What is the Universe expanding into..

[Galu]

Harrison Ford was a carpenter before he switched to movie actor.

But no one can say his acting is wooden!

 

[gpauk]

Yup - local chippie will do a mars bar, or a deep fried curly wurly....

 

[Galu]

Have you ever stretched your Curly Wurly, gpauk?

The Guiness World Record for a Curly Wurly stretch is 4.26 metres.

For the first time in this thread for a while, there is actually some science involved:

Some materials behave differently according to their temperature. The Curly Wurly stretches better when it’s warm because its molecules are spread wider apart, increasing the material’s elasticity. When the chocolate and toffee are cold, their molecules are bonded together tightly, keeping it from stretching.

You can experiment further by first freezing your Curly Wurly or by heating it in the microwave for 10 seconds!

 

[system7]

I am worried that in a Cosmology Thread we seem to be drifting into vagueness.

Let's try and get on-topic.

I certainly enjoy Calista Flochart:

Nothing is more on-topic than Sandra Bullock, IMO.

Just my thing. TBH, Elaine could have had me. Pleasant woman.

 

[Galu]

... we seem to be drifting into vagueness.

We are already familiar with vagueness in the context of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.

It would be worth exploring exactly how vagueness manifests itself in the various exact sciences.

 

[system7]

Her Majesty and one's Physics self appear to be Fermions!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermion

In that we cannot occupy the same Space:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein

One of my better Physics Jokes. IMO.

 

[gpauk]

If that's one of the better ones....

 

[system7]

Without precise Scientific references, one is unable to comment further.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_hypothesis

But have put on my Mathematical Hat in effort to discover something interesting about 1952

The factors of 1952 are:
1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 61, 122, 244, 488, 976, 1952

Am I missing something?

 

[Galu]

Do you think there may be some factors which you haven't taken into account?

 

[mchambin]

The factors of 1952 are:
1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 61, 122, 244, 488, 976, 1952

Am I missing something?

All of them are listed.
1952 = 32 x 61
The sum of the non trivial factors is 1953
976+ 488+244+....+8+4+2 = 1953

 

[Galu]

The sum of the non trivial factors is 1953

Which just happens to be the year of the Coronation.

Spooky or what!

 

[Disco-Pete]

Looks like the universe is moderately shrinking...13 "more" mass shootings over the week end. Keep it up and we'll once again be living in the "new world".

eh.

 

[mchambin]

Why the foundations of physics have not progressed for 40 years »

A good question !

https://iai.tv/articles/why-physics-has-made-no-progress-in-50-years-auid-1292

Not sure we get interesting answers.

Physicists today can happily make career by writing papers about things no one has ever observed, and never will observe. This continues to go on because there is nothing and no one that can stop it.

 

[system7]

Standard Model Broken. String Theory looking uncertain. I am on it!

Haven't finished it yet, but feel sure the answer is in there.

 

[Galu]

Why the foundations of physics have not progressed for 40 years »

That's an interesting article from Sabine Hossenfelder, in which she says:

"(Just because physicists) can write down equations for something does not mean this math is a scientifically promising hypothesis. String theory, supersymmetry, multiverses. There’s math for it, alright. Pretty math, even. But that doesn’t mean this math describes reality."

She suggests that theoretical physicists are ignoring the philosophy of physics, in which concepts such as the character of matter, the nature of space and time and the meaning of probability have been vividly challenged since the inception of modern science, beginning with the work of Galileo.

 

[TNT]

If the answer is in that book I'll eat my old hat

//

 

[Galu]

Lee Smolin simply leaves out the maths in his book Time Reborn.

"There are no equations," he says in the preface, "and everything you need to know to follow my arguments is explained."

However, he assumes that the reader is familiar with the standard model of particle physics, quantum mechanics, relativity and the awkward question of gravity.

Tying in with what Sabine Hossenfelder has said, Smolin claims that the reason physicists have come to reject the reality of time is that they have been bewitched by the beauty and success of the mathematical models they use into mistaking those models for reality.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/jun/06/time-reborn-lee-smolin-review

 

[Bonsai]

OotThat's an interesting article from Sabine Hossenfelder, in which she says:



She suggests that theoretical physicists are ignoring the philosophy of physics, in which concepts such as the character of matter, the nature of space and time and the meaning of probability have been vividly challenged since the inception of modern science, beginning with the work of Galileo.

Interesting. I read an article in which Einstein said he began with ideas and let logical deduction take him to a final conclusion. And then he did the math. He is said to have remarked that proving GR mathematically was ‘the hardest thing I have ever done’.

It does seem we are too quick to write an equation for something and because of that proclaim it as the truth when as SH points out, you can write an equation for just about any physical process, but that doesn’t make it right. She, and other physicists, are right to question string theory and the ‘multiverse’. We don even know how an EM wave or energy propagate through a vacuum at a really fundamental level (spoiler: Maxwell’s equations describe how they propagate not the underlying mechanism).

 

[system7]

I happen to know a bit about Einstein's General Theory of Relativity:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity

David Hilbert attended a Lecture by Einstein in which he unsurely attempted to flesh out his Ideas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hilbert

David remarked that even his young students on the streets of Gottingen knew more about 4D Spacetime than Albert:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24-cell

But conceded that Albert's intuition was superb. Therefore amicably conceded the result to him.

It is a curious thing that I struggled with a problem that I now know as the Hilbert Transform:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert_transform

 

[Disco-Pete]

Oh there's more than that that's curious.