Providing a solution to the worst-ever prediction in physics

cosmos
Credit: CC0 Public Domain

The cosmological constant, introduced a century ago by Albert Einstein in his theory of general relativity, is a thorn in the side of physicists. The difference between the theoretical prediction of this parameter and its measurement based on astronomical observations is of the order of 10121. It's no surprise to learn that this estimate is considered the worst in the entire history of physics. In an article to be published in Physics Letters B, a researcher from the University of Geneva (UNIGE), Switzerland, proposes an approach that may seemingly resolve this inconsistency. The original idea in the paper is to accept that another constant—Newton's universal gravitation G, which also forms part of the equations on general relativity—may vary. This potentially major breakthrough, which has been positively received by the scientific community, still needs to be pursued in order to generate predictions that can be confirmed (or refuted) experimentally.

"My work consists of a new mathematical manipulation of the equations of general relativity that finally makes it possible to harmonize theory and observation on the ," says Lucas Lombriser, assistant professor in the Department of Theoretical Physics in UNIGE's Faculty of Sciences and sole author of the article.

Expansion in full acceleration

The cosmological constant Λ (lambda) was introduced into equations on general relativity by Einstein over a century ago. The celebrated physicist needed the constant to ensure that his theory would be compatible with a universe he believed was static. However, in 1929 another physicist—Edwin Hubble—discovered that the galaxies are all moving away from each other, a sign that the universe is actually expanding. On learning this, Einstein rued the fact that he had introduced the cosmological constant, which had become useless in his eyes, and even described it as "the greatest blunder of my life."

In 1998, the precise analysis of distant supernovae offered proof that the expansion of the universe, far from being constant, is actually accelerating, as though a mysterious force is swelling the cosmos more and more rapidly. The cosmological constant was then once more called on in order to describe what physicists call "vacuum energy"—an energy whose nature is unknown (we talk about dark energy, quintessence, etc.) but which is responsible for the accelerated expansion of the universe.

The most precise observations of supernovae, and especially of the (microwave radiation that comes from all parts of the sky and which is considered to be left over from the Big Bang), have made it possible to measure an experimental value for this cosmological constant. The result is a very small figure (1.11 × 10-52 m-2 ) that is nevertheless large enough to generate the desired effect of accelerated expansion.

Huge gap between theory and observation

The problem is that the theoretical value of the cosmological constant is very different. This value is obtained using quantum field theory: this holds that pairs of particles on a very small scale are created and destroyed almost instantaneously at every point of space and at any moment. The energy of this "vacuum fluctuation"—a very real phenomenon—is interpreted as a contribution to the cosmological constant. But when its value is calculated, an enormous figure is obtained (3.83 × 10+69 m-2), which is largely incompatible with the experimental value. This estimate represents the largest gap ever obtained (by a factor of 10121) between theory and experiment across science.

This problem of the cosmological constant is one of the "hottest" subjects in current theoretical physics, and it is mobilizing numerous researchers around the world. Everyone is looking at the equations of general relativity from all sides in an attempt to unearth ideas that will solve the question. Although several strategies have been put forward, there is no general consensus for the time-being.

Professor Lombriser, for his part, had the original idea a few years ago of introducing a variation into the universal constant of gravitation G (Newton's) which appears in Einstein's equations. This means that the universe in which we live (with a G of 6.674 08 × 10-11 m3 / kg s2) becomes a special case among an infinite number of different theoretical possibilities.

After numerous developments and hypotheses, professor Lombriser's mathematical approach means it is possible to calculate the parameter ΩΛ (omega lambda), which is another way of expressing the cosmological constant but which is much easier to manipulate. This parameter designates also the current fraction of the universe that is made up of dark energy (the rest being composed of matter). The theoretical value obtained by the Geneva-based physicist is 0.704 or 70.4 percent. This figure is in close agreement with the best experimental estimate obtained to date, 0.685 or 68.5 percent, stating that this is a huge improvement over the 10121 discrepancy.

This initial success now needs to be followed by further analyses in order to verify whether the new framework proposed by Lombriser can be used to reinterpret or clarify other mysteries of cosmology. The physicist has already been invited to present and explain his approach in scientific conferences, which reflects the interest shown by the community.


Explore further

Centenary of cosmological constant lambda

More information: Lucas Lombriser. On the cosmological constant problem, Physics Letters B (2019). DOI: 10.1016/j.physletb.2019.134804 , www.sciencedirect.com/science/ … ii/S0370269319305088
Journal information: Physics Letters B

Citation: Providing a solution to the worst-ever prediction in physics (2019, August 29) retrieved 16 September 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-08-solution-worst-ever-physics.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.
1747 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Aug 29, 2019
Well, that's narrowed it a bit !!
Snag is it's wandering into MOND-country, may just be adding equants to epicycles...
How would this be falsifiable ??

Aug 29, 2019
"...this estimate is considered the worst in the entire history of physics..." and is one of the cornerstones of the Big Bang hypothesis...


Aug 29, 2019
The theoretical value obtained by the Geneva-based physicist is 0.704 or 70.4 percent.
Three significant digits of agreement with the results from the standard siren gravitational wave event GW170817, not bad...

Aug 29, 2019
The cosmological constant, introduced a century ago by Albert Einstein in his theory of general relativity, is a thorn in the side of physicists. The difference between the theoretical prediction of this parameter and its measurement based on astronomical observations is of the order of 10^121.

Juuust a bit outside...

Aug 29, 2019
It is difficult to soften this error and make it look not-so-consequential. Even if the calculation were off by a mere factor of 121, rather than 10^121, it would not be a good advertisement for physics.

Aug 29, 2019
The Permutter fraud.
Consider the description of the "experiment". A galaxy 5 billion light years away was examined. Its position was determined from its Doppler shift and the Hubble Constant. A Type Ia supernova in the galaxy was used as a "standard candle". They examined the maximum brightness of the supernova. There are suggestions, though, that the maximum brightness of the supernova was not observed but was "deduced" from its declining brightness. The maximum brightness was declared too dim for 5 billion light years, "so", the galaxy must be further away, meaning it is traveling faster than the Hubble Constant allows, and faster than its Doppler shift! It was then "concluded" every galaxy is traveling faster than the Hubble Constant allows and they must be further away than their other "standard candles", like Cepheid variables, indicate! But the "actual" distance to that galaxy is never indicated, meaning they did not know the real maximum brightness!

Aug 29, 2019
Logically the universe could have no "absolute" size - it only has "proportionality". Universal scale probably fluctuates in ways that defie common sense and are totally transparent to us. Particularly in the relation to matter and non matter and macro and sub atomic space.

Aug 29, 2019
There's a preprint on arXiv: https://arxiv.org...01.08588


Whole paper is here: https://www.scien...9305088?

Aug 29, 2019
I always though of the cosmological constant as an extension of the gravitational constant. As the gravitational constant is the result of the equation for known variables of gravitational attraction, the gravitational constant was the consensus of an unknown measure from known variables. So without really knowing what gravity is or how to measure it, we had agreed on a value that gave us the answer we wanted.
The cosmological constant is somewhat based on the gravitational constant in that there is an expectant consistency in how gravity reacts throughout the universe. Once again the intent was to divine an unknown value based on what we believe we know what the measure of gravity, which was based, not on a complete understanding of gravity, rather on an equation from some known variables.
So as we refine our measure of what we thought were known variables, we get a different result. All in all the concept of these constants have not changed - rather their inputs have changed.

Aug 29, 2019
great time to be alive for an amateur physics fan like myself! i strongly feel that some giant advances in understanding will arrive in my lifetime

Aug 29, 2019
great time to be alive for an amateur physics fan like myself! i strongly feel that some giant advances in understanding will arrive in my lifetime


They already have, depending on your age. Gravitational waves detected, event horizon imaged, Moon proven not to be made of cheese. Et cetera.

Aug 29, 2019
Snag is it's wandering into MOND-country, may just be adding equants to epicycles...
How would this be falsifiable ??


I once saw MOND described as an exercise in curve fitting! Frankly, it is pretty much dead on its arse. Need to look for something that doesn't **** around with gravity too much. The neutron star merger killed most of this nonsense. Not many places left to go. Some clever bugger will figure it out in the end.

Aug 29, 2019
Gravity has various levels of strength. As we all know, that gravitational pull between 2 bodies of Mass largely depends on Distance between the 2 Masses. The further apart, the less gravitational pull. We know this as how distance determines why a human jumping off a coffee table is far less likely to sustain major injuries than a human jumping off a tall mountain to the abyss below.
This provides the proof for variability of Gravity. In outer space, the closer the two Masses are to each other, the better the chance of a violent collision. Farther away from each other, there is a good chance that the two bodies will not collide.

"The original idea in the paper is to accept that another constant—Newton's universal gravitation G, which also forms part of the equations on general relativity—may vary. This potentially major breakthrough, which has been positively received by the scientifi..."

I vote for Newton's variability of Gravity. :)

Aug 29, 2019
great time to be alive for an amateur physics fan like myself! i strongly feel that some giant advances in understanding will arrive in my lifetime


They already have, depending on your age. Gravitational waves detected, event horizon imaged, Moon proven not to be made of cheese. Et cetera.


nyuk nyuk.. well there are FAR bigger advances to be made than those, in the realm of figuring out the exact nature of space, time, and matter.. but a blurry pic of a black hole, entertaining for a good minute, yes

Aug 29, 2019
Interesting; for lurkerz, the Einstein-Hilbert action is derived from the Newton/Einstein constant. There is a basic idea I'm missing, and I'll have to think about this a little while.

Aug 29, 2019
Gravity has various levels of strength. As we all know, that gravitational pull between 2 bodies of Mass largely depends on Distance between the 2 Masses. The further apart, the less gravitational pull. We know this as how distance determines why a human jumping off a coffee table is far less likely to sustain major injuries than a human jumping off a tall mountain to the abyss below.
This provides the proof for variability of Gravity. In outer space, the closer the two Masses are to each other, the better the chance of a violent collision. Farther away from each other, there is a good chance that the two bodies will not collide.


Am I interpreting your comment correctly; you're implying that gravity works different on Earth (where a greater fall distance = more force) and the opposite is true in space?

Aug 29, 2019
Gravity has various levels of strength. As we all know, that gravitational pull between 2 bodies of Mass largely depends on Distance between the 2 Masses.

Unfortunately, for your simplistic theory, it also depends on the individual MASS of those 2 bodies.

Aug 29, 2019
Hmmm, is this paper mooting the idea that different galaxies, galaxy clusters, and filaments, have different gravitational constants? I guess we'll have to see what drops out when some relativists and other gravitational physicists have their say.

Aug 29, 2019
"The original idea in the paper is to accept that another constant—Newton's universal gravitation G, which also forms part of the equations on general relativity—may vary. This potentially major breakthrough, which has been positively received by the scientific community, ..."

This is completely delusional. This proposal has been made before, and the constancy of important cosmological parameters have been observed to great precision, neither of which would lead to 'positive' reception. Here is a review of varying constant studies, starting with Dirac a century ago and on: https://www.ncbi....5256069/ .

Aug 29, 2019
Well, that's narrowed it a bit !!
Snag is it's wandering into MOND-country, may just be adding equants to epicycles...
How would this be falsifiable ??


It seems to me it is self-falsified, since it does not predict the CMB spectra, it is only concerned with deriving the previous big bang cosmology (with some bows towards dark energy). And as I noted before, its only author press release is delusional.

Three significant digits of agreement with the results from the standard siren gravitational wave event GW170817, not bad...


Yes, if you are pattern matching observations. The irony is that the paper is doing the same parlor trick from the other end, since 1) it fits its Lambda to the observed values and then 2) normalizes its evolution equation to 1 and use a uniform prior of 1/2 for its mass density proxy - it is set up so you will "predict" a value where Omega_Lambda energy density is close to half way between 0.5 and 1. Does that value sound familiar? ;-)

Aug 29, 2019
Hmmm, is this paper mooting the idea that different galaxies, galaxy clusters, and filaments, have different gravitational constants?
Not quite -- quoting from the paper:

"The scalar field becomes a space-time constant, for example, by a δ-function generated through appropriate boundary conditions on an additional vector field [16], [19] or by a squared four-form field strength contribution of a three-form gauge field as arises in supergravity [13], [15], [19], [20], [21], [22]. Variations in M^2_Pl [the quadratic Planck mass] therefore find fundamental motivation ranging from scalar-vector-tensor or higher-dimensional scalar-tensor theories to supergravity, string theory, or a type II multiverse."

Aug 29, 2019
"The original idea in the paper is to accept that another constant—Newton's universal gravitation G,...—may vary."

It would explain the inhability to get consistent measurements of G. https://physicswo...rements/

Aug 29, 2019
The irony is that the paper is doing the same parlor trick from the other end, since 1) it fits its Lambda to the observed values...
Are you sure? I lol'd at this bit here:

"For the residual to reproduce the observed cosmological constant with Planck parameters [5], the Universe should have undergone an immediate collapse at the scale factor α = 0.926, at an age of 0.88 H^(-1)_0, thus, about 1 Gyr in the past, and in contrast, an immediate collapse at the current epoch would account for 81% of the observed value with a decreasing fraction for a longer future (cf. [23]). While it is interesting that this value is close to measurement, it is not an exact recovery and moreover standard cosmology does not foresee an imminent collapse of the Cosmos."

Aug 29, 2019
we discovered that space is expanding because the galaxies are moving away from us. What else could it be doing? Does it vibrate? Is the space inside atoms or our solar system expanding ? Since they do not appear to be growing larger is space flowing past them. what could this mean. Does it have any effect on matter .

Aug 29, 2019
It seems to me that if space were expanding from inside an atom or solar system that would be equivalent to the atom or solar system shrinking. from a universal perspective

Aug 30, 2019
Gravity has various levels of strength. As we all know, that gravitational pull between 2 bodies of Mass largely depends on Distance between the 2 Masses. The further apart, the less gravitational pull. We know this as how distance determines why a human jumping off a coffee table is far less likely to sustain major injuries than a human jumping off a tall mountain to the abyss below.
This provides the proof for variability of Gravity. In outer space, the closer the two Masses are to each other, the better the chance of a violent collision. Farther away from each other, there is a good chance that the two bodies will not collide.


Am I interpreting your comment correctly; you're implying that gravity works different on Earth (where a greater fall distance = more force) and the opposite is true in space?
says jingles

Take into consideration that on Earth you have an atmosphere, but in outer space you don't. You are in free fall.
-contd-

Aug 30, 2019
On Earth, your weight is the same whether you're jumping off a coffee table, or jumping off the tall mountain. But the distance to the ground off a mountain is greater, so you can kiss your arse goodbye when you jump. On your way down, your shirt billows up due to air you are passing through.
In outer space, with no atmosphere to cause much friction, your planet is in free fall, the only way that your planet could collide with such force is if the other planet and yours are hurling towards each other at great speed. They will close the distance quickly, depending on the length of the distance. From a very great distance, they start off slowly and then gain speed as Gravity pulls them together. As they come closer, they gain more speed until the final moment. With no atmosphere they both move toward each other the fastest if they are both airless. In such a collision, most often both would lose any atmosphere to space. Gravity is greater on Earth than in outer space due to atmosphere

Aug 30, 2019
Gravity is greater on Earth than in outer space due to atmosphere

How exactly does atmosphere increase the strength of gravity? This sounds like new physics to me.

Should it not be the opposite? The earth gravity is pulling you down and the atmosphere's gravity is pulling you up negating some of earths gravity. Thus without the atmosphere the gravitational pull towards earth would actually be higher.

Aug 30, 2019
Gravity is greater on Earth than in outer space due to atmosphere


Ken M? Is that you?

Aug 30, 2019
Gravity is greater on Earth than in outer space due to atmosphere


Good grief. I'm at a loss for words here.

Aug 30, 2019
It is difficult to soften this error and make it look not-so-consequential. Even if the calculation were off by a mere factor of 121, rather than 10^121, it would not be a good advertisement for physics.

To put it in perspective, the ratio of the largest to the smallest space scale (size of universe to Planck length) is about 10^61. if someone tells you he can make a blender this size or 10^61 times bigger, you'd probably be extremely cautious about his claim.

Coincidentally, if you square the above ratio, you get 10^122 ~ 10^121, and this is close to the ratio of values for Lambda; Lambda coincidentally appears as 1/size square (units of 1/m^2). Pure coincidence or not?

Aug 30, 2019
...
Gravity is greater on Earth than in outer space due to atmosphere

Now, THERE is a mic drop moment...
What the heck are they putting in your meals?

Aug 30, 2019
Apparently, they missed this bit of that headline...
"with the worst-ever answer".

Aug 30, 2019
...
Gravity is greater on Earth than in outer space due to atmosphere

Now, THERE is a mic drop moment...
What the heck are they putting in your meals?

That looks like food, in his stupid pills.

Aug 30, 2019
Gravity is greater on Earth than in outer space due to atmosphere: by SEU

Foreth, SEU
you have achieved the unachievable
fore, you have flummoxed, MrBojangles
MrBojangles> Good grief. I'm at a loss for words here

for this statement, Gravity is greater on Earth than in outer space due to atmosphere
if you add
the mass of earth and the atmosphere
the gravity is greater
than
the earth in space is without its atmosphere

because
our atmosphere
contains a considerable amount of mass

but, MrBojangles
don't let science
get in the way of a good story

Aug 30, 2019
well. if i'm understanding the looneytoons correctly?

they are now blaming swamp belches & termite farts for the Earth's gravity field?

hmmm...

actually...
a pretty reasonable conclusion
compared yo their usual fantasy fails

Aug 30, 2019
Gravity is greater on Earth than in outer space due to atmosphere

How exactly does atmosphere increase the strength of gravity? This sounds like new physics to me.

Should it not be the opposite? The earth gravity is pulling you down and the atmosphere's gravity is pulling you up negating some of earths gravity. Thus without the atmosphere the gravitational pull towards earth would actually be higher.
says Cortezz

The Moon has no atmosphere so that the astronauts were able to jump and stay aloft for a few seconds, where if they tried that on Earth, they would immediately come down. On Earth, the higher up you go, the less atmosphere there is. If you go high enough without a tank of Oxygen to breathe, you would die.
At sea level, Gravity is the strongest, causing Atomic Clocks to tick slower; while at high altitudes the Clocks tick faster due to less gravity drag on the mechanism. Atmosphere is made up of Particles and surrounds the Earth.

Aug 30, 2019
@Cortezz
Atmosphere has very little gravity of its own. It's a gas made up of atoms, not a solid, so that being a gas, you could also call it a Plasma. At LEO there is no more Atmosphere and you are in free fall. Essentially, in outer space, the gas that we call Space is composed of Particles and Waves that are farther apart, which allows solid objects to go through it easily with a lot less friction than when solid objects go through the Earth's Atmosphere. You've heard of comets burning in the Atmosphere of Earth upon entry. The friction causes heat, which causes the comet to burn.

Aug 30, 2019
@Cortezz
Atmosphere has very little gravity of its own. It's a gas made up of atoms, not a solid, so that being a gas, you could also call it a Plasma. At LEO there is no more Atmosphere and you are in free fall. Essentially, in outer space, the gas that we call Space is composed of Particles and Waves that are farther apart, which allows solid objects to go through it easily with a lot less friction than when solid objects go through the Earth's Atmosphere. You've heard of comets burning in the Atmosphere of Earth upon entry. The friction causes heat, which causes the comet to burn.


more errors.. you are trying to sound scientifically literate but, you are not

Aug 30, 2019
So Surveillance Egg fella steps in shit and gets 'rewarded'. Gravitation theory, Newtonian, is grounded in the calculus, so exacting. Easy for not tech folks to get confused at what they can not understand, so they mangle it.

Aug 30, 2019
Gravity is greater on Earth than in outer space due to atmosphere: by SEU

Foreth, SEU
you have achieved the unachievable
fore, you have flummoxed, MrBojangles
MrBojangles> Good grief. I'm at a loss for words here

for this statement, Gravity is greater on Earth than in outer space due to atmosphere
if you add
the mass of earth and the atmosphere
the gravity is greater
than
the earth in space is without its atmosphere

because
our atmosphere
contains a considerable amount of mass

but, MrBojangles
don't let science
get in the way of a good story
says granville

No. That little moxnix from Bojingles was just him being 'cute'. What I initially said wasn't exactly an unknown, so jingles was only making fun of me as he had been in the habit of doing, possibly with his chest puffed out.
:)

Aug 30, 2019
@Cortezz
Atmosphere has very little gravity of its own. It's a gas made up of atoms, not a solid, so that being a gas, you could also call it a Plasma. At LEO there is no more Atmosphere and you are in free fall. Essentially, in outer space, the gas that we call Space is composed of Particles and Waves that are farther apart, which allows solid objects to go through it easily with a lot less friction than when solid objects go through the Earth's Atmosphere. You've heard of comets burning in the Atmosphere of Earth upon entry. The friction causes heat, which causes the comet to burn.


more errors.. you are trying to sound scientifically literate but, you are not
says Pea

Describe those errors and let's compare notes.

Aug 30, 2019

Atmosphere has very little gravity of its own. It's a gas made up of atoms, not a solid, so that being a gas, you could also call it a Plasma. At LEO there is no more Atmosphere and you are in free fall. Essentially, in outer space, the gas that we call Space is composed of Particles and Waves that are farther apart, which allows solid objects to go through it easily with a lot less friction than when solid objects go through the Earth's Atmosphere. ....


more errors.. you are trying to sound scientifically literate but, you are not
says Pea

Describe those errors and let's compare notes.


earth's atmospheric gas is not on the whole ionized, therefore not on the whole a plasma. in LEO there is indeed thin atmosphere and resulting drag. there is no 'gas we call space.' gas is not composed of waves. in physics the terms "particles and waves" do go together but describe not gas nor matter but rather zero-mass photons and electrons

Aug 30, 2019
earth's atmospheric gas is not on the whole ionized, therefore not on the whole a plasma.
//I said 'Atmosphere has very little gravity of its own. It's a gas made up of atoms, not a solid, so that being a gas, you could also call it a Plasma.

in LEO there is indeed thin atmosphere and resulting drag.
//What little atmosphere there is at LEO, would be from the leakage of Earth's atmosphere. Oxygen and other gases leak out to outer space.

there is no 'gas we call space.' gas is not composed of waves.
//Space is composed of gases, and those gases are composed of Particles/Atoms. Stars are made of gases.

in physics the terms "particles and waves" do go together but describe not gas nor matter but rather zero-mass photons and electrons
//That is without a doubt. They are quantum which also includes sub-particles. Photons are massless. Electrons have Mass and negative charge.


Aug 30, 2019
Here, let me try:

Zero gravity in orbit is not due to the atmosphere. It's due to free fall, in which the fall is in a direction that continuously "misses" the ground. The same can be found, though only for a short time, by skydiving or appropriate trajectories by aircraft (this type of mission is generally called a "vomit comet.")

Atmospheric gas has nothing to do with it.

Aug 30, 2019
@Pea
Although Earth's atmosphere is not technically a 'Plasma', EM and magnetic fields run through it, as well as gamma produced from lightning and antimatter. The atmosphere is a versatile gas, so I sometimes refer to it as a Plasma.

Aug 30, 2019
One more thing to consider: 33 feet of water is equivalent to 100 miles of atmosphere. If you dive in water to 33 feet, the pressure is two atmospheres; 28 psi.

If we take the 5:1 mass ratio of rock to water, this is equivalent to 6 feet, 7 and two tenths inches of rock. Last time I checked the Earth is 8000 miles across, about 1200 times that. The gravitational effect of the entire atmosphere is negligible.

Aug 30, 2019
//I said 'Atmosphere has very little gravity of its own. It's a gas made up of atoms, not a solid, so that being a gas, you could also call it a Plasma.

//What little atmosphere there is at LEO, would be from the leakage of Earth's atmosphere. Oxygen and other gases leak out to outer space.

//Space is composed of gases, and those gases are composed of Particles/Atoms. Stars are made of gases.

//That is without a doubt. They are quantum which also includes sub-particles. Photons are massless. Electrons have Mass and negative charge.



you can't call the earth's atmosphere a plasma. plasma describes a specific state of a gas that has been stripped of its electrons

the air in LEO isn't just leaked gas that is lost into space. it's still part of earth's atmosphere

space is not "composed" of gases, even if there are gases in many parts of space. stars are not "space"

i did misspeak about the mass of electrons

Aug 30, 2019
As I said, the Earth's atmosphere is versatile enough that it has a magnetic field and EM moving through it BECAUSE it is a gas.

The atmosphere is a part of Earth ONLY as long as it is still within the domain of Earth's influence. Once the gases flow out beyond Earth's influence, it becomes a part of interplanetary Space and can wind up anywhere.

Space IS a gas, and that gas is comprised of quantum particles of Matter/Energy in the form of atoms. And I did not say that Stars are space, I said that Stars are made of gases = Hydrogen + Helium

Aug 30, 2019
Thanks for the discussion, Pea. I've enjoyed it.

Aug 30, 2019
As I said, the Earth's atmosphere is versatile enough that it has a magnetic field and EM moving through it BECAUSE it is a gas.

The atmosphere is a part of Earth ONLY as long as it is still within the domain of Earth's influence. Once the gases flow out beyond Earth's influence, it becomes a part of interplanetary Space and can wind up anywhere.

Space IS a gas, and that gas is comprised of quantum particles of Matter/Energy in the form of atoms. And I did not say that Stars are space, I said that Stars are made of gases = Hydrogen + Helium


mostly wrong

magnetic fields don't need a gas to move through, and don't by themselves cause a gas to ionize into a plasma. the atmosphere doesn't cause the earth's magnetic field if you were suggesting it does

the gases in LEO are still largely under earth's gravitational attraction

space is not a gas. if you have a small area of space that has no gas or other atoms in it at all, it is still space

Aug 30, 2019
No. I never said or even indicated that the atmosphere causes the Earth's magnetic field. Check out the Earth's inner and outer core, plus the lower mantle.

In LEO, of course the atmosphere is still under the Earth's influence, but far beyond LEO, the gases are no longer under that influence.

Of course Space is a gas. It's not a solid nor a liquid. It's a gas. Space is never completely empty. It has substance, which enables it to bend, stretch, shorten, etc. The only substance that can do that is gas.

Aug 30, 2019
Gas expands, therefore Space expands. There is so much talk of the expansion of Space. If Space was not a gas, it could not expand.

Aug 30, 2019
it sounds like you're starting to come around on some of your previous erroneous points. hard to tell for sure

but space is not a gas. space can contain gas. on very small scales where there are no atoms, there is still space

you may not be convinced but i've spent more than enough time on ya. adios and have a good night

Aug 30, 2019
Nope. Space is not empty.

Aug 31, 2019
Expounding your Theories - Expansion in this vacuous vacuum
SEU> Gas expands, therefore Space expands. There is so much talk of the expansion of Space. If Space was not a gas, it could not expand.

Fore, if you say - Gas expands, therefore Space expands

as
we
say

galaxies
expand
space is there fore expanding

this
opens
all sorts of expansionistic possibilities

Aug 31, 2019
Pea has said: "but space is not a gas. space can contain gas. on very small scales where there are no atoms, there is still space".

Perhaps Pea is unaware that Space is chock full of Matter/Energy and that Matter/Energy are comprised of Atoms which are comprised of quantum particles such as scrumptious Electrons and positive Protons, so that there is nothing empty about Space. Which is why I now say that Space IS a Plasma and Plasma is not 'empty'.
Being that Space is a gas, that gas enables all these amazing things to happen in it. Motion/Mometum, Stars, galaxies and planets moving at various velocities - sometimes colliding but most often in a state of equilibrium with one another.
Our minds are still in awe at what He created.

Aug 31, 2019
ooops I seem to have said the dreaded word, 'created'. And now I will be beaten up for it. When and if Otto reads this, as he reads all of my comments, he will add to my already enormously large downvotes numbers. Not that I care, of course. I will certainly reach -25,000 if Otto has anything to do with it. ROFLOL

Aug 31, 2019
Thanks for the discussion, Pea. I've enjoyed it.
See this indicates the confusion you seem to have with pain and pleasure. You thank people for concluding that you are an idiot. Because you're always saying things like
Gravity is greater on Earth than in outer space due to atmosphere
-You know?

What's your deal pussytard? Are you pretending to be this sick or are you really in fact this_SICK?

Pirouette, pussycat_eyes, russkiye, obama_socks, RitchieGuy01, racistblackguy, jewsrule, Surveillance_Egg_Unit... all YOU. Anyone can google these and read flooding posts full of the same insane GARBAGE. For years.

WHAT is the matter with you? Do you really enjoy having all these people laughing at you?

People should be warned as to just who and what you are before they waste their time with you. And they should be ashamed for trying.

Aug 31, 2019
ooops I seem to have said the dreaded word, 'created'. And now I will be beaten up for it.
OK. Created out of what? Like kicking the can down the road.

Aug 31, 2019
Thank you Professor Lombriser! The force of gravity inside galaxies is the same dynamics as the pressure inside hurricanes, speaking of the atmosphere. As a matter of fact the atmosphere needs space but space is not the atmosphere. It's like where you live. The atmosphere is the medium. The dynamics of galaxy formation looks to me to be similar in certain ways to the formation of hurricanes.

Aug 31, 2019
cont
So in our hurricane analogy what is the atmosphere of space? IMO, until a better idea comes along, it looks like the quark-gluon soup in various states. In the case of visible matter (baryons) it comes in quantified forms determined by the strong force acting during baryogenesis when the universe was in a state maybe like lightening. People are trying to do the same thing today using lasers but I think it's like putting toothpaste back in the tube. Anyway the U is filled with this soup (dark matter) in various concentrations. The soup is energized by the dark energy - vacuum fluctuations - powered by would you believe the uncertainty principle? No chance, I suppose, but it'll have to do until a better idea comes my way.

Aug 31, 2019
Thanks for the discussion, Pea. I've enjoyed it.
See this indicates the confusion you seem to have with pain and pleasure. You thank people for concluding that you are an idiot. Because you're always saying things like
Gravity is greater on Earth than in outer space due to atmosphere
-You know?

What's your deal pussytard? Are you pretending to be this sick or are you really in fact this_SICK?


Pirouette, pussycat_eyes, russkiye, obama_socks, RitchieGuy01, racistblackguy, jewsrule, Surveillance_Egg_Unit... all YOU. Anyone can google these and read flooding posts full of the same insane GARBAGE. For years.

WHAT is the matter with you? Do you really enjoy having all these people laughing at you?

People should be warned as to just who and what you are before they waste their time with you. And they should be ashamed for trying.
says the mental patient Otto the Nazi

Nope. None of those names are me. You obviously need someone to pin them on.

Aug 31, 2019
cont
Lightening - reminds me of one of my pet peeves - the claim that during baryogenesis or leptogenesis all matter/antimatter particles would annihilate except for a small excess of matter over antimatter. Not in the presence of strong e/m fields as with lightening. In the presence of these fields matter and antimatter would be accelerated in opposite directions at near the speed of light before any annihilation had much of a chance. Later when spacetime started to get filled up with these particles annihilation (inflation) would begin and the leftover remnants would be collected in nearly separate domains of matter and anti-matter galaxies. I say nearly because the annihilation between matter and antimatter objects (inflation) may still be happening.

Aug 31, 2019
ATTENTION ALL PHYSORG COMMENTATORS:
theghostofotto1923 is obviously a mental patient who appears to believe that the Physorg website belongs to him, and that all commentators who post on this site are allowed to remain in this site as long as they do as Otto says. If it wasn't me, he would be picking on any one of YOU, accusing you of being one or more of these names that he drags out.
This name that I use is the only one I have, or ever had in physorg. theghostofotto1923 has been using sock puppets since he began commenting in this science site. And he has gotten away with doing so, while accusing many commentators in the past of doing what he does.
I have read thousands of his past comments going back over 10 years.

SO BEWARE OF THIS MENTALLY ILL CRAZY PERSON. IF YOU ENGAGE HIM IN A DISCUSSION HE WILL COME AFTER YOU TOO.

Aug 31, 2019
ooops I seem to have said the dreaded word, 'created'. And now I will be beaten up for it.
OK. Created out of what? Like kicking the can down the road.
says Seeker2

This being a science site that is full of (mostly) atheists, the word "creation and created" are unpopular due to the unbelief in the unphysical.
Don't mind Otto. He seems to think I'm someone else, and persists in his insanity.

Aug 31, 2019
@Seeker2
You mentioned Dark Matter as though it exists. It doesn't. There is normal Matter, the rest of the Universe is filled with Plasma.

Aug 31, 2019
Expounding your Theories - Expansion in this vacuous vacuum
SEU> Gas expands, therefore Space expands. There is so much talk of the expansion of Space. If Space was not a gas, it could not expand.

Fore, if you say - Gas expands, therefore Space expands

as
we
say

galaxies
expand
space is there fore expanding

this
opens
all sorts of expansionistic possibilities
says granville

The majority of the gas in Space is Hydrogen. There are also other different Atoms of gas that clump together to form disks.
Yes, Space IS expanding, but not in one direction only.

Aug 31, 2019
Damn SEU you must live such a pitiful life in your wheelchair, and I am glad you do... It makes me fell good.

Aug 31, 2019
You "fell" good? Hope you didn't hurt yourself.

Sep 01, 2019
Some comments imply some trolls confuse Newton's abstract space, which is transformed to Einstein's malleable spacetime in general relativity, with astronomical observed space which also contains matter. Einstein was the first that made that unifying abstraction, as earlier generations referred to specific spaces between objects. I.e. the space between my chair and my table is so-and-so long, while the space between your chair and your table is so-and-so long; i.e. "different".

@Protoplasmix: "Are you sure? I lol'd at this bit here:".

He, I lol'd too. Not sure what the author meant, if his ideas failed a crucial test but he doesn't care. Anyway, the scale factor in his Lambda estimate AFAIK is the observed one. Therefore I chose to just comment on that estimate.

Sep 01, 2019
@iexist: "we discovered that space is expanding because the galaxies are moving away from us. What else could it be doing?"

Fair questions. As far as we know:

- Space vibrates, in resonant form as gravitational waves, as observed by LIGO.

- Atoms and molecules are nuclear respectively chemically strongly bound systems. and systems up to the size of our Local Group of galaxies are sufficiently gravitationally bound to resist the spacxe expansion. Technically it happens "inside", everywhere, but it is easier to refer to the bound system volume, that it "oozes outside" does not mean anything in relation to the systems. (But to cosmology, obviously, the universe expands.)

- Dark energy, the vacuum energy of particle matter fields is constant, meaning the effect is decoupled from matter properties. Except in the sense that insufficiently gravitationally bound systems are fragmented by expansion into smaller pieces, eventually of Local Group size and mass.

Sep 01, 2019
Damn SEU you must live such a pitiful life in your wheelchair, and I am glad you do... It makes me fell good.


Are you bigoted?

I have no idea if individual trolls such as SEU have any failings except moral and, if the average troll comments are anything to go by they are as a population Dunning-Kruger sufferers. Either biologically and/or socially inflicted to be exceedingly stupid - or it is part of the troll act.

But other different personal abilities is neither here nor there in a conversation. Trolls, fact denialists, anti-vaxxers, populists, et cetera can be filtered out since they are typically not interested in a conversation in the first place. And the damage they do to our society by presenting and promoting errors can be pointed out, as well as their factual errors.

Sep 01, 2019
I said 'Atmosphere has very little gravity of its own. It's a gas made up of atoms, not a solid, so that being a gas, you could also call it a Plasma
-Yes you did! You really did! Bwahaahaaaaaa

-WHAT a turdfest. I started making a summary of all the floaters pussytard has plopped here like
Moon has no atmosphere so that the astronauts were able to jump and stay aloft for a few seconds, where if they tried that on Earth, they would immediately come down
and
The atmosphere is a versatile gas, so I sometimes refer to it as a Plasma
and
Earth's atmosphere is versatile enough that it has a magnetic field and EM moving through it BECAUSE it is a gas
...but gave up because EVERYTHING of hers in this thread is pretty much, a turd.

Sorry for the scatology. I'm just reminded of those unfortunates one sometimes sees on the news, wandering the streets, naked from the waist down, big brown stain on her butt. 'Does anyone recognize this woman?' they ask.

Why yes, yes we do.

Sep 01, 2019
@Seeker2
You mentioned Dark Matter as though it exists. It doesn't. There is normal Matter, the rest of the Universe is filled with Plasma.
Sounds like the unphysical. If you can't see it, it doesn't exist. Right?

Sep 01, 2019
@Seeker2
You mentioned Dark Matter as though it exists. It doesn't. There is normal Matter, the rest of the Universe is filled with Plasma.

Which is - matter in a different state. So, non applicable.

Sep 02, 2019
why are they chasing GR time and time again when none of its predictions amount to anything. GR is bunk as proved in all my papers at
https://www.scrib...savvys84

Sep 02, 2019
The main thing I take from this is a sense of desperation, if something is so far off (and it is) that someone feels the need to solve it by introduction variation into (one of?) the most venerable fundamental constants. And since gravity and time have been demonstrated to be linked, wouldn't that introduce another problem somewhere?

Another thing that bothers me is that this again seems to reveal a vast discrepancy between what's set before the public (we've got things pretty well wrapped up) and what is known among professionals (we're fudging, some of this stuff doesn't work, we're throwing in unknown variables, too many degrees of freedom in the equations...) -- and while I might not be qualified to judge, I've seen statements by professionals in these and relate fields saying this stuff.

I much prefer science that is open and honest, and allows plainly (not just theoretically) that there are huge surprises ahead, because there's so much we only think we know.

Sep 02, 2019
@Seeker2
You mentioned Dark Matter as though it exists. It doesn't. There is normal Matter, the rest of the Universe is filled with Plasma.
Sounds like the unphysical. If you can't see it, it doesn't exist. Right?
says Seeker2

Human eyes are not configured to SEE the Unphysical. Most Humans, particularly the atheists don't believe that the unphysical can exist, otherwise these atheists say that they would see it. But the unphysical DOES EXIST, even if your "blind" eyes aren't able to see what is really there. You may not be "blind" to see the material, but that's only due to the physiology of your eyes and brain. The Matter/Energy was created in the Universe, and LIFE was created in the Universe. But Life Forms aren't perfect, so their eyes don't see anything but what is made of Matter/Energy.
But I assure you, Seeker2, that there is much more than meets the eye, so to speak. :)

Sep 02, 2019
@Seeker2
You mentioned Dark Matter as though it exists. It doesn't. There is normal Matter, the rest of the Universe is filled with Plasma.
Sounds like the unphysical. If you can't see it, it doesn't exist. Right?
says Seeker2

Human eyes are not configured to SEE the Unphysical. Most Humans, particularly the atheists don't believe that the unphysical can exist, otherwise these atheists say that they would see it. But the unphysical DOES EXIST, even if your "blind" eyes aren't able to see what is really there. You may not be "blind" to see the material, but that's only due to the physiology of your eyes and brain. The Matter/Energy was created in the Universe, and LIFE was created in the Universe. But Life Forms aren't perfect, so their eyes don't see anything but what is made of Matter/Energy.
But I assure you, Seeker2, that there is much more than meets the eye, so to speak. :)
Metaphysical hyperbole...

Sep 02, 2019
@Seeker2
You mentioned Dark Matter as though it exists. It doesn't. There is normal Matter, the rest of the Universe is filled with Plasma.

Which is - matter in a different state. So, non applicable.
says Whyde

Yes, Plasma is a different state of Matter. But it isn't the "Dark Matter" that is invisible and unknown, but they claim that it interacts with normal matter and gravity. They have been pushing this Dark Matter woo for decades and still haven't found it. All sorts of lab experiments and papers have been written on Dark Matter, but still no evidence that it exists.

Sep 02, 2019
Metaphysical hyperbole...
says Whyde

You're welcome to have your own opinions on it. But what exactly IS metaphysical? Isn't your very existence metaphysical? Or the existence of planets, stars, galaxies and the Universe itself, metaphysical? Is it because you are able to SEE these things made of Matter/Energy that you declare them as Physical? What if you had no eyes to see them with? Would you count on someone with eyes to tell you what exists and what doesn't?
Cats are able to see the unphysical. Their eyes are different from human eyes, so they have the 'gift'. But what can they do with all that knowledge, being a cat? Not very much. And humans have the knowledge, but not the eyes to see it with. So humans don't have the 'gift', and perhaps that is a good thing.

Sep 03, 2019
Cats are able to see the unphysical
My GOD youre a twat.

Sep 03, 2019
Judging from his earlier comment, I think I'm with Torbjorn on this -- when people say things that are wrong, you can point out how they are wrong, why they are wrong, and what damage might be done, especially if such misinformation becomes widespread, but please don't get personal, abusive, etc.

Or I might also say, just don't feed the trolls at all.

Sep 03, 2019
Cats are able to see the unphysical
My GOD youre a twat.
says Otto

No Otto, YOUR MOTHER IS A TWAT. Try not to forget that, ok? And exactly WHO is YOUR god? Baphomet, perhaps?

Sep 03, 2019
SpookyOtto the Nazi hater of humanity vomits his stock phrase of "Forcing women to make babies until it kills them", completely ignoring and forgetting that women have to go through MENOPAUSE at various ages where they can no longer conceive, no matter how much sexual intercourse they enjoy. Otto habitually posts the same tired old boring comments year after year, about women and the same tired old bullshlt about Tribal Dynamics, thinking that these two themes will make all the readers think that Otto is so full of wisdom and knows more than anyone else.

Such false pride in oneself is Otto's undoing, besides all of his past sins that are recorded, and for which he will pay when we take his already damned soul up to where it will burn with horrible pain for all eternity. Otto's alleged 'ghost' will find out soon enough that we don't make deals.

Sep 03, 2019
As to the insane looneytick, theghostofOtto's seeming disagreement with my assertion that cats are able to SEE the unphysical, anyone with even half a brain would question how would Otto KNOW that cats can't see the unphysical. Otto seems so certain while calling on his god.

Sep 04, 2019
but please don't get personal, abusive, etc
I'm going to assume that you're just naive and arent aware of all the abuse this clown has subjected the other posters to on this site for the last several years under several sockpuppets. If you were, you would realize that politely correcting all the trash she dumps here is a waste if time, and only encourages her to dump more.

THE MODS dont seem to care whether physorg is trashed or not, but lots of us do, and we cant just sit idly by and watch this taking place.

Ridicule is all there is left.

Sep 04, 2019
THE MODS dont seem to care whether physorg is trashed or not, but lots of us do, and we cant just sit idly by and watch this taking place.
Ridicule is all there is left.

I think you have gotten this all wrong. Who would write to these forums and go to check same articles all over again if not us who are trashing to place. The trolls and the numerous people feeding them are the ones bringing most page visits and add revenue. That is why the mods don't care.

Everybody knows that the trolls would stop trolling if they aren't given any attention. What good it would be to anyone to post "EU said this and the universe is magnetic bla bla bla..." if there wouldn't be a furious knight posting and defending the forums from fake science. It's easy to blame the trolls but it's we/you/us/forum users to blame. Ignore button exists.

Same time as trolls get something out of the fights, so do you because you all still keep coming back here. I just find the same old battles entertaining :)

Sep 04, 2019
@cortezz

SEU is much more than a troll. He's dangerous.
He threatened Otto on a public forum.
Take note of when he uses "we"

SEU wrote:

"Such false pride in oneself is Otto's undoing, besides all of his past sins that are recorded, and for which he will pay when we take his already damned soul up to where it will burn with horrible pain for all eternity. Otto's alleged 'ghost' will find out soon enough that we don't make deals.

Highlights from quote: (I capitalized "we" and "ghost" for emphasis)

"...all of his past sins that are recorded"
"..he will pay when WE take his already damned soul up to where it will burn with horrible pain for all eternity."
"Otto's alleged 'GHOST' will find out soon enough that WE don't make deals."

Sep 04, 2019
Cats are able to see the unphysical
Hey I have a security camera that can see in the dark. Does that mean it can see the unphysical?

Sep 04, 2019
Hey Otto speaking of SEU were you around in 2015 when I got in a big debate with one of the Einstein haters? Can't remember what her handle was then.

Sep 04, 2019
Oooh, I see what you mean, Otto!

Still, while I understand your response, I still think it is better not to reply in kind, or not to reply at all. Just MHO, based on advice from ancient religious writings, philosophers, and some internet memes. 8)

Sep 04, 2019
Can't remember what her handle was then.
Don't think it was OlDreamerDavid.

Sep 04, 2019
Hey Otto speaking of SEU were you around in 2015 when I got in a big debate with one of the Einstein haters? Can't remember what her handle was then.
says Seeker2

Wasn't me. And I'm not female. Perhaps that was one of Otto's sock puppets debating you.
And I only began commenting in 2018.

Sep 04, 2019
Cats are able to see the unphysical
Hey I have a security camera that can see in the dark. Does that mean it can see the unphysical?
says Seeker2

Does your security camera have a lens that is configured in the shape of a cat's eye? Cats can also see ghosts. Hey, maybe cats can see the 'ghost of Otto'. ROFLOL

Sep 04, 2019
@jimmybobber

You're so silly. ROFLOL
We won't take Otto's soul until he is DEAD, jimmybobber aka da Schneib

Sep 04, 2019
Can't remember what her handle was then.
Don't think it was OlDreamerDavid.


Certainly wasn't. I have no problem with Einstein's theories. I do think sometimes people go overboard when comparing them to Newton's. Newton's theories and equations still work fine for the conditions and degree of precision they were designed for. Einstein's work brought deeper understanding and better conceptualization, with further applications. They've been tested to extremely high precision.

Sep 04, 2019
Does your security camera have a lens that is configured in the shape of a cat's eye?
Exactly. It's round.
Cats can also see ghosts.
So can cameras. Google it.

Sep 04, 2019
Cats are able to see the unphysical
Hey I have a security camera that can see in the dark. Does that mean it can see the unphysical?

If ya wanna call IR unphysical, sure...
ALtho, I just read a little blurb on cat's having roughly the same infra red capacity as humans, but it did say they have much higher capacity for UV than humans...
Found that interesting. But it is STILL not the "unphysical".

Sep 05, 2019
THE UNPHYSICAL CAT

Can cats do logic?
Of course they can!
Any cat knows
Pawing that box of cat biscuits
Makes it fall over
Then biscuits pour out
A firm grip on the law of cause and effect
What if the box is empty?
Can cats deduce this fact from the sound
Or feel of the box
Or are they simply taking their chances
Cats infer from incomplete information
For each cat
Is presented with a container
That did or did not rattle when shaken
Was then turned over
An object did or did not fall out
But not always in line with what you'd expect
In some cases a rattling box
Did reveal an object when turned over
But in others it didn't
Conversely, a non-rattling box could also reveal
An object
Or not
Once the container had been turned over
The cat was allowed to go

Cats spent more time looking at containers
That didn't confirm with physical laws
Than they did at those which did
They understand the causal connection
Between sound and object
And have a grasp on gravity

THE UNPHYSICAL CAT

Sep 05, 2019
No. That little moxnix from Bojingles was just him being 'cute'. What I initially said wasn't exactly an unknown, so jingles was only making fun of me as he had been in the habit of doing, possibly with his chest puffed out.
:)


No, it was genuine astonishment. I couldn't believe someone could be so far off the mark on a basic principle, but then I considered who it was coming from.

Sep 05, 2019
I still think it is better not to reply in kind, or not to reply at all. Just MHO, based on advice from ancient religious writings, philos...
Well right there's your problem.

My problem is I'm an easy mark. I only tend to see the bad things that should be fixed, not the good things. People like Ghydening wyre seem to be the opposite, but apparently even he is reaching his limits with this toad. Everybody does with people like this. That's their only purpose.
And I'm not female... I only began commenting in 2018
You're a liar. You've been lying here since 2013 and before. The odd thing is when you leave for many months and then come back with another sock. Why is that? You a locust? Temp contract consultant? Jobshopper like kamburoff the psychopath? Look at how much we learned from him.

Come on pussytard_eyes. Open up. We're here to learn after all (not you).

Tell us all about your affliction. Show us your LinkedIn page. Do some good for a change.

Sep 05, 2019
@jimmybobber
@cortezz
SEU is much more than a troll. He's dangerous.
He threatened Otto on a public forum.
Take note of when he uses "we"
not just Otto, but myself, DaSchneib and a few others who learned of his/her puppetry and history on PO

Sep 05, 2019
Hey Otto speaking of SEU were you around in 2015 when I got in a big debate with one of the Einstein haters?
Does not ring a bell. Are sure it wasn't zephyr? He hated all scientists.
Can't remember what her handle was then
Take your pick...
Pirouette, pussycat_eyes, russkiye, obama_socks, RitchieGuy01, racistblackguy, jewsrule, and more (Shakescene21? Frank herbert?)... sweet sorghum farmer, Caltech aerospace PhD grad, NASA engineer (consultant), 900 ft-tall glassy-headed Martian manhunter, black psychiatrist, nurse in a psycho ward (closest to the truth), 6 miscarriages, sex up against the microwave, fixer of meltdowns with dry ice (not right in with the rods mind you, but just above to cool them). Lots more. Can stop Yellowstone with geothermal plants. And freeze breath I suppose.

Pretty weird huh stump?

Sep 05, 2019
Does your security camera have a lens that is configured in the shape of a cat's eye?
Exactly. It's round.
Cats can also see ghosts.
So can cameras. Google it.
says Seeker2

LOL The pupils in cat's eyes are not round, Seeker2. Their pupils are closer to the shape of the pupils of lizards and snakes, to some degree.
"Cats have a tapetum lucidum, which is a reflective layer behind the retina that sends light that passes through the retina back into the eye.[1] While this improves the ability to see in darkness and enables cats to see using roughly one-sixth the amount of light that people need, it appears to reduce net visual acuity, thus detracting when light is abundant. "
Cats are somewhat near-sighted. But they are able to see unphysical 'ghosts' and even Angels.

Sep 05, 2019
. People like Ghydening wyre seem to be the opposite, ...

Hey, hey, hey....
I resemble that remark... :-)

Sep 05, 2019
why are people still feeding the troll? attention is all the troll wants, period. the only way to win is not to play

Sep 05, 2019
I quote SEU:
"Does your security camera have a lens that is configured in the shape of a cat's eye?"

Seeker2 responded:
"Exactly. It's round."

SEU responded:
"LOL The pupils in cat's eyes are not round, Seeker2. Their pupils are closer to the shape of the pupils of lizards and snakes, to some degree."

SEU you don't seem to understand the difference between eye and pupil.


Sep 05, 2019
@Everyone

I've found the quote that SEU failed to reference. Quoted with no link.

Quote:
"Cats have a tapetum lucidum, which is a reflective layer behind the retina that sends light that passes through the retina back into the eye.[1] While this improves the ability to see in darkness and enables cats to see using roughly one-sixth the amount of light that people need, it appears to reduce net visual acuity, thus detracting when light is abundant. "

Link:
https://www.buzz5...t-senses

User: Caroline2
Second paragraph of first post beginning "Sight:"

Incredibly, after said quote, SEU concludes:

"Cats are somewhat near-sighted. But they are able to see unphysical 'ghosts' and even Angels."

Sep 05, 2019
why are people still feeding the troll? attention is all the troll wants, period. the only way to win is not to play
says Pea

Who is this 'troll' that you say people are still feeding? The only TROLL I know of who craves attention is theghostofotto1923 aka Otto the Nazi

Sep 05, 2019
@jimmybobber
I got that quote from Wikipedia. Look it up yourself.

Sep 05, 2019
I quote SEU:
"Does your security camera have a lens that is configured in the shape of a cat's eye?"

Seeker2 responded:
"Exactly. It's round."

SEU responded:
"LOL The pupils in cat's eyes are not round, Seeker2. Their pupils are closer to the shape of the pupils of lizards and snakes, to some degree."

SEU you don't seem to understand the difference between eye and pupil.

says jimmybobber

You are half correct. From Wikipedia:
"The pupil is the central opening of the iris on the inside of the eye, which usually appears black. The grey/blue or brown area surrounding the pupil is the iris. The white outer area of the eye is the sclera."

I should have said "iris".

Sep 05, 2019
. People like Ghydening wyre seem to be the opposite, ...

Hey, hey, hey....
I resemble that remark... :-)
says Whyde

OK Whyde. What have you done now? Got yourself in trouble again, I see.
:)

Sep 05, 2019
@jimmybobber
@cortezz
SEU is much more than a troll. He's dangerous.
He threatened Otto on a public forum.
Take note of when he uses "we"
not just Otto, but myself, DaSchneib and a few others who learned of his/her puppetry and history on PO
says Cabinboy Strumpy

Thanks for the reminder, which we haven't forgotten. We will come for all 3 of you when you breathe your last and your hearts stop beating and your human body is declared dead. Never fear, Strumpy. You will see us even with your eyes closed.
And I don't have any puppetry. The only one who has ever accused me of it is theghostofotto1923 and many are those who believed his LIES. Otto is so like a diseased carrier of plague, who spreads it all around liberally, and some humans believe his lies because they are afraid of him.
LOL

Sep 05, 2019
Hey Otto speaking of SEU were you around in 2015 when I got in a big debate with one of the Einstein haters? Can't remember what her handle was then.
says Seeker2

Wasn't me. And I'm not female. Perhaps that was one of Otto's sock puppets debating you.
And I only began commenting in 2018.
says I

Oooops, I meant to say 2016 (July 13)

Sep 05, 2019
@egg-tarded troll
which we haven't forgotten. We will come
LMFAO

bring it, you lying, fraudulent, trolling spineless turd-burgling vaginal blood-fart

you can't bully me because, like Otto, I know who you are!

PS - syphilis is treatable nowadays so there is no longer a need for you to just accept your disease

Sep 06, 2019
@Stumpy-tarded troll
which we haven't forgotten. We will come
LMFAO

bring it, my lying, fraudulent, trolling spineless turd-burgling vaginal blood-fart wife

you can't bully me because, like Otto, I know who you are!

PS - syphilis is treatable nowadays so there is no longer a need for you to just accept your disease


ROFLOL Syphilis is YOUR disease, Strumpy. Are you and Otto planning to have homosexual sex together now? Is that why you've suddenly showed up? Be sure to take pictures for your Facebook account. LOL

Sep 06, 2019
We know all about you, Strumpy. We know everything about you. And Otto is crazy about you. He missed you.

Sep 06, 2019
Reviewing the Situation

in these quantum breeze
of this phys.org
of through this time and space
tis time for change
to look again at past comments
for looking at these present comments
are word for word in this other time
this Jan 20, 2013 as though
this other world is this world
as though these are one and the same
as it is getting difficult
to distinguish one avatar from another
so, Surveillance_Egg_Unit
so, Captain Stumpy
so, TheGhostofOtto1923
in this peace and quiet of this weekly week
before this avatar returns refreshed, bright eyed and bushy tailed, in full Mop
SEU, GhostlyOtto, simply Stumps - tis time to review this situation

THE best Fagin in the history of Fagins
Ron Moody-Reviewing the Situation
https://www.youtu...C4X_KWl4

Sep 06, 2019
Reviewing the Situation

for this Jan 20, 2013
to this present day
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
Captain Stumpy
TheGhostofOtto1923
this avatar
of this Jan 20, 2013
is well known to you all
for you know well his last comment - as you're still discussing it six years later

This comment has been removed by a moderator

SEU, GhostlyOtto, simply Stumps - tis time to review this situation

Sep 06, 2019
@jimmybobber
@cortezz
SEU is much more than a troll. He's dangerous.
He threatened Otto on a public forum.
Take note of when he uses "we"
not just Otto, but myself, DaSchneib and a few others who learned of his/her puppetry and history on PO
........hey stub, still bragging about your size hanging onto that Stumpy moniker. Why do you think anyone here should care about your stubby nether regions?

Sep 06, 2019
. People like Ghydening wyre seem to be the opposite, ...

Hey, hey, hey....
I resemble that remark... :-)
But then you mangle silverware for a living so... You do know that much of the world is still eating with sticks dont you?

Hey stump
We know all about you, Strumpy. We know everything about you. And Otto is crazy about you. He missed you
-remember when she used to say this as obamasocks?

Sep 06, 2019
@Benni
Tell us how solar sails work. I'm impressed you are still hear after that debacle. I think your hoping nobody remembers that thread that you abandoned because you were wrong.
We all remember.

Tell us how photons have no momentum Benni.

Sep 06, 2019
Of course Space is a gas. It's not a solid nor a liquid. It's a gas. Space is never completely empty. It has substance, which enables it to bend, stretch, shorten, etc. The only substance that can do that is gas.

@SEU
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. But, the tests confirm, thee has stretched the substance betwixt thy ears so much, it has shortened.

Sep 06, 2019
As to the insane looneytick, theghostofOtto's seeming disagreement with my assertion that cats are able to SEE the unphysical, anyone with even half a brain would question how would Otto KNOW that cats can't see the unphysical. Otto seems so certain while calling on his god.

@SEU
Must explain why he hates cats. Much like the quantum world, should he be observed, would instantly materialize and then be forced to exist with the disgusting humans. Yeah, I know, I'm oversimplifying, he just hates everything.

Sep 06, 2019

Tell us how photons have no momentum Benni.

@jimmybobber
Tell us how photons speed up again, after being slowed, as it passes through glass?

Sep 06, 2019
@Antigoracle
You said:
"Tell us how photons speed up again, after being slowed, as it passes through glass?"

Are you suggesting photons accelerate and decelerate?


Sep 06, 2019
"Tell us how photons speed up again, after being slowed, as it passes through glass?"

Are you suggesting photons accelerate and decelerate?
Common knowledge.

"Scientists have long known that the speed of light can be slowed slightly as it travels through materials such as water or glass."

and

"Scientists have managed to slow photons in free space for the first time. They have demonstrated that applying a mask to an optical beam to give photons a spatial structure can reduce their speed."

and even

"A control laser is fired at the crystal, triggering a complex quantum-level reaction that turns it transparent. A second light source (the data/image source) is then beamed into the now-transparent crystal. The control laser is then turned off, turning the crystal opaque. Not only does this leave the light trapped inside, but the opacity means that the light inside can no longer bounce around — the light, in a word, has been stopped."

-Thats what google is for.

Sep 06, 2019
@Otto

"Are you suggesting photons accelerate and decelerate?"

Sep 06, 2019
@Otto

Try reading the question better next time.
You obviously haven't Googled enough.

jimmybobber: "Are you suggesting photons accelerate and decelerate?"

TheGhostofOtto1923: "Common knowledge."

Sep 06, 2019
@Otto
But then you mangle silverware for a living so
I think his stuff is cool as hell! I tried it at home but all I got was the wife's fry pan upside the head... oh, and now I have to eat with chopsticks I made from a neighbours femur (long story)
remember when she used to say this as obamasocks?
Yes... Yes I do
and as a few other socks as well!

it's almost like she doesn't learn that the internet is searchable

.

.

@benji-trolling idiot
your stubby nether regions?
why are you so fascinated with my nether regions?
because they're so huge compared to your own?
Or because you're a Eunuch?

Hey Benji! Show us how to do ODE's and tell us how a Solar Sail works again!
I love comedy hour on PO

Sep 06, 2019
Light and Diffraction
GhostlyOtto> Scientists have long known that the speed of light can be slowed slightly as it travels through materials such as water or glass

The Speed of Light is Absolute
It neither decelerates
Or accelerates
It is simply diffraction in the medium light is travelling
It diffracts over a longer path
There by taking extra nano-seconds to exit
Giving the impression of having slowed
When it has simply travelled over a longer path

Sep 06, 2019
chopsticks I made from a neighbours femur (long story)
Yeah well I guess big dogs are good for some things.

Hey pussytard are you up for a game of fetch the looney?

Sep 06, 2019

Captain Stumpy
......and so there it is again, every time you put that hideous nether moniker of yours up.

@benji-trolling idiot
your stubby nether regions?
why are you so fascinated with my nether regions?
because they're so huge compared to your own?
.......what is it you find so fascinating about that hideous moniker? Do you consider it a BRAND or a BADGE or exactly what? Why do you think ANY of us care about the most personal things you are dealing with in life?

We don't come here because we care about what's going on in your nether regions, but you shove it in our faces every time you make a Comment. So come on, tell us why YOU think we should care.

When I see a Stumpy comment as the retired fireman that you are, there's a fleeting image that comes to my mind, a FIRE HYDRANT; short & fat with it's stubby water discharge port. Yeah, Stumpy the Nether Guy, knocking himself to make sure all of us know it.

Sep 06, 2019
Light and Diffraction
GhostlyOtto> Scientists have long known that the speed of light can be slowed slightly as it travels through materials such as water or glass

The Speed of Light is Absolute
It neither decelerates
Or accelerates
It is simply diffraction in the medium light is travelling
It diffracts over a longer path
There by taking extra nano-seconds to exit
Giving the impression of having slowed
When it has simply travelled over a longer path

Physicist: This bothers a lot of people...

The difference is the time the photon takes being absorbed and emitted by the atoms it encounters in the medium, it still propagates at c between the atoms.

Sep 06, 2019
Of course Space is a gas. It's not a solid nor a liquid. It's a gas. Space is never completely empty. It has substance, which enables it to bend, stretch, shorten, etc. The only substance that can do that is gas.


@SEU
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. But, the tests confirm, thee has stretched the substance betwixt thy ears so much, it has shortened.
says antigoracle

antigo, if Space wasn't made of a gas, it would have to be a vacuum 100%. Have you ever seen that trick with the gas can, where all of the air is sucked out of it? What happened to that metal gas can? It collapsed, didn't it. Am I saying that if ALL of the gas molecules in Space (the Universe) was removed, would Space collapse? Why yes, that is what I am saying.

Sep 06, 2019
@granville
@Protoplasmix
Light and Diffraction
GhostlyOtto> Scientists have long known that the speed of light can be slowed slightly as it travels through materials such as water or glass

The Speed of Light is Absolute
It neither decelerates
Or accelerates
It is simply diffraction in the medium light is travelling
It diffracts over a longer path
There by taking extra nano-seconds to exit
Giving the impression of having slowed
When it has simply travelled over a longer path
says granville
https://www.askam...l-speed/

The difference is the time the photon takes being absorbed and emitted by the atoms it encounters in the medium, it still propagates at c between the atoms.
says Protoplasmix

Excellent presentation from both of you. Good that you both schooled Otto and his errors.

Sep 06, 2019
This Lightspeed Photon
Protoplasmix> The difference is the time the photon takes being absorbed and emitted by the atoms it encounters in the medium, it still propagates at c between the atoms.

Is absorbed and emitted at lightspeed


Sep 06, 2019
every little helps
SEU> Excellent presentation from both of you. Good that you both schooled Otto and his errors.

there's a strange silence of late, though they silence is golden, SEU

Sep 06, 2019
@granville
Hmmm I think you're right. Wonder what caused that. Perhaps they've all gone to the lake on a picnic. Or it's movie time. Or...or...

Sep 06, 2019
@benji the lying illiterate
We don't come here because we care about what's going on in your nether regions, but you shove it in our faces every time you make a Comment
you're the one who keeps bringing up my nether regions... I don't swing that way so you'll have to stick to propositioning eggy or the other trolls you cavort with


Sep 07, 2019
The comments on this article should have been closed a long time ago.

Sep 09, 2019
@Benni

..what is it you find so fascinating about that hideous moniker? Do you consider it a BRAND or a BADGE or exactly what?

Maybe he missing an arm jackass.

Sep 09, 2019
. People like Ghydening wyre seem to be the opposite, ...

Hey, hey, hey....
I resemble that remark... :-)
But then you mangle silverware for a living so... You do know that much of the world is still eating with sticks dont you?

Best silverware mangler out there...
I've raised it to an art!
I'm a forkin' tiNe lord!
Dr WDF. (Watt de Forque)
Dr. who, you ask?
No, no, no... HE does TIME, I do TINES...

Sep 09, 2019
People like Ghydening wyre seem to be the opposite, ...

Hey, hey, hey....
Opposite of what, again?
Looking for negatives?
Bah... there isn't enoough o them out there, already?
Life's too short.
But then you mangle silverware for a living so... You do know that much of the world is still eating with sticks dont you?

actually, they're called chop sticks and require a great deal of adeptness to operate... :-)
anyway, they'll see the light someday.
Guess you could call me a forkin' missionary...:-)

Sep 09, 2019
This Lightspeed Photon
Protoplasmix> The difference is the time the photon takes being absorbed and emitted by the atoms it encounters in the medium, it still propagates at c between the atoms.

Is absorbed and emitted at lightspeed

Nope...
The slightest of lag times involved, there...

Sep 09, 2019
Otto says -
Can stop Yellowstone with geothermal plants. And freeze breath I suppose.

Pretty weird huh stump?
Nothing will stop Yellowstone or hurricanes. But they don't have to be Category 5 destroying Bermuda. Tap Yellowstone for everything practical and save Bermuda. And freeze a little more breath in the northern latitudes. Nature will get you coming or going. Your choice.

Sep 09, 2019
...Is absorbed and emitted at lightspeed
Nope...
The slightest of lag times involved, there...
Yep. As a matter of fact the absorption and emission time would depend on the light frequency - the higher the frequency of energy of the photon the more time for the electrons to move to a higher energy level and re-radiate at a lower energy level. Ergo you get a sort of rainbow effect.

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