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 5:28 PM


On Mar 25, 3:07 am, "Tom Potter" <tdp1...@yahoo.com> wrote: > "DoubleA" <double...@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.tkhttp://tiny.im/390k
What I said was that your theory was one of a kind, just like my preacher friend's religious views are one of a kind, not that he had a theory like yours. Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Potter? Seek help.
DoubleA



