Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.



Re: Planck reveals 'almost perfect' universe!
Posted:
Mar 25, 2013 6:07 AM


"DoubleA" <doublea3@hush.com> wrote in message news:d2f7c6a4ea724db299d8c2d18cfc28f8@y2g2000pbg.googlegroups.com... >On Mar 23, 1:00 am, "Tom Potter" <tdp1...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >"DoubleA" <double...@hush.com> wrote in message >> >news:b947ed7b1c3442f896e47052a3a78240@j1g2000pbq.googlegroups.com... >> >On Mar 22, 12:19 am, "Tom Potter" <tdp1...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> "DoubleA" <double...@hush.com> wrote in message >> >> >>news:c482c3ea7963456ca323d0573e59538c@h1g2000pbg.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> > It is the best of all possible universes! >> >> >> >http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2013/mar/21/planckrevealsa... >> >> >> > DoubleA >> >> >> The path from an almost perfect sphere >> >> to the "almost perfect universe. >> >> >> VOLUME >> >>  >> >> >> The volume of a perfect sphere is: >> >> volume = 4 / 3 * pi * radius^3 >> >> >> If a sphere divides into two equal parts >> >> and there is no "sawdust" >> >> ( No matter is converted into space.) >> >> >> each part would have a volume of >> >> one half of the original volume. >> >> >> A division of an original sphere with a volume of 1.0 volume units, >> >> would create two spheres with volumes of .5 volume units. >> >> >>  >> >> SPACE >> >>  >> >> >> The radius of a perfect sphere is: >> >> radius = ( 3/4 * volume / pi ) ^.3333333 >> >> >> The radius of a 1.0 unit sphere is 0.620350491 >> >> and the radii of a .5 unit sphere is 0.492372511. >> >> >> The first two spheres from a division would create a space of >> >> 2 * 0.492372511 or 0.984745023 >> >> compared to the original space of 0.620350491, >> >> thus the space would be increased by 0.364394531 space units. >> >> >>  >> >> LARGE POPULATIONS >> >>  >> >> >> The space generate by 1,000,000 divisions would be >> >> 6203.504941 space units. >> >> >> and the space generate by 1,000,001 divisions would be >> >> 6203.509076 space units. >> >> >> As can be seen, as more and more divisions occur, >> >> the creation of space becomes less obvious. >> >> >>  >> >> TIME >> >>  >> >> >> Time and 3D space came about >> >> because an initial amount of action >> >> existed in the universe. >> >> >> The action modulated the rotation of matter, >> >> creating 3D space and time, >> >> >> time being a count of some standard angular displacement. >> >> >>  >> >> LUMPS TO SPHERES >> >>  >> >> >> The division of matter creates nonspherical matter >> >> TEMPORARILY, but Nature uses action >> >> to reduce nonspherical material to perfect spheres. >> >> >> Nature even created animals and man >> >> to help in the process of reducing nonspherical >> >> matter to more perfect spheres. >> >> >> Man makes low places high >> >> and high places low. >> >> >>  >> >> SAWDUST >> >>  >> >> >> When matter divides, >> >> one or both of two things happen: >> >> >> 1. space increases >> >> 2. the volume of matter decreases >> >> >> Hubble expansion seems to tell us >> >> that space is increasing. >> >> >>  >> >> SUMMARY >> >>  >> >> >> The bottom line is, >> >> sawdust is created when matter divides, >> >> and the sawdust is space, >> >> >> and time and 3D space >> >> are created by the rotation of matter, >> >> >> which was and is driven by >> >> a fixed amount of action >> >> that existed from the first division. >> >> >> Assuming that the diameter of the universe is 45 billion years, >> >> and that one sphere existed 14 billion years ago, >> >> one can calculate >> >> how much matter has been converted to space over time >> >> how much action exists in the universe, >> >> and approximately how many matter divisions have occurred. >> >> >> The basic formula >> >> that drives the universe is: >> >> radius = ( 3/4 * volume / pi ) ^.3333333 >> >> >> The rate at which nonspherical matter >> >> is converted to spherical matter, >> >> is a function of the amount of >> >> action extant in the matter and its' environment, >> >> and on the geometry of the matter, >> >> and this is the next step in the complexity of matter, space, and >> >> time. >> >> >> Observe that as divisions occur, >> >> space become more and more homogeneous >> >> due to the "Mixmaster effect" caused by the action, >> >> >> and the action is more evenly distributed to the >> >> increasing number of matter pieces. >> >> >>  >> >> Tom Potter >> >> >>http://thecloudmachine.tkhttp://tiny.im/390k >> >> >What is all this rambling supposed to be about, Potter? >> >> >Sawdust is good for gardens. It supposedly keeps the worms out of >> >radishes. >> >> >DoubleA >> >> Regarding DoubleA's question: >> "What is all this rambling supposed to be about, Potter?" >> >> "The path from an almost perfect sphere >> to the "almost perfect universe." >> >> 1. In the beginning was a sphere. >> >> 2. The sphere possessed ACTION. >> >> 3. The action caused the sphere to burst into pieces. >> >> 4. The separation of the pieces is called space. >> < In English > >> >> 5. Each of the pieces that were separated by spaces >> burst and created more pieces and spaces, >> >> 6. Go To #5 >> >> The equation for the burst speed of a material is: >> >> V=?(8S/((3+?)?)) >> >> Where... >> V is burst speed >> S is ultimate tensile strength >> ? is Poisson's ratio >> ? is density >> >> What would the universe be like >> if the initial sphere had a negative Poisson's ratio? >> >> http://silver.neep.wisc.edu/~lakes/Poisson.html >> >> It would be great if someone wrote a program >> that allowed one to vary the parameters >> of an initial sphere, >> and graphical show what happens. >> >>  >> Tom Potter >> >> http://thecloudmachine.tkhttp://tiny.im/390k > > >An "A" for originality. Your theory is much like my new preacher >friend's religious views: one of a kind. > >DoubleA
It is interesting to see that my pal "DoubleA" has a friend who has a theory much like the one I outlined above.
As I am always anxious to learn new things and see if they can improve my understanding of the world,
I would like to hear about this interesting theory and will be looking forward to seeing "DoubleA"'s outline of it, using maths as I have done,
and to hear how it compares to the theory outlined above.
It may be that "DoubleA" confuses quasirandom verbal explanations with linear maths explanations but we will be able to see when "DoubleA" explains this theory, as he understands it.
Or it may be that "DoubleA" does not understand either theory very well and will not be able to explain and compare them.
Or it may be that "DoubleA" is just making noise like an empty drum.
 Tom Potter
http://thecloudmachine.tk http://tiny.im/390k



