Big Bang Theory (no, not the TV series)

Forums › Off topic › Big Bang Theory (no, not the TV series)

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

Mad Scientist
29770 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3020733 13-Jan-2023 07:10

huckster:

Science is a methodology.

We're the bit that is too primitive. We haven't figured out how to apply that methodology correctly in order to answer these questions.

Yet.

yes we are too primitive

i propose our methodology is fubar

the definition of speed of light is to the meter c = m / s

they then defined the meter to the speed of light m = c x s

how can you have 2 fundamental constants defining each other?

i thought only Donald Trump would do that

and yet this is the best we can do

Ge0rge

2056 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3020759 13-Jan-2023 09:28

I propose that your understanding of the methodology is fubar.

We define the second as being exactly 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of caesium-133. This can be repeatedly and accurately measured and confirmed, and is a constant.

With that constant in mind, we can observe a ray of light in a vacuum and then measure the distance that it covers during those 9,192,631,770 transitions. We then divide that distance into 299,792,458 equal segments. One of those segments is defined as the SI unit for distance, and is called a metre.

lurker

831 posts

Ultimate Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3020760 13-Jan-2023 09:34

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18665 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3020787 13-Jan-2023 11:05

I think it is astounding and a real tribute to us that we understand as much about the Universe as we think we do, but if you consider it and then consider us, and the difference of scale involved, our minuscule meat machine monkey brains have no hope at all of ever truly comprehending the true nature and extent of our reality. We are not even microbes on the fleas of that dog.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#3020789 13-Jan-2023 11:17

Rikkitic:

I think it is astounding and a real tribute to us that we understand as much about the Universe as we think we do, but if you consider it and then consider us, and the difference of scale involved, our minuscule meat machine monkey brains have no hope at all of ever truly comprehending the true nature and extent of our reality. We are not even microbes on the fleas of that dog.

Yet we travel to space, send probes beyond our Solar system. We observe and analyse distant stars, Nebulae, Exoplanets. We determined the nuclear make up of life and energy. We understand and know an immense about the Universe and its origins. Your contempt for our abilities and achievements is somewhat insulting to the scientists of today and yesterday.

MikeAqua

7785 posts

Uber Geek

#3020805 13-Jan-2023 11:53

Some people on this thread seem to be confused between facts, theories, conjectures and beliefs. Below I've attempted to differentiate these from science perspective: -

Facts = An explanation that is substantially proven with Empirical data, ideally in multiple peer reviewed studies that reach the same conclusion. Example the speed of sound under standard atmospheric conditions has been proven and is just accepted. Also, the earth being spheroid in shape.

Theories = a logical explanation based on some explanatory power Empirical evidence, with acceptance by experts other than the originating theorist. A test to prove/disprove can be devised conceptually,

Conjecture = an theorist has a hypothesis which has some explanatory power. I'd put the multiverse theory weakly in that category. It might have some explanatory power based on a couple of datasets. For example, people have proposed leakage of matter into another universe to explain problems with "missing matter" in the universe. Another explanation for this is dark matter.

Belief = an idea, opinion or view that someone likes that doesn't necessarily have any explanatory power or empirical evidence. May not be able to be tested logically. Religion, walking under ladders, ethics, philosophy. This is different from accepting a theory or fact based on evidence. Common in people who don't understand the field of which they are speaking.

Something people also often misunderstand about theories, is that they don't have to be perfect. A good theory is reasonably simple, and has high explanatory power.

A good example would be Newton's Principia Mathematica. Reasonably simple equations that have massively useful predictive power.

The Big Bang theory is actually a reasonably strong theory. It explains a lot about what we see in the universe, it's consistent with a number of other accepted theories and there is substantial amount of empirical evidence to support it. For example, the universe is still expanding and the pattern of cosmic background radiation.

Do we understand it all? Hell, no. We have only recently swung down from the trees as a species and we've only had modern scientific methods for about 300 years. A lot of that time scientists have had to compete with existing beliefs, sometimes risking their lives to do so.

Mike

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#3020807 13-Jan-2023 11:59

Assuming we don't annihilate ourselves (big assumption admittedly) I see no reason why, given the current rate that our knowledge is increasing, why we won't develop things like FTL travel within the next say 500 years.

Further into the future I can see us becoming non-corporeal with our consciousness operating inside some sub-atomic matrix. We could really become masters of the Universe(s) and issues like the death of the Universe or a cyclical big bang become irrelevant.

In the very short term we need to expand off this planet to ensure our survival. Whether that is a good thing for the Universe is another question altogether.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3020813 13-Jan-2023 12:15

I have high faith in the Big Bang Theory. My issue is what caused the dot to contain all energy that now exists. Are there more? Is this cyclical? I don't imagine we would ever answer these questions.

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3020816 13-Jan-2023 12:21

SJB:

In the very short term we need to expand off this planet to ensure our survival. Whether that is a good thing for the Universe is another question altogether.

Fixing my house is a lot easier than rebuilding another. Probably the most bizarre thing is that we know a lot, can do a lot, yet we are not prepared to restore the planet we live on, where the technology to do that is common and essentially low tech. How we group together as tribes, with rulers is an abject failure. We pillage the planet, then go to war to get more pillage area. Yet in most of our homes, where there are also rulers, we keep them tidy and efficient and pleasant.

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#3020817 13-Jan-2023 12:22

tdgeek:

Are there more? Is this cyclical? I don't imagine we would ever answer these questions.

See my post above. If we survive long enough we will understand everything. It's inevitable, like evolution.

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#3020818 13-Jan-2023 12:24

tdgeek:

SJB:

In the very short term we need to expand off this planet to ensure our survival. Whether that is a good thing for the Universe is another question altogether.

Fixing my house is a lot easier than rebuilding another.

Not strictly true. In some cases it is easier to abandon and build again.

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3020820 13-Jan-2023 12:31

SJB:

Not strictly true. In some cases it is easier to abandon and build again.

I think you know what I mean. Both as regards a house and colonising Mars

MikeAqua

7785 posts

Uber Geek

#3020830 13-Jan-2023 13:36

SJB:

I see no reason why, given the current rate that our knowledge is increasing, why we won't develop things like FTL travel within the next say 500 years.

One reason might be that it's simply physically impossible to travel through space time faster than light speed. That's what our current understanding suggests and none of the work arounds posited look all that promising ... yet.

I suspect the solution will be to manipulate our biology to make long interstellar journeys possible. Or build intergenerational ships. Those approaches seem more feasible than a warp drive.

Mike

sleemanj

1490 posts

Uber Geek

#3020884 13-Jan-2023 15:16

tdgeek:

I have high faith in the Big Bang Theory. My issue is what caused the dot to contain all energy that now exists. Are there more? Is this cyclical? I don't imagine we would ever answer these questions.

It is likely unknowable. Not everything has an answer which can be understood let alone known by humans.

We can't even know what is or was beyond the observable universe boundary, dictated by the speed of light and expansion of the universe.

Stop worrying about it. We do not expect a cat, smart as they are, to comprehend calculus. Humans have limits also.

---
James Sleeman
I sell lots of stuff for electronic enthusiasts...

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18665 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3020885 13-Jan-2023 15:17

MikeAqua:

I suspect the solution will be to manipulate our biology to make long interstellar journeys possible. Or build intergenerational ships. Those approaches seem more feasible than a warp drive.

This generation already has trouble paying for things that will only benefit the next one. How the hell are they going to finance an intergenerational space ship?

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6