New method may resolve difficulty in measuring universe's expansion

New method may resolve difficulty in measuring universe's expansion
Artist's impression of the explosion and burst of gravitational waves emitted when a pair of superdense neutron stars collide. New observations with radio telescopes show that such events can be used to measure the expansion rate of the Universe. Credit: NRAO/AUI/NSF

Astronomers using National Science Foundation (NSF) radio telescopes have demonstrated how a combination of gravitational-wave and radio observations, along with theoretical modeling, can turn the mergers of pairs of neutron stars into a "cosmic ruler" capable of measuring the expansion of the Universe and resolving an outstanding question over its rate.

The astronomers used the NSF's Very Long Baseline Array (VLBA), the Karl G. Jansky Very Large Array (VLA) and the Robert C. Byrd Green Bank Telescope (GBT) to study the aftermath of the collision of two that produced gravitational waves detected in 2017. This event offered a new way to measure the expansion rate of the Universe, known by scientists as the Hubble Constant. The expansion rate of the Universe can be used to determine its size and age, as well as serve as an essential tool for interpreting observations of objects elsewhere in the Universe.

Two leading methods of determining the Hubble Constant use the characteristics of the Cosmic Microwave Background, the leftover radiation from the Big Bang, or a specific type of supernova explosions, called Type Ia, in the distant Universe. However, these two methods give different results.

"The neutron star merger gives us a new way of measuring the Hubble Constant, and hopefully of resolving the problem," said Kunal Mooley, of the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO) and Caltech.

The technique is similar to that using the supernova explosions. Type Ia supernova explosions are thought to all have an intrinsic brightness which can be calculated based on the speed at which they brighten and then fade away. Measuring the brightness as seen from Earth then tells the distance to the supernova explosion. Measuring the Doppler shift of the light from the supernova's host galaxy indicates the speed at which the galaxy is receding from Earth. The speed divided by the distance yields the Hubble Constant. To get an accurate figure, many such measurements must be made at different distances.

When two massive neutron stars collide, they produce an explosion and a burst of gravitational waves. The shape of the gravitational-wave signal tells scientists how "bright" that burst of gravitational waves was. Measuring the "brightness," or intensity of the gravitational waves as received at Earth can yield the distance.

New method may resolve difficulty in measuring universe's expansion
Radio observations of a jet of material ejected in the aftermath of the neutron-star merger were key to allowing astronomers to determine the orientation of the orbital plane of the stars prior to their merger, and thus the "brightness" of the gravitational waves emitted in the direction of Earth. This can make such events an important new tool for measuring the expansion rate of the Universe. Credit: Sophia Dagnello, NRAO/AUI/NSF

"This is a completely independent means of measurement that we hope can clarify what the true value of the Hubble Constant is," Mooley said.

However, there's a twist. The intensity of the gravitational waves varies with their orientation with respect to the orbital plane of the two neutron stars. The gravitational waves are stronger in the direction perpendicular to the orbital plane, and weaker if the orbital plane is edge-on as seen from Earth.

"In order to use the gravitational waves to measure the distance, we needed to know that orientation," said Adam Deller, of Swinburne University of Technology in Australia.

Over a period of months, the astronomers used the to measure the movement of a superfast jet of material ejected from the explosion. "We used these measurements along with detailed hydrodynamical simulations to determine the orientation angle, thus allowing use of the gravitational waves to determine the distance," said Ehud Nakar from Tel Aviv University.

The collision of two neutron stars (GW170817) flung out an extraordinary fireball of material and energy that is allowing a Princeton-led team of astrophysicists to calculate the Hubble constant, the speed of the universe's expansion. They used a super-high-resolution radio 'movie' (left) that they compared to a computer model (right). To generate their 'movie,' the science team combined data from enough radio telescopes spread over a large enough region to generate an image with such high resolution that if it were an optical camera, it could see individual hairs on someone's head 6 miles away. The movie emphasizes observations taken 75 days and 230 days after the merger. The middle panel shows the radio afterglow light curve. Credit: Ore Gottlieb and Ehud Nakar, Tel Aviv University

This single measurement, of an event some 130 million light-years from Earth, is not yet sufficient to resolve the uncertainty, the scientists said, but the technique now can be applied to future neutron-star mergers detected with gravitational waves.

"We think that 15 more such events that can be observed both with and in great detail with radio telescopes, may be able to solve the problem," said Kenta Hotokezaka, of Princeton University. "This would be an important advance in our understanding of one of the most important aspects of the Universe," he added.

The international scientific team led by Hotokezaka is reporting its results in the journal Nature Astronomy.


Explore further

Gravitational waves will settle cosmic conundrum

More information: A Hubble constant measurement from superluminal motion of the jet in GW170817, Nature Astronomy (2019). DOI: 10.1038/s41550-019-0820-1 , https://nature.com/articles/s41550-019-0820-1
Journal information: Nature Astronomy

Citation: New method may resolve difficulty in measuring universe's expansion (2019, July 8) retrieved 17 August 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-07-method-difficulty-universe-expansion.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
1275 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Jul 08, 2019
This is not as precise as type Ia supernova which are all the same size: precisely the minimum mass required for a binary white dwarf star sucking mass from its neighbor to finally go supernova.

Nor does the article even try to mention the analogue to the "doppler shift" that is supposed to tell us the rate of expansion of the colliding neutron stars. Do the gravity waves have a "red shift" or what?

Jul 08, 2019
If we believe that our World has started sometimes ago we are still in the position to decide which hypothesis, Lemaître's or Gamow's was closer to reality. There is an opinion that the problems in the standard cosmology could be solved by adjusting of details. Our suggestion is that we have to go back to the conceptions and use the observations accumulated since.
https://www.acade...osmology

Jul 08, 2019
The Universe's expansion to WHERE? For all their assumptions and theories, these and other scientists can never seem to explain to me/us just WHERE THE UNIVERSE IS EXPANDING TO.
It is not enough to just say something like, 'oh, you must believe us when we tell you that THE UNIVERSE IS EXPANDING.' So do balloons. So do chest cavities when you inhale. So does a vacuum cleaner bag when filled with dirt.

"Astronomers using National Science Foundation (NSF) radio telescopes have demonstrated how a combination of gravitational-wave and radio observations, along with theoretical modeling, can turn the mergers of pairs of neutron stars into a "cosmic ruler" capable of measuring the expansion of the Universe and resolving an outstanding question over its rate."


HOW can a pair of merging neutron Stars in their locality explain an expansion of the Universe? These Neutron Stars are MERGING, i.e. coming together. They are not expanding.

Jul 09, 2019
Look, I can't play along with this nonsense.
If the universe were "expanding" then the time to peak luminosity of type Ia supernova would vary as a multiple of (z+1), according to Einstein's verified (verified daily in supercolliders) theory of special relativity. Unfortunately for the big bang theory, there is no such correlation.

Jul 09, 2019
The Universe's expansion to WHERE? For all their assumptions and theories, these and other scientists can never seem to explain to me/us just WHERE THE UNIVERSE IS EXPANDING TO.

You are totally wrong, I'm not surprised. You again misunderstood whatever the scientists tried to explain. Scientists have explained the expansion just fine for more than a century.
Don't worry about analogies you don't understand. If you cannot comprehend the analogy you definitely won't get how it really works.
The universe itself is expanding, nothing needed for it to expand into. It's simple but you will never get it.
SpaceTime as a single construct? You will never get it.
The relativity of simultaneity? Never.
The BB ant the expanding universe? Impossible.
Prove me wrong.
Make a comment, containing science, without misunderstanding the science.

Jul 09, 2019
Look, I can't play along with this nonsense.
If the universe were "expanding" then the time to peak luminosity of type Ia supernova would vary as a multiple of (z+1), according to Einstein's verified (verified daily in supercolliders) theory of special relativity. Unfortunately for the big bang theory, there is no such correlation.

You cannot play along before you understand the basic rules of the game.
Your comments illustrate your ignorance thereof.
So you have made up your own game and you are just playing with yourself.
Have fun.

Jul 09, 2019
@Ojorf
Since you seem to believe that you are far more knowledgeable about this issue, then why don't YOU tell us where this Universe is expanding into, yes?
Something that is expanding must have something to expand into, even if it is only Space. Another dimension, perhaps? Does it flow up or down or sideways? Do enlighten us.

Jul 09, 2019
I did. As predicted you did not understand.

Jul 09, 2019
SEU, this etiquette
@Ojorf
Since you seem to believe that you are far more knowledgeable about this issue, then why don't YOU tell us where this Universe is expanding into, yes?
Something that is expanding must have something to expand into, even if it is only Space. Another dimension, perhaps? Does it flow up or down or sideways? Do enlighten us.

Your not supposed to ask this entity this universe is expanding into
It's not the done think old boy; it does not go well with these college dinners and spoils the ambiance!

p.s. SEU, as to prove your question, Ojorf replies in an air of ambiance that keeps these college dinner conversations flowing "Ojorf - I did. As predicted you did not understand"

Jul 09, 2019
Expanding space is naked empire.

Nucleus of atoms expanding and recycling expanding pushing force which have example a nature of expanding light.


Jul 09, 2019
- The Universe's expansion to WHERE -

The Universe Itself Is Expanding - By Ojorf
You are totally wrong
I'm not surprised
You again misunderstood
whatever the scientists tried to explain
Scientists have explained
the expansion just fine
for more than a century.
Don't worry
about analogies you don't understand
If you cannot comprehend the analogy
you definitely won't get how it really works
The universe itself is expanding
nothing needed for it to expand into
It's simple but you will never get it
SpaceTime as a single construct
You will never get it.
The relativity of simultaneity
Never.
The BB ant the expanding universe
Impossible.
Prove me wrong.
Make a comment
containing science
without misunderstanding the science

Jul 09, 2019
A curved space equivalent concept to gods.

The current atomic model is wrong. It's very illogical. Binding forces cannot be explained logically.

When considering the law of preserving the amount of motion, it is much more logical to assume that the nuclei of atoms will expand and recycle their expanding pushing force, whereby the expanding nuclei of the atoms automatically push each other out of each other in the same proportion as they expand.


Jul 09, 2019
The expanding electrons and photons are then created by this expanding pushing force, which is expanded by the expanding nuclei of atoms recycling together.

Most of the expanding light would be our dark widening waves of pushing force that would interact with each other, causing each other's expansion to accelerate, and accelerate the pace of such expanding light in proportion to the substance / matter and light expanding.


Jul 09, 2019
Now think of photons that protrude beyond the sun.

1. We know that the Sun is halting the radiation / energy / light moving in space.

2. It means that the Sun does not emit energy that it pushes towards itself.

3. Thus, the energy towards the sun is pushed by the kind of energy that does not emerge from it.

4. Repeat from the same, but anyway. There is energy from the sun that does not push towards it.

How are these energies different?

Billions of years of moved radiation thrive toward the sun.

The sun is emitting radiation, which is a completely new radiation compared to the billions of years of radiated movement in space.


Jul 09, 2019
Ok, I claim that the billions of years of space-moving radiation in the Sun contain such pushing force that is able to push the photons that protrude past the Sun towards the Sun, and thus the trajectory of light moving past the Sun bends in a perceived manner.

That is, the radiation that emanates from the Sun does not yet contain the pushing force contained in the billions of years of radiation in space.

Why is this a clearly better and more logical explanation for the bending of the trajectory of light with star or galaxy bypass?

In this model, the mass does not have to tell the space itself anything.

And space does not have to tell the mass or light anything.

It is enough that the information / radiation from the substance LOOKS FORWARD DIRECTLY to other material-based objects, or that the space-moving radiation can tell and tell the information / radiation directly encountered by the subject.


Jul 09, 2019
With expanding lights which interactive with eachother we can explain

1. Bending light

2. Cosmologys way redshifted light

3. Gravity redshifted light.

We can explain All this phenomena with expanding light.

And also we can explain how matter and light expanding "in" space to outside space which already exist.

With words and also visually way.

Nobody cant explain how expanding space expanding.

Expanding space is naked empire.


Jul 09, 2019
Jupiter and other planets can cycle Sun.

This it because nucleus of atoms expanding and recycling dark expanding pushing force.

This proof that today model an atoms is total wrong theory about matter.

Maybe Earth warmup 1900-1940 and 1980-2010 because 1572 and 1604 supernovas dark ...

https://youtu.be/4wgD9qHDdxE

YouTube · Etimespace


Jul 09, 2019
Ojorf's answer to the question - The Universe's expansion to WHERE

The universe itself is expanding
nothing needed for it to expand into
It's simple but you will never get it
SpaceTime as a single construct
You will never get it.
The relativity of simultaneity – By Ojorf

In physics
the relativity of simultaneity
is the concept
that distant simultaneity
whether two spatially separated events
occur at the same time
is not absolute
but depends on the observer's reference frame
for
According to Einstein's special theory of relativity
It is impossible to say
In an absolute sense
That two distinct events
Occur at the same time
If those events are separated in space
So
Relativity of Simultaneity
Is likened to the uncertainty principal
For is it impossible to say
With a 100% certainty
Those two objects
Either side of the universe
Their exact spatial dimensional position

For - Relativity of Simultaneity – is this epitome of this infamous Obfuscation
Thanks, Ojorf – very illuminating

Jul 09, 2019
Ok, I claim that the billions of years of space-moving radiation in the Sun contain such pushing force that is able to push the photons that protrude past the Sun towards the Sun, and thus the trajectory of light moving past the Sun bends in a perceived manner.

If it is so, why does not the bending of light depend only on the surface area of the object? We can see that many smaller sized objects bend light stronger than bigger objects. By your theory this should not happen?

Jul 09, 2019
Hey, for Cosmologists here's a NEW method of proven science that would fix their models for their EXPANSION theories, it's called the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, ENTROPY.

Anyone who thinks the Universe can eternally expand with no new input of energy is someone who simply does not understand Kinetic Energy. Nothing can have MOTION without a constant input of energy that provides WORK to the system to keep the system in motion. It starts with transformation of mass to energy for distribution to nearby mass to create the MOTION that causes galaxies to orbit one another, but this is not the way Pop-Cosmology explains the observed motion of the Universe.

Cosmologists NEVER engage in a discussion about the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics because it is 100% counter to what Cosmologists use to describe their EXPANSION theories, that is a CLOSED BOUNDARY SYSTEM for the distribution of energy to create WORK (motion). Theories of energy distribution in unbounded systems is PERPETUAL MOTION.


Jul 09, 2019
Cosmologists NEVER engage in a discussion about the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics because it is 100% counter to what Cosmologists use to describe their EXPANSION theories, that is a CLOSED BOUNDARY SYSTEM for the distribution of energy to create WORK (motion). Theories of energy distribution in unbounded systems is PERPETUAL MOTION.

No reason to lie. There's an explanation for everything. If you would just use google, you would know this. Here's a link I googled for you: https://www.quora...m-energy

Jul 09, 2019
And how exactly does @Benni know for certain that the universe is bounded?

Evidence please.

Jul 09, 2019

> Ojo,
You are totally wrong, I'm not surprised. You again misunderstood whatever the scientists tried to explain. Scientists have explained the expansion just fine for more than a century.
......I've got bad news for you, Cosmologists are NOT scientists. No one who is an advocate for the Perpetual Motion concept of a never ending expansion of the Universe is a scientist, and most certainly not you.

Ojo, you've NEVER demonstrated you understand the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, ENTROPY, that ENERGY to create WORK cannot be generated from NOTHING, any proposal that it can is Perpetual Motion which is solely the theoretical framework of present day Cosmology theory & neophytes like you can't prove Perpetual Motion can exist alongside the immutable 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

Here's a suggestion for you Ojo, click a Wiki link & read up on Entropy & you will soon be disappointed to learn that this is not the manner in which Cosmology describes the motion of the Universe.

Jul 09, 2019
And how exactly does @Benni know for certain that the universe is bounded?

Evidence please.
.......the obvious evidence of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, ENTROPY. Entropy is irrefutable "evidence" & YOU can't prove otherwise, can you schneibo?

Jul 09, 2019
Visible universe expanding "in" infinity space to outside space which already exist.

It is eternal recycling "in" infinity 3 D space which is nothing. So, space cant expanding! It cant curving.

Here i explain how it is going.

https://youtu.be/A-45AqYtkFw

By the way, double-split experiement prove that there is dark expanding pushing waves / light waves which interactive with expanding photons and expanding electrons.


Jul 09, 2019
"If it is so, why does not the bending of light depend only on the surface area of the object? We can see that many smaller sized objects bend light stronger than bigger objects. By your theory this should not happen?"

Tell me one phenomena what i cant explain with expanding pushing force.


Jul 09, 2019
Tell me one phenomena what i cant explain with expanding pushing force.

Tell me how can we calculate the mass of objects based on bending of light if mass does not bend light?

Jul 09, 2019
Matter / mass cant bending light.

Expanding matter emit expanding light and after billions of years that expanding light can pushing expanding photons because of entropy.

Entropy working all a time with expanding matter and whit expanding light.

New expanding light dont have that kind of pushing force what billions years old expanding light have.

And this is because entropy working with quarks, with dark light waves which is also dark pushing force and with photons.

Entropy cant working with space

Space is nothing.

Space dont emit information.

Expanding space is god which dont exist.


Jul 09, 2019
.......the obvious evidence of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, ENTROPY. Entropy is irrefutable "evidence" & YOU can't prove otherwise, can you schneibo?
Entropy only applies in a bounded universe, as you pointed out.

Thus, I ask, "How do you know it's bounded?"

Simply repeating your stupid assertion without evidence is circular and ridiculous. Do you not know how to think? It sure looks that way.

Jul 09, 2019
Hey For Cosmologists - by Benni

Here's a NEW method of proven science
that would fix their models for their EXPANSION theories
it's called the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, ENTROPY.
Anyone who thinks
the Universe can eternally expand
with no new input of energy
is someone
who simply does not understand Kinetic Energy
Nothing can have MOTION
without a constant input of energy
that provides WORK to the system
to keep the system in motion
It starts with transformation of mass to energy
for distribution to nearby mass
to create the MOTION
that causes galaxies to orbit one another
but this is not the way
Pop-Cosmology explains the observed motion of the Universe.
Cosmologists
NEVER engage in a discussion
about the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics
because it is 100% counter
to what Cosmologists
use to describe their EXPANSION theories
that is a CLOSED BOUNDARY SYSTEM
for the distribution of energy
to create WORK (motion)
Theories of energy distribution in unbounded systems is PERPETUAL MOTION

Jul 09, 2019
ENTROPY
Sir Isaac Newton – Gravity always brings inertial mass to a halt

- Hey For Cosmologists -
Anyone who thinks
the Universe can eternally expand
with no new input of energy
is someone
who simply does not understand Kinetic Energy
Nothing can have MOTION
without a constant input of energy
that provides WORK to the system
To keep the system in motion – By Benni

When mass is in motion in these dusty galaxies
This dust is continually slowing this orbital mass down
When lesser galaxies fly to close to greater galaxies their flight is brought to halt to a galaxy of one
For if this dust in this universe does not halt this kinetic energy of motion
Sir Isaac Newton's Gravity will halt this kinetic energy
Gravity will halt this expanding universe to a grinding halt

For as Benni decrees - Nothing can have MOTION - without constant input of energy

Jul 09, 2019
Matter / mass cant bending light.

Expanding matter emit expanding light and after billions of years that expanding light can pushing expanding photons because of entropy.

Entropy working all a time with expanding matter and whit expanding light.

New expanding light dont have that kind of pushing force what billions years old expanding light have.

You evaded my question. We know for a fact that we can calculate mass of an object from how much it is bending the light. If mass does not bend light, why can we still calculate mass of an object from the bending of the light?

So you must tell me why are the expanding light and mass correlated.

Your theory must have an aswer for this if you want it to be considered valid.

Jul 09, 2019
"Hey For Cosmologists -
Anyone who thinks
the Universe can eternally expand
with no new input of energy
is someone
who simply does not understand Kinetic Energy
Nothing can have MOTION
without a constant input of energy
that provides WORK to the system
To keep the system in motion – By Benni"

Visible universe is not going to expanding eternally.

Finally all visible universe expanding pushing force pushing inside extremely density and extremely massive expanding concentration and get thst expanding pushing force expanding faster.

Finally our pushing force stop area where is extremely high pressure which squeezes our pushing force for extremely dense pushing force.

and thus the current pushing force is once again compressed into a new, extremely dense raw material, which then expands exponentially into the expanding matter for new expanding star.


Jul 09, 2019
"You evaded my question. We know for a fact that we can calculate mass of an object from how much it is bending the light. If mass does not bend light, why can we still calculate mass of an object from the bending of the light?"

Question is so peace of cake, that i think you can found out answer your self.

The more massive and denser the object, the more dense and smaller the pushing force it will radiate.

The denser and more massive tensile forces, the slower the internal time.

The slower the internal time, the less interaction with the environment.

And the less these densities of pushing force exert their pushing force on eg photons.

Expanding black star emit dark light / pushing force which dont interactive so much with visible expanding matter. Expanding black star dont need pulling force and or curving space.


Jul 09, 2019
Expanding black star emit dark expanding pushing force which expanding inside visible expanding star faster and when is collide with expanding star expanding matter, it get that expanding faster.

Now that expanding matter pushing strong way away from expanding star centre. So, that way where is expanding black star.

With that strong way expanding matter, visible expanding star pushing away from expanding black star same way what black star and visible star expanding.

All that whit out pulling force or curving space.


Jul 09, 2019
I am a biggest story ever.

One who found out how Universe really working.

http://www.onesim...e.com/l4

Etimespace from youtube

Jukka Savorinen


Jul 09, 2019
okay, i gotta admit it, i'm baffled
what the hell is "The Pushing Force?"

do you specifically mean the phenomena temporarily classified as "Dark Energy"?

which seems to be getting the credit (blame) for the expansion of SpaceTime
but apparently, at our present scale of measurement
(limited by our technology to date)
does not seem to have a measurable effect
on the temporarily visible material we can observe

or even whateverthehell "Dark Matter" eventually turns out to be,

Jul 09, 2019
Only thing what is "in" expanding visible universe, is it expanding pushing force.

There is no matter / substance and 4 forces.

No matter and pushing force.

Just expanding pushing force.

Quarks expanding snd recycling expanding pushing force.

Later there is same expanding quarks, but this expanding quarks have different expanding pushing force.

So, this expanding pushing force changing "inside" expanding quarks.

Same expanding lake, later different expanding water.

Same expanding dude, later different expanding cells.

Same expanding quark, later different expanding pushing force.


Jul 09, 2019
At the same time, Jupiter and Saturn align themselves on opposite sides of the Sun whenever the Earth has approached the Sun every 60 years.

Jupiter and Saturn align themselves on the opposite sides of the Sun every 20 years, but has Saturn's energy moved towards the Sun closer to Jupiter during the 60-year alignment than during the two other alignments?

If, then, the pushing force from Saturn would be more activated after passing the Sun or perhaps pushing through the surface layers of the Sun, and thus its ability to activate within the Earth, the pushing force of Jupiter would be better.

If so, this explains how Jupiter would be able to push the expanding Earth towards the expanding Sun.

It would be a similar phenomenon as what the so-called. Magnetic The pulling force is except that it is not a driving / pulling force.

That is, the pushing forces are activated by pushing forces to activate pushing forces what does it face from the front.


Jul 09, 2019
Thus, I ask, "How do you know it's bounded?"


Inverse square law. Finite stellar mass with infinite density. Differential equations.

Jul 09, 2019
You really ought to put a sarcasm tag on that, @Bojangles.

Jul 09, 2019
us there anyone reading these comments who are competent to explain to me, a Cosmology naif,
what the he_double_hockey-sticks that MrPushingForce is attempting tp describe?

& what does water have to do with the Universe expanding?
or is it some sort of special water?
perhaps a specific isotope
or molecular structure?

for that matter, fow do planetary alignments figure into this?
do i need to consult an ephemerides?
perhaps astrology or velikovsky?

color my quarks as confused!

Jul 09, 2019
color my quarks as confused!
.....I can understand that, they've never been isolated to prove they even exist, I'll bet you never knew this?

Jul 09, 2019
Entropy only applies in a bounded universe, as you pointed out.

Thus, I ask, "How do you know it's bounded?"
......you answered your own question:"Entropy only applies in a bounded universe, as you pointed out."

Jul 09, 2019
And you still have no evidence the universe is bounded.

Noted. Typical @Benni.

Jul 09, 2019
And you still have no evidence the universe is bounded.

Noted. Typical @Benni.
......el schneibo, in case you didn't know......ENTROPY is settled science, it doesn't exist except within a bounded system.

Jul 09, 2019
benni, frankly & ernestly
i find it easier to "believe" in quarks than to believe in you!

Jul 10, 2019
I did. As predicted you did not understand.
says Ojorg

OK Since you are convinced that I am not capable of understanding their omission of WHERE the Universe is expanding TO - then why don't YOU explain WHERE. I am not interested in their method of measuring the Universe or its expansion. I am interested in the WHERE of it. There are all sort of ways to measure, but there is NOTHING IN THE ARTICLE or FROM YOU wrt what I am looking for.
If you have a proper answer, then kindly share it with us. Thanks. And no equivocating, please

Jul 10, 2019
I did. As predicted you did not understand.
says Ojorf

No, you did not. You equivocated and bloviated and yet said nothing to deal with my concern.
Perhaps you don't know the meaning of the word "expansion". The expansion of the Universe (or anything) has a certain meaning. It doesn't mean staying stationary.
So do try a little harder, won't you. Else just go to the corner, put on your dunce cap, and sit quietly on the high stool. And mind your manners.

Jul 10, 2019
Hey, for Cosmologists here's a NEW method of proven science that would fix their models for their EXPANSION theories, it's called the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, ENTROPY.

Anyone who thinks the Universe can eternally expand with no new input of energy is someone who simply does not understand Kinetic Energy. Nothing can have MOTION without a constant input of energy that provides WORK to the system to keep the system in motion. It starts with transformation of mass to energy for distribution to nearby mass to create the MOTION that causes galaxies to orbit one another, but this is not the way Pop-Cosmology explains the observed motion of the Universe.
says Benni

Please correct me if I'm wrong. I thought that nothing can expand in a closed system. It can only circulate, go round and round like within a sphere, or become stationary. In an "open system", there needs to be another place, area, region, etc. for the expansion products to go into.

Jul 10, 2019
Ok, I claim that the billions of years of space-moving radiation in the Sun contain such pushing force that is able to push the photons that protrude past the Sun towards the Sun, and thus the trajectory of light moving past the Sun bends in a perceived manner.

If it is so, why does not the bending of light depend only on the surface area of the object? We can see that many smaller sized objects bend light stronger than bigger objects. By your theory this should not happen?
says Cortezz

Cortezz, I strongly believe that this MrPushingForce and his 6 comments that said nothing are, in reality, theghostofotto1923
It looks like SpookyOtto is on another spoofing spree. Be forewarned.

Jul 10, 2019
There is no expanding space!

Expanding space is naked empire.

It is god which does not exist.

Space is infinity 3 D place which is nothing.

It cant expanding.

It cant curving

Loosers explain some phenomenas with hokkus pokkus space.


Jul 10, 2019
@SEU
No, you did not. You equivocated and bloviated and yet said nothing to deal with my concern.
Perhaps you don't know the meaning of the word "expansion". The expansion of the Universe (or anything) has a certain meaning. It doesn't mean staying stationary.
So do try a little harder, won't you. Else just go to the corner, put on your dunce cap, and sit quietly on the high stool. And mind your manners.

You are making the incorrect assumption that "for an object in space to expand it needs space to expand into" and applying it to space itself. It does not.
Just read any popular science book on relativity these concepts have been explained in simple terms a million times over. It's not difficult to understand even without bothering with any math.

Jul 10, 2019
Then feel free to expound on the expansion of the Universe in your own words. And yes, for an open Universe, expansion of that Universe is exactly that - expansion. Try harder, Ojorf

BTW that Space is also part and parcel of the Universe. Where the Space goes, the Universe goes. The question is WHERE does it go.

Jul 10, 2019
Stop demanding to be spoon-fed all the time. Read a book or something.
Your typical confusion about time as in the comments here:
https://phys.org/...tum.html
stems from the same ignorance of relativity and the dimensions making up the structure the universe.
Read up on relativity. You will not understand any any of this until you get the basics under your belt. If that's possible.

Jul 10, 2019
The expansion of the universe is the increase of the distance between two distant parts of the universe with time.[1] It is an intrinsic expansion whereby the scale of space itself changes. The universe does not expand "into" anything and does not require space to exist "outside" it. Technically, neither space nor objects in space move. Instead it is the metric governing the size and geometry of spacetime itself that changes in scale. Although light and objects within spacetime cannot travel faster than the speed of light, this limitation does not restrict the metric itself. To an observer it appears that space is expanding and all but the nearest galaxies are receding into the distance.
During the inflationary epoch about 10−32 of a second after the Big Bang, the universe suddenly expanded, and its volume increased by a factor of at least 1078 (an expansion of distance by a factor of at least 1026 in each of the three dimensions), equivalent to expanding an object 1 nanometer

Jul 10, 2019
As I have said several times before, "Time" does not exist. Only Events and Actions and their Durations can be quantified and measured. Einstein was talked into including "Time" with his Space equations by his Professor Minkowski, who had adopted Time as a part of dimensions. He insisted it to be the 4th dimension after the first three spatial dimensions. Einstein could not refuse his old professor, in spite of his misgivings.

Jul 10, 2019
Stop demanding to be spoon-fed all the time. Read a book or something.
Your typical confusion about time as in the comments here:
https://phys.org/...tum.html
stems from the same ignorance of relativity and the dimensions making up the structure the universe.
Read up on relativity. You will not understand any any of this until you get the basics under your belt. If that's possible.
says Ojorf

So you are admitting that you are unable to come up with the answers? Wiki, in regards to Time, is incorrect. It is only a concept that proceeded from the Mind of an ancient human who required an answer for why the Sun moves from East to West

Jul 10, 2019
IF, as it is stated in the Wiki paragraph above is true, then the Universe is, indeed, bounded, and there is no place else for Matter/Energy to go. Thus, everything is recycled and stays within the confines of this Universe and its Space. In effect, there is nowhere else and nothing else.
I am almost certain that Ojorf takes solace in that.

Jul 10, 2019
More from Wiki:
During the inflationary epoch about 10−32 of a second after the Big Bang, the universe suddenly expanded, and its volume increased by a factor of at least 1078 (an expansion of distance by a factor of at least 1026 in each of the three dimensions), equivalent to expanding an object 1 nanometer (10−9 m, about half the width of a molecule of DNA) in length to one approximately 10.6 light years (about 1017 m or 62 trillion miles) long. A much slower and gradual expansion of space continued after this, until at around 9.8 billion years after the Big Bang (4 billion years ago) it began to gradually expand more quickly, and is still doing so.

According to the simplest extrapolation of the currently-favored cosmological model, the Lambda-CDM model, this acceleration becomes more dominant into the future. In June 2016, NASA and ESA scientists reported that the universe was found to be expanding 5% to 9% faster than thought earlier, based on studies using Hubble Space Tele

Jul 10, 2019
This Bounded Universe

But, where is this universe expanding into - Ojorf
SEU> In June 2016, NASA and ESA scientists reported that the universe was found to be expanding 5% to 9% faster than thought earlier, based on studies using Hubble Space Telescope

When you compress all the molecules in a sealed living room
When you compress all the molecules in a cubic inch
The room is the vacuum
The same vacuum between the galaxies
For this sealed room is a bounded system
If you release these molecules they will expand to the living room walls
For this living room is a bounded system, Ojorf
So what is outside this bounded living room, Ojorf?
For what this expanding bound universe is expanding into, Ojorf
Is the same vacuum that is outside this bounded living room!

The infinite vacuous vacuum of space


Jul 10, 2019
benni, frankly & ernestly
i find it easier to "believe" in quarks than to believe in you!
.....no surprise to me that you find it easier to believe in things you can't prove exist, that's what Pop-Cosmology is all about, it's the comfort zone you live in because you're unable to comprehend the settled science of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, ENTROPY. You're disbelief in the settled science of entropy finds a welcome home here from your mentor, el schneibo.

Jul 10, 2019
Hey, for Cosmologists here's a NEW method of proven science that would fix their models for their EXPANSION theories, it's called the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, ENTROPY.

Anyone who thinks the Universe can eternally expand with no new input of energy is someone who simply does not understand Kinetic Energy. Nothing can have MOTION without a constant input of energy that provides WORK to the system to keep the system in motion. It starts with transformation of mass to energy for distribution to nearby mass to create the MOTION that causes galaxies to orbit one another, but this is not the way Pop-Cosmology explains the observed motion of the Universe.
says Benni

Please correct me if I'm wrong. I thought that nothing can expand in a closed system. It can only circulate, go round and round like within a sphere, or become stationary. In an "open system", there needs to be another place, area, region, etc. for the expansion products to go into.
Correct

Jul 10, 2019
Please correct me if I'm wrong. I thought that nothing can expand in a closed system. It can only circulate, go round and round like within a sphere
.........the almost perfect description of BARYCENTER orbital mechanics.

In barycenter orbital mechanics of a local group, some stars are always moving faster than others & in different planes of orbits, as such some stars will appear to the local observer to be redshifted while others within the group will appear to be blueshifted, this is the structure of the entire Universe & is the reason why there are entire galaxies that appear to be approaching us while others appear to be receding.

The rate of recession (or approach) of bodies within a barycenter varies with distance from the center of mass.


Jul 10, 2019
This Bounded Universe - By Granville

Where is this universe expanding into
When you compress
All the molecules
In a sealed living room
When you compress
All the molecules
In a cubic inch
The room is the vacuum
The same vacuum
That is between the galaxies
For this sealed room
Is a bounded system
If you release these molecules
They will expand
To the living room walls
For this living room
Is a bounded system
So what is outside
This bounded living room
For what this expanding
Bound universe
Is expanding into
Is the same vacuum
That is outside
This bounded living room
Which
Is
The infinite vacuous vacuum of space

p.s. in memory of dear old Albert foreth as he is rescued from time and space to occupy the infinite vacuous vacuum of space along with the proton and his scrumptious electron who by beta-decay
continue this cycle of rebirth of pristine protons and electrons and lest we forget our pristine neutral neutron who made this all possible in this vacuum

Jul 10, 2019
This Bounded Universe - By Granville

Where is this universe expanding into
When you compress
All the molecules
In a sealed living room
When you compress
All the molecules
In a cubic inch
The room is the vacuum
The same vacuum
That is between the galaxies
For this sealed room
Is a bounded system
If you release these molecules
They will expand
To the living room walls
For this living room
Is a bounded system
So what is outside
This bounded living room
For what this expanding
Bound universe
Is expanding into
Is the same vacuum
That is outside
This bounded living room
Which
Is
The infinite vacuous vacuum of space

p.s. in memory of dear old Albert foreth as he is rescued from time and space to occupy the infinite vacuous vacuum of space along with the proton and his scrumptious electron who by beta-decay
continue this cycle of rebirth of pristine protons and electrons and lest we forget our pristine neutral neutron who made this all possible in this vacuum


.....granDy speaketh.

Jul 10, 2019
@Ojorf.
@SEU,...space itself. It does not.
Careful, @Ojorf! :) You haven't provided the non-metaphysical explanation of what constitutes the "space itself" you allude to. Unless you provide that in physically effective and logically consistent terms which make sense in the context of universal inflation/expansion, then your own response to @S_E_U is fraught with illogical/metaphysical concepts. It is that situation that for so long prompted the question "What happened/existed before the Big Bang". That was (finally) addressed; and led to "Multi-Universe" hypotheses attempting to finally move away from previous "THE Big Bang" purportedly "coming from nothing via a quantum fluctuation".

Unfortunately, the problem was merely shifted to the wider 'multiverse' context; STILL leaving open the questions:

- "QUANTUM fluctuation(s) in WHAT?"

and..

- "WHAT are multiple-universes expanding/Inflating INTO?"

As you can see, @Ojorf, your response was old/simplistic/unphysical. :)

Jul 10, 2019
So, got a question, how exactly does entropy work if there's no such thing as time?

Just askin'.

Jul 11, 2019
@SEU
So you are admitting that you are unable to come up with the answers? Wiki, in regards to Time, is incorrect. It is only a concept that proceeded from the Mind of an ancient human who required an answer for why the Sun moves from East to West

What is wrong with you you? I just told you twice.
It's right there in the wiki quote you posted. Did you not read your own post?

Jul 11, 2019
So, got a question, how exactly does entropy work if there's no such thing as time?

Just askin'.


Cause @Benni knows - no explanations required - it's a Benni fact
https://imgflip.com/i/35ekhd

Jul 11, 2019
It is really quite amazing that @Grandy @SEU and now @Mr Pussyface all dovetail nicely into @Benni's imbecilic diatribe.

Jul 11, 2019
benni, frankly & ernestly
i find it easier to "believe" in quarks than to believe in you!
.....no surprise to me that you find it easier to believe in things you can't prove exist, that's what Pop-Cosmology is all about, it's the comfort zone you live in because you're unable to comprehend the settled science of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, ENTROPY. You're disbelief in the settled science of entropy finds a welcome home here from your mentor, el schneibo.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't those Entropic laws first developed in 1803 by Carnot? Using 19th century maths? Which Benni constantly derides?

Jul 11, 2019
It is really quite amazing that @Grandy @SEU and now @Mr Pussyface all dovetail nicely into @Benni's imbecilic diatribe.
.......bringing up the subject of something that is SETTLED SCIENCE is not a diatribe, it is simply what ENTROPY is known to be, SETTLED SCIENCE, ever hear of that phrase anywhere before this?

On the other hand, Dark Energy is hypothesized to be the diametric opposite of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, it is generation of kinetic energy with no means for distributing it, but because you've never taken a college engineering course in Thermodynamics like Benni has then it is clear to see why you fall so easily for Perpetual Motion hypotheses of any kind.

Jul 11, 2019
.......bringing up the subject of something that is SETTLED SCIENCE is not a diatribe, it is simply what ENTROPY is known to be, SETTLED SCIENCE, ever hear of that phrase anywhere before this?

On the other hand, Dark Energy is hypothesized to be the diametric opposite of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, it is generation of kinetic energy with no means for distributing it, but because you've never taken a college engineering course in Thermodynamics like Benni has then it is clear to see why you fall so easily for Perpetual Motion hypotheses of any kind.


The fantastic college and its ineffably immutable course of engineering janitors !
https://media1.te...=4468432


Jul 11, 2019
Shall we call that a #BenniFact™?

And I ask again, how can there be entropy without time?

This is farcical.

Jul 11, 2019
Shall we call that a #BenniFact™?
......no, it's like I stated, SETTLED SCIENCE, long before Benni & you can't prove it's wrong.

Jul 11, 2019
Shall we call that a #BenniFact™?
......no, it's like I stated, SETTLED SCIENCE, long before Benni & you can't prove it's wrong.


You are now talking of yourself in the third person, which is another marker of psychosis.

Jul 11, 2019
Shall we call that a #BenniFact™?

And I ask again, how can there be entropy without time?

This is farcical.


I second this motion !

Should we add #BenniFact™® ?

Cause there is only one Benni ! And that's a fact !

:D

Jul 11, 2019
This is silliness. There is no definition of entropy without time.

Another #BenniFact™® bites the dust.

Jul 11, 2019

You are now talking of yourself in the third person, which is another marker of psychosis.


It's been going on for some time. We had a few theories about this...

Jul 11, 2019
And I ask again, how can there be entropy without time?

This is farcical.
.....answering your own question labeling it "farcical" was very appropriate.

Jul 12, 2019
A Benni Factoid in expansion

Entropy without time
DaSchneib> Shall we call that a #BenniFact™?

And I ask again, how can there be entropy without time?

This is farcical.

Who'd of thought
after
Benni Fame
when in those lazy hazy half a neutron days of yore
when the only the famous name that was oft spoke in awe
this Benni
this collimation of fame
we
now
have
Bennies Factoids

Jul 12, 2019

You are now talking of yourself in the third person, which is another marker of psychosis.

It's been going on for some time. We had a few theories about this...
.......but no curiosity about the settled science of ENTROPY.

Jul 12, 2019
Still waiting for an explanation of how there can be entropy without time.

Jul 12, 2019
Still waiting for an explanation of how there can be entropy without time.
.......it's called SETTLED SCIENCE, it scales with the size or extent of a system, not time.

You continually ask dumb questions because you don't realize that's what your questions are.

Jul 12, 2019
Time is all in the mind

Entropy without time
DaSchneib> Shall we call that a #BenniFact™?

And I ask again, how can there be entropy without time?

This is farcical.

Just why is it farcical
Entropy without time
For what is your interpretation of time
For time
If
We believe dear old Albert, is relative
For time depends on its coordinates
Time depends on it relative velocity

If dear old Albert is to be believed
Time slows with velocity
Time decelerates with gravity
Time is a relative entity
For time even changes on the mood ones in
In those dark depressing nights
When, DaSchneib
Sleep does not come easily
Time drags interminably
For
DaSchneib, time is all in the mind

Jul 12, 2019
There isn't any "settled science" of entropy without time.

@Benni is lying again.

Another #BenniFact™®.

Jul 12, 2019
Just why is it farcical
Entropy without time
For what is your interpretation of time
......el schneibo needs to look at some ENTROPY equations, there is no TIME variable in any of them. The reason he doesn't know this is because he's never cracked the cover on a college level thermodynamics book, in fact he has never even done a cursory review of it in Wiki.

Jul 12, 2019
For why does time drag interminably

In those dark depressing nights
Why does time decelerate with gravity
What is it that gravity is decelerating?
For we are measuring time on the frequency of electromagnetic radiation
For as the electron oscillates with frequency and wave in transition
Gravity decelerates mass in motion with frequency and wave
For dear old ALBERT decreed electromagnet radiation is effected by the acceleration of gravity
For Albert proved the frequency of light is effected by the acceleration of gravity
For this is the world of atomics and their clocks
This world of gravitation and this frequency of light
For where ever we take are time pieces
Gravity dominates the oscillations in our clocks

For time is just in our minds, DaSchneib

Jul 12, 2019
https://en.wikipe.../Entropy

Says entropy is in units of kilogram meter meters per second per second per kelvin.

Last time I checked seconds were time.

Just sayin'.

Jul 12, 2019
hat1208
21 hours ago
Shall we call that a #BenniFact™?
......no, it's like I stated, SETTLED SCIENCE, long before Benni & you can't prove it's wrong.

You are now talking of yourself in the third person, which is another marker of psychosis.
.....I just like to keep you from losing focus on who your name calling rants are directed at, Benni. Don't get it do you? Just like you don't get it that ENTROPY is SETTLED SCIENCE.

Jul 12, 2019
There is no entropy without time, @Benni. No matter how many times you try to pretend there is.

Jul 12, 2019
https://en.wikipe.../Entropy

Says entropy is in units of kilogram meter meters per second per second per kelvin.

Last time I checked seconds were time.

Just sayin'.
that's called change in entropy.......SETTLED SCIENCE, thus displacing the immeasurable limits of infinite time in Dark Energy theories.

Yeah, schneibo, just one more bounded limit ENTROPY places upon the limits of the bounded Universe. Do you even know that entropy increases with time the longer energy to a system exceeds it's output, or the reverse? Yeah, more evidence that time (change) only exists within a bounded system.

Jul 12, 2019
For time is just in our minds

The worm has turned
hat1208> It is really quite amazing that @Grandy @SEU and now @Mr Pussyface all dovetail nicely into @Benni's imbecilic diatribe.

For hath you noticed Benni
The shoe is on the other foot
Who's left out in the cold
For who's left out in the cold looking in
In days of old
Days of yore
Those hazy dazy lazy days when life was simpler
Those Starry days
Starry five star days
When simplicity was the order of the club
When all looked in with awe at the witches of this starry club of fives
But those were of an earlier TIME
For TIME stands still for no man
Those days are gone in these mists of TIME
Those lazy dazy hazy five star days when witches were broomsticking by the light of this full moon
Those days are gone
Just memories
For TIME is just in our minds

Jul 12, 2019
There is no entropy without time, @Benni. No matter how many times you try to pretend there is.
......you're the great pretender here, existing entropy in a system is always calculated without time, you just don't comprehend the basic math for calculating entropy.

Jul 12, 2019
Entropy can only be measured by its change over time, according to the article. Maybe you should actually read it.

There is no such thing as an "entropy meter."
Unlike many other functions of state, entropy cannot be directly observed but must be calculated.

Jul 12, 2019
Besides, you said math doesn't work, so how are you going to calculate?

Just askin'.

Jul 12, 2019
Time is a Mathematical Construct
DaSchneib> Last time I checked seconds were time Just sayin

DaSchneib, our planet
Orbiting our sun
That completes one orbit we call one year
Take our planet, its moon
Orbits our planet 12 times in one complete solar orbit of our planet
We have 1 year dived by 12
Where 1/12 we have called 1 month
For in one solar orbit of this planet
Our planet has 365 sunsets in one solar orbit
Every 30 sunsets this moon is a full moon
For our moon makes 1 complete orbit of our planet in 30 sunsets
For one sunset of our planet
We call 1 day
It was decided to divide one sunset into 24 hours
Where each hour is further subdivided by 3,600 seconds
Where, DaSchneib
This second
This time period of one second is beholden
On how many rotations in one complete orbit of our sun
Time is relative
For, DaSchneib this 1 second is relative

Time: a Mathematical Construct, is all in the mind

Jul 12, 2019
A Mathematical Construct

For, DaSchneib this 1 second is relative
The second has been standardised
As 9billion oscillations
Where these 9billion oscillations
Are at the mercy
Of velocity and acceleration of gravity
Whereas time flows eternally at the same rate throughout this infinite vacuum
Until
We measure
These 9billion hertz
Because
These 9billion hertz
Are at the mercy of velocity and acceleration of gravity
Which
All depends how much gravity is affecting the 9billion hertz in our caesium time pieces

For gravity is not time
Gravity is a force
That effects the oscillations
We use to measure these 9billion oscillations
We have standardised as one second

Our Mathematical Construct

Jul 12, 2019
hat1208
21 hours ago
Shall we call that a #BenniFact™?
......no, it's like I stated, SETTLED SCIENCE, long before Benni & you can't prove it's wrong.

You are now talking of yourself in the third person, which is another marker of psychosis.
.....I just like to keep you from losing focus on who your name calling rants are directed at, Benni. Don't get it do you? Just like you don't get it that ENTROPY is SETTLED SCIENCE.


@Benni name calling rants?

Jul 12, 2019
Entropy can only be measured by its change over time, according to the article. Maybe you should actually read it.
.......I don't need the wrong information your article put out, here's the basic Entropy equation:

ΔS = Q/T........... change in entropy is the heat added per unit temperature with units of Joules/Kelvin.

A joule is quantity of energy exerted when a force of one newton is applied over a displacement of one meter, units of time are not part of the calculation when applied as a static measurement, that is no ACCELERATION.

Da Schneib
10 hours ago
Besides, you said math doesn't work, so how are you going to calculate?

Just askin'.
......you're not quoting Benni, you're just quoting & contradicting yourself yet again.

Jul 12, 2019
This is a nice improvement on the original gravity wave + light observation result. By using the radio results (and nominally the x-ray data) to model the jets the uncertainty shrinks and the result moves even closer to the consensus result. And notably, despite using a local data point that derives at distances where the contradicting observations (in various observations used to derive cosmological distances from).

This is not conclusive (one data point; large uncertainty) but indicative. If the consensus model would be incorrect added data would be expected to put it in more and not less tension (i.e. significantly change its parameters).

-tbctd-

Jul 12, 2019
-ctd-

To sum up Hubble parameter at current universe age [km*s^-1*Mpc^-1]:

Planck CMB [2018] consensus [Planck w/ dust+BAO/RSD+WL+lensing] 68.09 +0.45/-0.45
GW170817 star merger [2019] consensus [GW+EM+VLBI+LC+PLJ] 68.1 +4.5/-4.3
CMASS cosmic voids [2019] consensus [Planck+LOWZ+CMASS+voids] 67.71 +0.43/-0.43

[CMASS: https://journals....0.023504 ; in GW170817 analysis jet model is a matter of taste, I choose the synthetic that scans parameters used.]

Pretty neat. I suspect we will find a problem with the cosmic ladder observations; but you never know.

Jul 12, 2019
I think it's actually pretty close, but apparently I'm wrong. 68.09 kilometers per second per megaparsec and 67.71 km/s/Mpc seem pretty close to me, but we've been having a fit about it for the last ten years or so. My estimation is that it will work out, and it will be interesting watching us find the last couple sig figs.

Jul 12, 2019
Oy vey. We have yet another troll that misunderstand science and has a pseudoscience 'idea' that somehow never can be put into numerical estimates and tested against observations.

Such claims without evidence can be rejected without evidence. Troll will be blocked by me for inane ranting.

However, first it is useful to elaborate on the science (which numerical estimates, see the many papers):

The universe itself is expanding, nothing needed for it to expand into.


That *is* the correct understanding.

General relativity show that in order to have physical laws in spacetime it has to be fluid. It can be bent by gravitation and expanded (or contracted) by the inner energy state of the universe. A newtonian approximation of cosmos as a thrown mass is replaced by an einsteinian approximation of an adiabatic expansion.

(And even without all that, using a scale factor on a model of the universe *just works*; cosmology 101. See e.g. Susskind's web leactures, they are free!)

Jul 12, 2019
This was ironic, since the plaint then - again erroneously - [from another troll?] becomes "Cosmologists NEVER engage in a discussion about the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics".

That would be news to cosmologists, since those discussion have been taken place for a long while. Due to the problems of defining total energy in general relativity *that* question is not consensus settled, but good estimates of *entropy* can be made.

"Using recent measurements of the supermassive black hole (SMBH) mass function, we find that SMBHs are the largest contributor to the entropy of the observable universe, contributing at least an order of magnitude more entropy than previously estimated. The total entropy of the observable universe is correspondingly higher, and is S_obs = 3.1+3.0 –1.7 × 10^104 k."

[ https://iopscienc...0/2/1825 ; entropy is here expressed in terms of Bolzmann's constant k and the volume used is the observable universe volume.]

-tbctd-

Jul 12, 2019
@Da Schneib: For the record, I agree - it looks like the numbers will settle within a decade, one way or the other. I exceeded the voting limits on the troll (there should be a similar comment number limit!), so I could not simply vote your last comment up. (I see that such a sensible comment immediately got voted down. Boo! We should have votes for votes...)

-ctd-

The reason why we can use the cosmic horizon at infinity age is because it is a well defined volume with no energy in or out.

My opinion - which of course is mostly worthless for anyone else - is that since the universe is flat on large scales the energy density sums to zero on average, and the corresponding entropy density is finite so we have no problem here.

Intriguingly then our slow roll inflation universe is flat and presumably infinite in space and age. It has total energy zero (as it should, for a classical eternal system) but the entropy is infinite (typical for the measure problem of infinite universes).

Jul 12, 2019
Oh, I went back and saw this "gem", maybe my opinion will come in handy:

"Dark Energy is hypothesized to be the diametric opposite of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, it is generation of kinetic energy with no means for distributing it, but because you've never taken a college engineering course in Thermodynamics like Benni has then it is clear to see why you fall so easily for Perpetual Motion hypotheses of any kind."

No, it is the opposite.

The expansion is often (slightly misleading) illustrated as a thermodynamic [TD] "push" that accelerates the expansion!

The gravity energy contribution is negative potential energy in a general relativity [GR] sum of energies and dark energy (which is a small positive vacuum energy density, presumably) acts through it for reasons of GR and TD on the inner state of the system. As I already commented, the newtonian universe model is a throw, so the main kinetic energy is put in there as initial condition with no TD problem.

- tbctd-

Jul 12, 2019
-ctd-

And the better einsteinian model is *an adiabatic expansion*, so explicitly TD.

In both cases they are perpetual motion [PM] systems as any system without friction, like a mass moving in free space. No TD PM problem, but a physics law PM for kinetic energy of masses that all accept.

Besides, as I also mentioned, (in my opinion) total energy of the universe seems to be zero - flat space - so its phase space "motion" *has* to be "perpetual". It should move between its zero energy states for eternity, according to ergodic theory of TD.

DE pushing piston model here, with numbers, by a cosmologist: http://www.astro....ant.html . So there. ;-)

Jul 13, 2019
Shall we call that a #BenniFact™?

And I ask again, how can there be entropy without time?

This is farcical.
says Schneib

It's as simple as the nose on your face, Schneib. Entropy is a natural occurrence given the right conditions, and it is observable, recordable and validatable. Entropy is an Event, an Action; a happening. It doesn't need whatever "time" is. And Entropy may be measured as to its Duration and any Distance that is given. The measuring of Entropy may be done with an instrument.
And "time" is only what YOU make of it since it isn't real but only a product of your mind, and referring to it as "time", doesn't make it real no matter what.

Jul 13, 2019
Time is all in the mind

Entropy without time
DaSchneib> Shall we call that a #BenniFact™?

And I ask again, how can there be entropy without time?

This is farcical.

Just why is it farcical
Entropy without time
For what is your interpretation of time
For time
If
We believe dear old Albert, is relative
For time depends on its coordinates
Time depends on it relative velocity

If dear old Albert is to be believed
Time slows with velocity
Time decelerates with gravity
Time is a relative entity
For time even changes on the mood ones in
In those dark depressing nights
When, DaSchneib
Sleep does not come easily
Time drags interminably
For
DaSchneib, time is all in the mind
says granville

Time doesn't slow or decelerate; neither does it reverse or stop. An Action can slow down; an Event can stop; both can be measured with clocks as to Duration, or a tape measure for Distance.
Both are observable and recordable.

Jul 13, 2019
Is there a civil engineer in the house

TorbjornLarsson: vacuum can be bent
torbjorn_b_g_larsson> General relativity show that in order to have physical laws in spacetime it has to be fluid. It can be bent by gravitation

Really
Spacetime, is has to be fluid, it can be bent by gravitation
So, TorbjornLarsson
Is a fluid engineer
Since when can vacuum be bent, squashed, bent
And
Since when does a vacuum
If you listen quietly, go tick-tock
For
A vacuum can be bent
We will believe
When we see an elephant fly

Jul 13, 2019
This constant unwavering time of this vacuum

Time, this nuts is for cracking
SEU> Time doesn't slow or decelerate; neither does it reverse or stop

In time, SEU
This time will come
When this chronometer
That
Does not deviate
In motion
In gravitation
For it will tell this time of this vacuum
Tell this constant time of this vacuum
As one time throughout this infinite vacuum
For there is only one time
As
That is this single time of this vacuum
That
Our unwavering chronometer
When it is constructed
Free from gravitation and motion in this vacuum
Will
Tell
This constant unwavering time of this vacuum

Jul 13, 2019
Lizard Boy said;

It's as simple as the nose on your face, Schneib. Entropy is a natural occurrence given the right conditions, and it is observable, recordable and validatable. Entropy is an Event, an Action; a happening. It doesn't need whatever "time" is.


What a complete and utter moron! Further proof, were it needed, that alien lizards are as dumb as a bag of spanners!

Jul 13, 2019
Time, this Nuts is for Cracking

In a Nutshell
Our Chronometer
When Constructed
Free from Gravitation
Free from Motion
Will tell this Constant Unwavering Time of this Vacuum

Jul 13, 2019
Torbjorn seems to be a firm believer of "Time" as in Space-time. So he is actually a big fan of Professor Minkowski's pet theory that was forced onto Einstein.
Space itself cannot be 'bent' through gravitation. Space is made up of quantum particles/waves, gases and dust. Therefore, Space can follow the contours of Matter such as planets and moons, and "wrap" itself around them while also filling in. But it's not due to gravity even though gravity attracts Mass to other Mass. If there happens to be a large amount of iron molecules in Space, then those molecules may have an influence on EM/magnetic fields and spatial electric currents such as Jupiter's auroras.
Isn't that right, jonesy?

Jul 13, 2019
This jargon of Science

SEU, this secret is out
SEU> Professor Minkowski's pet theory that was forced onto Einstein.
Space itself cannot be 'bent' through gravitation. Space is made up of quantum particles/waves, gases and dust. Therefore...If there happens to be a large amount of iron molecules in Space, then those molecules may have an influence on EM/magnetic fields and spatial electric currents such as Jupiter's auroras.
Isn't that right, jonesy?

This secret, this P.W graduate secret demise, SEU
Is finally revealing itself
Foreth SEU, if truth be told
These protectorates of this science
Expansion, space, vacuum, electric currents
Are either nonsense, or science depending how their told in their telling
Foreth, this demise is this jargon of science
Has brought graduates, professors, to question their hard won degrees
As now Professor Minkowski theories are under scrutiny of this interweb

Tis a pity, when in Professor Minkowski day, he was unable to frequent this phys.org!

Jul 13, 2019
Torbjorn seems to be a firm believer of "Time" as in Space-time. So he is actually a big fan of Professor Minkowski's pet theory that was forced onto Einstein.
Space itself cannot be 'bent' through gravitation. Space is made up of quantum particles/waves, gases and dust. Therefore, Space can follow the contours of Matter such as planets and moons, and "wrap" itself around them while also filling in. But it's not due to gravity even though gravity attracts Mass to other Mass. If there happens to be a large amount of iron molecules in Space, then those molecules may have an influence on EM/magnetic fields and spatial electric currents such as Jupiter's auroras.
Isn't that right, jonesy?


Total bollocks. Stop commenting on stuff you don't understand, lizard boy. i.e. science.

Jul 13, 2019
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
11 hours ago
This is a nice improvement on the original gravity wave + light observation result. By using the radio results (and nominally the x-ray data) to model the jets the uncertainty shrinks and the result moves even closer to the consensus result.
.........."consensus result"? Sure among the fans of Pop-Cosmology fantasies, but not nuclear physicists who know gravitational collapse theory is totally contrived because it pre-supposes that gravity is NOT mass dependent in accordance with the Inverse Square Law.

(And even without all that, using a scale factor on a model of the universe *just works*; cosmology 101
......thus explaining everything that your Pop-Cosmolgy level of thinking is all about, "It must be true if torbjorn_b_g_larsson imagines it".

Jul 13, 2019
.........."consensus result"? Sure among the fans of Pop-Cosmology fantasies, but not nuclear physicists who know gravitational collapse theory is totally contrived because it pre-supposes that gravity is NOT mass dependent in accordance with the Inverse Square Law.


BS janitor boy. Not a single nuclear physicist has ever said such a thing. What were Oppenheimer's professional qualifications, dumbo? What did he write on black holes and neutron stars? Come back when you know what you are talking about, you ignorant loon.

Jul 13, 2019
The gravity energy contribution is negative potential energy in a general relativity [GR] sum of energies and dark energy (which is a small positive vacuum energy density, presumably) acts through it for reasons of GR and TD on the inner state of the system. As I already commented, the newtonian universe model is a throw, so the main kinetic energy is put in there as initial condition with no TD problem.
............pure unadulterated psycho-babble brought to us as only Pop-Cosmologist torbjorn_b_g_larsson can fantasize it.

If you tried doing an oral recitation of the above paragraph you wrote, how many of those words could you even remember in the order in which you wrote them? You write stuff that is totally indecipherable, then sit back & marvel at how clever you think you were to come up with such indecipherable psycho-babble.

Jul 13, 2019
What does "mass dependent in accordance with the Inverse Square Law" mean? The two have nothing to do with one another.

@Benni is lying again.

Another #BenniFact™®.

Jul 13, 2019
What does "mass dependent in accordance with the Inverse Square Law" mean? The two have nothing to do with one another.
...........it would only be expected you'd make such a statement simply because it makes no sense, the two are intricately woven into one another & is SETTLED SCIENCE you don't know how to contradict except to come up with theories of never ending gravitational collapse in which momentum of particles of mass somehow creates new gravity independent of new mass.


Jul 13, 2019
Oh, they're both true... they just have nothing to do with each other.

ISL is because the surface area of a sphere surrounding the source increases as the square of its radius. There are inverse square laws for gravity, EM, and even for light. However much force or light there is, the farther away something is the less there is of it. Anybody with a functioning brain knows that.

That has nothing to do with the fact that gravity is also mass dependent. Not any more than that EM is charge dependent.

Neither is either a consequence or a cause of the other.

@Benni is babbling now, trying to make up another lie.

Jul 13, 2019
Jargon that is science - By TorbjornLarsson
This Newtonian Universe Model is a Throw

The gravity energy contribution
Is negative potential energy
In a general relativity
Sum of energies
And dark energy
Which is a small positive vacuum energy density
Acts through it for reasons of GR and TD
On the inner state of the system
As I already commented
The Newtonian universe model is a throw
So the main kinetic energy
Is put in there as initial condition
With no TD problem

p.s. we will get to what this jargon meaneths, on a bacon and egg sandwich, foreth there is no positive vacuum energy density in a slice of fried bacon, as to what a positive vacuum is, the mind boggles

RNP
Jul 13, 2019
@Benni
If you tried doing an oral recitation of the above paragraph you wrote, how many of those words could you even remember in the order in which you wrote them?


This is just your way of saying...I don't understand what you are saying, so you must be wrong.

Let me remind you again - the reason that you do not understand what people are telling you is that you are uneducated (as you make abundantly clear every time you post), whereas the people you are arguing with are highly trained.

Get an education and you MIGHT just be able to post without making a fool of yourself.

Jul 13, 2019
Jargon that is science

Remember, remember
What is - This Dense Aether Model
To this what is question

What is, TorbjornLarsson - Positive Vacuum Energy Density?

Jul 13, 2019
@Torbjorn
@RNP
@Castro
@DS.

Stop wasting breath on @Benni's silly taunts and (now very smelly) 'baits' well past their 'entertainment value' use-by-date. Readers can see how lame he and his gambits are. Forget him. Just concentrate on addressing genuine scientifically/logically valid points raised by genuine interlocutors: speaking of which/whom...

I long ago pointed out that "Inflation/Expansion" hypotheses were missing a crucial piece, the absence of which makes such hypotheses (and all interpretations/claims therefrom) just 'hot metaphysical air' blown by 'the Big Bang crowd'.

The missing piece?...the COUPLING MECHANISM between allegedly expanding spacetime and separating galaxies purportedly being 'carried apart' by allegedly expanding spacetime.

The BB crowd 'explains' that some galaxies CAN converge "because spacetime EXPANDS THROUGH" them.

BUT IF SO, how can it also MOVE galaxies APART?

See? Expansionists cannot have it BOTH ways!

Over to you, guys. :)

Jul 14, 2019
Jargon that is science

Remember, remember
What is - This Dense Aether Model
To this what is question

What is, TorbjornLarsson - Positive Vacuum Energy Density?
says granville

LOL Most here would also like to know what it is. No one seems to be agreeing with Torbjorn on his "Positive Vacuum Energy Density" and no entries for it were found in Wikipedia.
Perhaps Torbjorn has translated it from Swedish into English incorrectly?
OR, he may have tried to do some spoofing here for laughs. Anything is possible with this bozo and his highfalutin' jargon to sock it to the peasants.

Jul 14, 2019
Actually, @torbjorn is right: if gravity results in negative potential energy (which makes sense if you understand PE in a gravity field) then DE has to result in positive PE. That's because gravity acts to reduce PE by bringing things closer together, whereas DE acts to increase it by shoving things apart.

You really don't understand physics very well, do you?

Jul 14, 2019
Jargon that is science
DaSchneib> PE in a gravity field then DE has to result in positive PE. That's because gravity acts to reduce PE by bringing things closer together, whereas DE acts to increase it by shoving things apart

Probing dark energy, the energy in empty space causing the expanding universe to accelerate
The energy of the universe is dominated by empty space emitting a repulsive form of gravity that is pushing the universe apart
https://www.nasa....rgy.html

Really, DaSchneib
Vacuum is repelling inertial mass

By implication
Positive Vacuum Energy Density?
is
Potential energy: PE is Positive Vacuum Energy

Jul 14, 2019
Potential energy: PE is Positive Vacuum Energy

Really, DaSchneib
While
Vacuum is repelling inertial mass
While
Gravity is attracting inertial mass

We have
By implication
Energy from vacuum
Energy created from vacuum
For how much energy is created from vacuum

At least, DaSchneib
Gravity is emanating from inertial mass attracting inertial mass by the graviton quantum particle
Where as
Vacuum; repelling inertial mass
Meaneths
In a sealed room
The molecules
Are being repelled by vacuum
This certainly puts a question mark
On this blackhole
As this singularity
Cannot exist
As vacuum
Is repelling this singularity apart

Jul 14, 2019
What is, TorbjornLarsson - Positive Vacuum Energy Density?
says granville

LOL Most here would also like to know what it is. No one seems to be agreeing with Torbjorn on his "Positive Vacuum Energy Density" and no entries for it were found in Wikipedia.
Perhaps Torbjorn has translated it from Swedish into English incorrectly?
OR, he may have tried to do some spoofing here for laughs. Anything is possible with this bozo and his highfalutin' jargon to sock it to the peasants.
.........this kind of stuff is from Eastern Mysticism of Hinduism. The guy is a religious nutjob trying to hide it using the words of science intead of saying what he really means, that, "I torbjorn_b_g_larsson am a practicing Hindu".

Jul 15, 2019
Once more I can say that the universe is a constant structure. The ripples as called expansion are just a transverse wave as light.



Jul 15, 2019
@RealityCheeck

You have mentioned "Expanding Spacetime" twice in your comment above. Please explain how Spacetime expands and what are the properties of Spacetime that allow it to expand. Thanks

Jul 15, 2019
Alien Lizard Boy said;

LOL Most here would also like to know what it is. No one seems to be agreeing with Torbjorn on his "Positive Vacuum Energy Density" and no entries for it were found in Wikipedia.
Perhaps Torbjorn has translated it from Swedish into English incorrectly?


Perhaps said Lizard Boy hasn't learned how to use the internet! And, more to the point, hasn't got a scooby about any kind of science.

Have a little lesson from John Baez;

http://math.ucr.e...uum.html

Fittingly, Baez is also the author of the Crackpot Index!

https://en.wikipe...ot_index

Jul 15, 2019
Now if all one had to do was to consult the internet for information on these matters, there certainly would not be any need for phys.org, would there? Just read the article and consult Wiki or the Archives, etc. and don't even bother with the comments. It is now well known that Castrovagina believe himself to be the Oracle whereby any queries re science should be referred and directed to himself. There are a few more in physorg who have the idea that they are all-knowing, and those who wish to learn should speak only to them. Such as Schneib, Castrovagina, Torbjorn. But Torbjorn regards all scholars to be trolls and blocks all queries.

Jul 15, 2019
But Torbjorn regards all scholars to be trolls and blocks all queries.


And you are not a scholar. You are a clueless, scientifically illiterate eejit.

Jul 15, 2019
Not to mention that I had expected Castrovagina to explain to us all, the burning question of "what is time made of?", which Castrovagina failed to do and ran off, leaving me to doubt his role of Oracle, just as I doubted Schneib's ability to answer the very same questions.
Sad it is, when those who in physorg who include them selves amongst the highly educated sages of science can't even give answer to such an ordinary and basic query of what is time made of.

Jul 15, 2019
Not to mention that I had expected Castrovagina to explain to us all, the burning question of "what is time made of?", which Castrovagina failed to do and ran off, leaving me to doubt his role of Oracle, just as I doubted Schneib's ability to answer the very same questions.
Sad it is, when those who in physorg who include them selves amongst the highly educated sages of science can't even give answer to such an ordinary and basic query of what is time made of.


It is a stupid question from a crackpot with no understanding of science. Go join a physics forum, and make a tit of yourself there, you loon;

https://forum.cos...-Answers


Jul 15, 2019
The Babble about jebus contains all troof!!!111!!oneoneoneeleventyone!!11

https://www.youtu...lF_gC8Xk

Jul 15, 2019
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/LGelF_gC8Xk/hqdefault.jpg

These people are insane. They need to be removed from the general population and the real Christians need to denounce them.

Just like the real Muslims need to denounce the violent militias.

Jul 15, 2019
There are a few more in physorg who have the idea that they are all-knowing, and those who wish to learn should speak only to them. Such as Schneib, Castrovagina, Torbjorn. But Torbjorn regards all scholars to be trolls and blocks all queries.
......ever notice how soon after he's (Torb) made the statement that he has blocked Benni but what soon thereafter he just incidentally finds the need to sort of look in on me? He needs to find out what's going on in the real world of science so he reads Benni's Comments all the while claiming he has me on Block.

If he had me on Block, he wouldn't know what else to spend his time on.

Jul 15, 2019
I already KNOW what time is made of, and what it is NOT made of, but it appears that Castrovagina and Schneib have no idea and therefore cannot give answer to my queries. Now why is that?
Instead, Castrovagina resorts to a heavy preponderance of name-calling and ad hominem, while Schneib resort to invoking the name of someone called jebus, and then goes on to spelling out some nonsensical verbiage which nobody knows the meaning of, except for Schneib and his evil Master who is obviously reading all that has gone on. LOL

Jul 15, 2019
What is space "made of?"

I've been asking this for nearly a year and don't have your answer yet.

Now stop lying.

Jul 15, 2019
@Benni
Torbjorn reads the responses from others who have replied to you comments, and that is how he knows what you have said. He doesn't have to unblock you or me. He just has to read what his friends are saying to see what has been said by you, me or anyone else he has blocked. That is why he has no inkling of what I have been sayin re the nonexistence of time.

Jul 15, 2019
......ever notice how soon after he's (Torb) made the statement that he has blocked Benni but what soon thereafter he just incidentally finds the need to sort of look in on me? He needs to find out what's going on in the real world of science so he reads Benni's Comments all the while claiming he has me on Block.

If he had me on Block, he wouldn't know what else to spend his time on.


But you don't know anything about science! As has been shown.

Jul 15, 2019
I already KNOW what time is made of, and what it is NOT made of....


Nope. You are a scientifically illiterate oaf, who couldn't find his own arse with an extra pair of hands. I told you - go make a tit of yourself on a real physics forum. Given the heavy stuff they deal with, I expect they could use a bit of a laugh, and you are just the clown to provide such.

Jul 15, 2019
What is space "made of?"

I've been asking this for nearly a year and don't have your answer yet.

Now stop lying.
says Schneib

I answered your query of what is space made of in another phorum, which you ignored and now pretend that you never read it. I even answered Cortezz wrt the same question. Look for it.

Jul 15, 2019
That Castrovagina wants me to be in another area of physorg instead of right here, is a clear indication that he is unhappy with my queries re what time is made of. As I have already expounded on the nature of the Minkowski Spacetime inclusion into Einstein's equations, and have told the story of it in one of these phorums already... I shouldn't have to repeat it again and again. Look it up

Jul 15, 2019
That Castrovagina wants me to be in another area of physorg instead of right here, is a clear indication that he is unhappy with my queries re what time is made of. As I have already expounded on the nature of the Minkowski Spacetime inclusion into Einstein's equations, and have told the story of it in one of these phorums already... I shouldn't have to repeat it again and again. Look it up


Nope. You haven't got a clue, dumbo. If you want a Q & A, go join a physics forum. This is not one. We all know why idiots like you and Benni and others are too chicken to do that. That is why you end up here, on a sci-news comments section. You want people to think you actually understand science, when you haven't got a scooby, and would be a laughing stock on a physics forum, just as you are here.

Jul 15, 2019
Cortezz had inquired of me as to "what is time made of". I missed his query in one phorum, so that when he asked again in another phorum, is when I answered and gave him the full details, and he had read what I had said re what is space made of, in answer to Schneib's query of same.

Bur Castrovagina seems threatened by my own queries and resorts to his usual name-calling rants, as if by doing that, he will frighten me away. LOL

Jul 15, 2019
Baez is awesome.

Casimir effect has been measured, quantum vacuum fluctuations are real. More Baez: http://math.ucr.e...mir.html

Jul 15, 2019
Only ones laughing in these phorums are Castrovagina and Schneib, who are both unable to answer my queries or time. Everyone else who have a brain is taking the matter seriously.

Jul 15, 2019
That Castrovagina wants me to be in another area of physorg instead of right here, is a clear indication that he is unhappy with my queries re what time is made of. As I have already expounded on the nature of the Minkowski Spacetime inclusion into Einstein's equations, and have told the story of it in one of these phorums already... I shouldn't have to repeat it again and again. Look it up
.....and that's the game they play, pretend you never answered their question in the first place & then sidetrack you into endless repetition hoping they're sucking the energy out of you for presenting new material, but if you notice they are the ones never presenting new material, just the same words in the course of their foul mouthed name calling rants.


Jul 15, 2019
I agree. There seems to be a certain boundary through which Castrovagina and Schneib will refuse to pass, if that boundary has been crossed already with such new ideas/new science as the nonexistence of Time aka Spacetime, the concepts have to be vilified and made to seem antiscience, when all it is is the FUTURE OF SCIENCE.

Jul 15, 2019
Only ones laughing in these phorums are Castrovagina and Schneib, who are both unable to answer my queries or time. Everyone else who have a brain is taking the matter seriously.


Nope, nobody is taking such a stupid question seriously. That is why you are too chicken to ask it on a physics forum.

Jul 15, 2019
That Castrovagina wants me to be in another area of physorg instead of right here, is a clear indication that he is unhappy with my queries re what time is made of. As I have already expounded on the nature of the Minkowski Spacetime inclusion into Einstein's equations, and have told the story of it in one of these phorums already... I shouldn't have to repeat it again and again. Look it up
.....and that's the game they play, pretend you never answered their question in the first place & then sidetrack you into endless repetition hoping they're sucking the energy out of you for presenting new material, but if you notice they are the ones never presenting new material, just the same words in the course of their foul mouthed name calling rants.



But you've never answered a question correctly, nor presented any new material! You are as dumb as a bag of spanners.

Jul 15, 2019
If you want a Q & A, go join a physics forum. This is not one. We all know why idiots like you and Benni and others are too chicken to do that. That is why you end up here, on a sci-news comments section. You want people to think you actually understand science, when you haven't got a scooby, and would be a laughing stock on a physics forum, just as you are here.
.....of course it hasn't dawned on you that YOU should be the one hearkening to the advice of your own words, that while claiming you know so much more than others you've singled out at which to aim your discontent.

Ok, you claim to know so much more science than Benni & Egg, then YOU be the one to spend ALL your time right over there in those forums that almost nobody reads ( uh, oh, did I just stumble onto something here?).

Jul 15, 2019
Ok, you claim to know so much more science than Benni & Egg, then YOU be the one to spend ALL your time right over there in those forums that almost nobody reads ( uh, oh, did I just stumble onto something here?).


It isn't a claim. It is a self-evident fact. What is a half-life, janitor boy? And I do post on physics forums.

Jul 15, 2019
I answered your query of what is space made of in another phorum
No, you didn't. As usual, you are lying. I don't post on "another phorum" (whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean). If you claim I do link and quote it.

Jul 15, 2019
If you want a Q & A, go join a physics forum. This is not one. We all know why idiots like you and Benni and others are too chicken to do that. That is why you end up here, on a sci-news comments section. You want people to think you actually understand science, when you haven't got a scooby, and would be a laughing stock on a physics forum, just as you are here.
.....of course it hasn't dawned on you that YOU should be the one hearkening to the advice of your own words, that while claiming you know so much more than others you've singled out at which to aim your discontent.

Ok, you claim to know so much more science than Benni & Egg, then YOU be the one to spend ALL your time right over there in those forums that almost nobody reads ( uh, oh, did I just stumble onto something here?).


Benni, I have asked Castrovagina to tell us 'what is time made of?" and he cannot answer, because he does not KNOW the answer, even though it is one of the most basic bits of knowledg

Jul 15, 2019
Still waiting for the link and quote, liar.

Here's another picture of your jebus:

https://cdn0.thet...com_.jpg

Jul 15, 2019
I answered your query of what is space made of in another phorum
No, you didn't. As usual, you are lying. I don't post on "another phorum" (whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean). If you claim I do link and quote it.
says the lying Schneib

I will look for that phorum in which I told you 'what SPACE is made of', and I will post it here on my return.

Jul 15, 2019
Benni, I have asked Castrovagina to tell us 'what is time made of?" and he cannot answer, because he does not KNOW the answer, even though it is one of the most basic bits of knowledg


And I've told you - it is a stupid question, you idiot. What the **** do you mean - 'what is time made of'? Cretin.

Jul 15, 2019
And another. https://www.themo...guns.png

Go thump your Babble someplace else.

And stick your gun up your asshole and twist it.

Jul 15, 2019
I answered your query of what is space made of in another phorum
No, you didn't. As usual, you are lying. I don't post on "another phorum" (whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean). If you claim I do link and quote it.
says the lying Schneib

I will look for that phorum in which I told you 'what SPACE is made of', and I will post it here on my return.


And learn to spell before you come back, you illiterate retard.

Jul 15, 2019
And another. https://media3.gi...00w.webp

You people are insane and you need to be removed from civilized society. Generally we do it in gas chambers and on electric chairs after you murder someone you never met because their skin is a different color than yours.

Jul 15, 2019
I will look for that phorum in which I told you 'what SPACE is made of', and I will post it here on my return.
Bullshit. Bring it, alien lizardboi.

Here's another one for you: https://encrypted...6mQ7ARSk

Jul 15, 2019
https://phys.org/...ory.html

There it is, Schneib. I answered you. All you have to do is look it up

Jul 15, 2019
https://phys.org/news/2019-06-astronomers-history.html

There it is, Schneib. I answered you. All you have to do is look it up
.....he won't, instead he'll be back in two months making the same demand.

Jul 15, 2019
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
Jul 05, 2019
Ready anytime. Just as soon as alien mind-reading man tells us what space is "made of."

says Schneib

But Schneib, we all thought that you KNEW. Are you looking for confirmation wrt what SPACE is made of... from ME...who is but a mere scholar and interested observer?
OK since you are as yet unsure of your alleged knowledge of Space, I will explain to you what SPACE IS MADE OF. And then YOU can explain to all of us WHAT TIME IS MADE OF.

The Fabric of SPACE aka the Vacuous Vacuum is not empty but is filled with Quantum Particles and Waves such as Photons; pristine protons; scrumptious electrons; neutral neutrons that are going to plus decay in 14.7 minutes; as well as gases and dust, where everything is in Motion and Momentum; including Particles that scientists have yet to discover.
It is easy peasy, Schneib. That mote in your eye has arrived from SPACE and will eventually go back to it.
Did my answer to your query meet with satisfaction?

Jul 15, 2019
There it is Schneib, I made it easier for you. You're welcome.

I don't know, Benni. He might be reading it right now. And weeping.

Jul 15, 2019
https://phys.org/...ory.html

There it is, Schneib. I answered you. All you have to do is look it up


Nope. Not seeing anything relevant there, other than a bunch of scientifically illiterate garbage trying to explain away the effects of GR and SR on time. Said garbage has been debunked previously. Multiple times.

Jul 15, 2019
Did my answer to your query meet with satisfaction?


Lol. Sounds like a heap of crap you've plagiarized from the idiot Granville! How sad!

Jul 15, 2019
https://phys.org/...ory.html

There it is, Schneib. I answered you. All you have to do is look it up
It's not "another phorum." It's this forum. You're lying again.

And it doesn't contain the words, "What is space made of." So you're lying twice in the same post.

Link and quote, gaping flapping fapping stinking farting Babble-thumping asshole.

Hint: you forgot the quote.

Jul 15, 2019
https://phys.org/...ory.html

There it is, Schneib. I answered you. All you have to do is look it up


Nope. Not seeing anything relevant there, other than a bunch of scientifically illiterate garbage trying to explain away the effects of GR and SR on time. Said garbage has been debunked previously. Multiple times.
says Castrovagina

Hmmm you must be needing new reading glasses, jonesy. I was talking about "Space" not Time.
Schreib was asking about Space. Read it again.
Nope. Nothing was debunked. It is all still very relevant. But YOU only accept what you like and discard the good parts.

Jul 15, 2019
So, just a link and a claim, but no quote.

You're lying again, alien lizard boi.

Here, another one for you: http://s1.b3ta.co...nfin.gif

Jul 15, 2019
https://phys.org/...ory.html

There it is, Schneib. I answered you. All you have to do is look it up
It's not "another phorum." It's this forum. You're lying again.

And it doesn't contain the words, "What is space made of." So you're lying twice in the same post.

Link and quote, gaping flapping fapping stinking farting Babble-thumping asshole.

Hint: you forgot the quote.
says the demonic-infested Schneib

Hey Schneib, I notice that every time that you are in a quandary and have been caught in a lie or three, you revert to your demon that lives in you for inspiration.
I mean to say, Schneib - what on Earth does "gaping flapping fapping, etc etc" mean, Schneib?
Those sound like demonic words, Schneib. You are revealing more and more about the 'thing' that lives inside you. Does it pinch or punch you? Does it hurt you, you filthy bag of cells? Take your time. Compose yourself and don't answer too quickly.

Jul 15, 2019
Still no quote.

You're still lying for jebus.

Here's another one for you: https://imgflip.c...esus-gun

You guys sure seem to make a lot of images of your jebus icon with guns.

Jul 15, 2019
You know, I can do this shit all night. There's only about 10,000 images of jebus with guns out there on the Intertubes.

You people should be kicked out of society and gassed.

Here's another one: https://i.gifer.com/origin/fe/fe7e44682f9a41eb720a1b6cfcf72c9a_w200.webp


Jul 15, 2019
Still no quote.

You're still lying for jebus.

Here's another one for you: https://imgflip.c...esus-gun

You guys sure seem to make a lot of images of your jebus icon with guns.
says Schneib

Looks you and Castrovagina BOTH need reading glasses.
I submitted the quote/comment already above. Look for it, Schneib. It's easy to find. It's right below Benni's comment and above Castrovagina's comment.
See that, Schneib? That's what comes of you accepting a demon into you and accepting the devil as your Master. Your mind is degenerating, Schneib. You can't tell what is real and what isn't.
And you STILL haven't explained who this jebus person is, Schneib. Is it the name of your demon, Schneib?

Jul 15, 2019
No quote. You're lying for jebus again. This is getting boring.

And yet another: https://i.imgflip.com/1x2dv7.jpg

Do I really need to beat you down any further?

Jul 15, 2019
No quote. Lying for jebus.

Here's another one: https://encrypted...ug55sLiP

Jul 15, 2019
I'm tellin' you, there's ten thousand pictures of your jebus with guns out there, son. You better run away, because you are one of the nutjobs. No questions, no doubts, no horseshit.

Another one: https://www.gunsa...-gun.jpg

Jul 15, 2019
Here's another one: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-8IKIodaqFe8/T4r0vmsDy_I/AAAAAAAABxI/uokEyl9XT0I/s1600/jesus-gun+control.jpg

Disgusting.

Jul 16, 2019
What, all out of lies now?

Figures. Run away coward. You can't keep up what you claim. No quote, you lose, I win.

Another one: https://10cities1...pg?w=640

Jul 16, 2019
You stil haven't looked at the quote I placed up above, Schneib. Too lazy to look for it?

Jul 16, 2019
Uh Schreib. I don't think anyone is looking at your silly little childish need to puke yourself by further taking up bandwidth with your images. I am playing a game in the meantime.

Jul 16, 2019
Too lazy to post it again? I didn't see any quote. I saw a link to a thread (not, BTW, a forum) that didn't have anything like you claim it did. You're just lying for jebus again.

Another jebus with guns: https://scontent....gram.com

You are a disgusting christainoid piece of stinking shit. Go away.

And if anyone doesn't know what a "christianoid" is, it's a Christian-like object.

Jul 16, 2019
I am playing a game in the meantime.
And that's why you don't have any quotes.

Nice try christianoid.

Here's another one: https://athenae25...stol.jpg

Tellin' you I can do this all night. Time for you to run away.

Jul 16, 2019
LOL If you had looked right below Benni's comment above, you would have seen it. it has the date July 05 on it.
Oh by all means, Schneib. Do it all night - all night long.

Jul 16, 2019
Hmmm Schnieb must have fallen asleep or he's busy wanking while looking at all those jpg images. Humans are somewhat disgusting.

Jul 16, 2019

Nope. Nothing was debunked. It is all still very relevant. But YOU only accept what you like and discard the good parts.


Yes it was. Trivially. Time is seen to be altered by SR and GR. Fact. Not only that, but we can predict by how much beforehand, and then check our predictions against observation. And Einstein wins every time. So, if time isn't real, how can it be altered due to velocity or altitude? Still waiting for an answer.

Jul 16, 2019
Link and quote. If either is missing, you lied. Simple as that.

https://oktayegek...sus1.jpg

Jul 16, 2019
https://cretoniat...egun.jpg

Link and quote or you got nothin. Liar.


Jul 16, 2019
LOL If you had looked right below Benni's comment above, you would have seen it. it has the date July 05 on it.
Oh by all means, Schneib. Do it all night - all night long.
.......maybe schneobo's philanges are too big for a good fit?

Jul 18, 2019

Nope. Nothing was debunked. It is all still very relevant. But YOU only accept what you like and discard the good parts.


Yes it was. Trivially. Time is seen to be altered by SR and GR. Fact. Not only that, but we can predict by how much beforehand, and then check our predictions against observation. And Einstein wins every time. So, if time isn't real, how can it be altered due to velocity or altitude? Still waiting for an answer.
says Castrovagina

I'm afraid not, jonesy. IF there was such an object as Time, other than your wish to measure the duration of something by using a timepiece, then tell us what time is made of, so that we can determine if SR and GR have any effect on it. If you can't SEE that effect happening except by the motion of a clock, then what happened to that effect?
jonesy, perhaps you're not aware, but it is the CLOCK'S MECHANISM that can be altered in regard to altitude, direction, velocity, etc etc.

Jul 18, 2019
In fact, jonesy, even Nuclear clocks have to be altered, amended and repaired due to its aging radioactive MECHANISM. The thing that you call TIME is not living inside that clock. It is purely mechanised and dependent on humans to fix it.
There is no such thing as "predicting or altering time by SR and GR. Or whatever it is that you THINK they can do with time.
Time is a ghost, a specter that lives only IN your mind, jonesy. It has been so instilled into your psyche that it is virtually impossible to be rid of it.
It is your AWARENESS OF EVENTS and ACTIONS that motivate you to want to MEASURE the DURATIONS of those Events and Actions. I think that Einstein KNEW this also, but he didn't want to hurt Professor Minkowski's feelings, which is why Einstein used the word Spacetime.

Jul 18, 2019
LOL If you had looked right below Benni's comment above, you would have seen it. it has the date July 05 on it.
Oh by all means, Schneib. Do it all night - all night long.
.......maybe schneobo's philanges are too big for a good fit?
says Benni

LOL I have no idea why Schneib is presenting all his collection of jpg's as though anyone would be interested in viewing them. Very strange, indeed. The loony bins were emptied out back in the 1970s in the US, according to the books, which would account for Schneib, rrwilly, Otto and a few others living here in physorg. The 'resident nut jobs, I call them.
I had to tell Schneib about 10 times exactly where to find my comment, and he STILL couldn't find it.

Jul 18, 2019
... blah blah bla bla bla blah blah bla blah bla ble ble bli ble bleh blih bloh blah bla bla blah blih blih bluh buh bla bli bla ble bla time not exist blah bli bli blah bla ble blah blah blah ble ble bleh bla bla bla blah blah bli blah humans stupid, god in brain ble ble bla bla bla bli


@StupidEgg
Fixed it ;)

Jul 18, 2019
... blah blah bla bla bla blah blah bla blah bla ble ble bli ble bleh blih bloh blah bla bla blah blih blih bluh buh bla bli bla ble bla time not exist blah bli bli blah bla ble blah blah blah ble ble bleh bla bla bla blah blah bli blah humans stupid, god in brain ble ble bla bla bla bli
......u have a differential equation for this?


Jul 18, 2019
.....u have a differential equation for this?


Could you solve it ?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more