Origins of the Universe, Big Bang or No Bang.

[MeteorWayne]

Well, it is The Unexplained, so we do have a full condiment and dressing bar available

 

[harrycostas]

G'day from the land of ozzzzz


The topic that I'm reading up is cutting edge science information and not pet theories.

I did not know that science has clubs and that science can be censored and directed.

What is mainstream?

Does the topic fit the bill? yes it does.

Research in axions and other subatomic particles and their properties hold the key to the formation of the objects that we observe near and far.

This leads the the Big Bang or No Bang.

 

[ramparts]

Really, Harry? Please explain to me how axions lead to the Big Bang.

 

[drwayne]

And please do so IN YOUR OWN WORDS, not with a link or a copy and paste.

 

[MeteorWayne]

And explain directly, in the post you make the assertion that it is related, in no uncertain terms how it is related to the topic of this discussion.

Anything less will result in moderation.

 

[harrycostas]

G'day from the land of ozzzzz

If I explain the importance of Axions and related subatoic particels. You will require posting of links backing the information.

I would rather who ever is interested do a bit of research into it than without wasting too much of my time discuss the topic.

The SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System
Axion Cosmology 2009
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-b ... &version=1

You can also do a better search with specific topics axions re jets and black holes.

Since we cannot go back billions of years to test the BBT , we can look at the workings of subatomic particels in generating ultra compact matter that is able to form main jets with a stability small to very large that are able to mimic the processes of Nuclosynthesis as explained by the BBT.

 

[ZenGalacticore]

G'day from the land of ozzzzz

If I explain the importance of Axions and related subatoic particels. You will require posting of links backing the information.

I would rather who ever is interested do a bit of research into it than without wasting too much of my time discuss the topic.

In other words, you have no broad or possibly even specialized command of the topic of the thread that you yourself started.

Since we cannot go back billions of years to test the BBT , we can look at the workings of subatomic particels in generating ultra compact matter that is able to form main jets with a stability small to very large that are able to mimic the processes of Nuclosynthesis as explained by the BBT.

TMK, we can go back billions of years as we peer out into space. We cannot see the "beginning" of the Big Bang because the light has not had time to reach our instruments due to the expanding nature of the fabric of space.

And that was twice that you mis-spelled particle.

 

[neuvik]

In other words, you have no broad or possibly even specialized command of the topic of the thread that you yourself started.

No way, after reading through 96 abstracts hes gotta be an expert. Never mind all the past dodging of questions, dodging of mods, misqouting, and thunderbolts links.

 

[csmyth3025]

It's been a while since I checked this thread. It's comforting to see that Harry hasn't changed. I'm constantly amazed by his ability to blow off requests for specifics on the point(s) he's asserting in his posts by citing another abstract or study which may or may not have anything to do with the subject of the request.

I think Harry has missed his true calling. He should be practicing politics rather than "studying" astrophysics.

Chris

 

[origin]

G'day from the land of ozzzzz

If I explain the importance of Axions and related subatoic particels. You will require posting of links backing the information.

I would rather who ever is interested do a bit of research into it than without wasting too much of my time discuss the topic.

The SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System
Axion Cosmology 2009
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-b ... &version=1

You can also do a better search with specific topics axions re jets and black holes.

Since we cannot go back billions of years to test the BBT , we can look at the workings of subatomic particels in generating ultra compact matter that is able to form main jets with a stability small to very large that are able to mimic the processes of Nuclosynthesis as explained by the BBT.

Do you really think that paper and your subsequen paragraph are related?

 

[ramparts]

Harry, I hope you don't think this is how science is done. Check out a colloquium at a university astronomy department some time, or a talk at a conference. The scientist presenting his research will always get a few pointed questions. Do you think the common practice is for the speaker to say "well, I don't want to waste too much of my time discussing the topic, here's a search result from the ADS, go figure it out yourself?" If a scientist said that, they'd be laughed out of the room! If you present an idea, you are supposed to defend it. If scientists wouldn't do what you're doing, then why should you?

 

[SpeedFreek]

Do you really think that paper and your subsequent paragraph are related?

It's not a paper, it an ADS search for any 2009 paper containing the search terms "axion" and "cosmology". :roll:

The top item in the search results is:

Five-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe Observations: Cosmological Interpretation! :lol:

What Harry wants us to do is sift through all those papers to see if we can find a relationship between black holes, axions and his beloved jets, which he now seems to think can mimic the nuclueosynthesis that predicts the CMBR, as well as causing the redshift-distance relationship!

 

[ramparts]

It's not a paper, it an ADS search for any 2009 paper containing the search terms "axion" and "cosmology". :roll:

Actually, it's a search for papers from any year containing the search terms "axion," "cosmology" and "2009"

 

[SpeedFreek]

Alright, alright Mr Picky!

 

[FlatEarth]

Alright, alright Mr Picky!

Talk about calling the kettle black!! :lol: :lol:

 

[marcel_leonard]

Ultimately no one knows what the Space/Time continuum really is; which ultimately makes me feel justified believing in a creator of this universe...
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNAUR7NQCLA[/youtube]

 

[origin]

Ultimately no one knows what the Space/Time continuum really is; which ultimately makes me feel justified believing in a creator of this universe...

Does that mean if we come up with a good definition of space-time you will become an atheist?

 

[origin]

Do you really think that paper and your subsequent paragraph are related?

It's not a paper, it an ADS search for any 2009 paper containing the search terms "axion" and "cosmology". :roll:

The top item in the search results is:

Five-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe Observations: Cosmological Interpretation! :lol:

What Harry wants us to do is sift through all those papers to see if we can find a relationship between black holes, axions and his beloved jets, which he now seems to think can mimic the nuclueosynthesis that predicts the CMBR, as well as causing the redshift-distance relationship!

Oh, I thought he was refering to the second paper axion cosmology revisited. Gee, how silly of me, he wanted us to read all 98 papers [slaps head]. Well of course he doesn't have time to 'splain it, it would be much quicker to read and digest all 98 papers, it is so obvious.

Is it possible that in conjunction with a gravity anomoly or something and living on the bottom of the planet could cause the blood to rush to your head, causing the generation of absurd hypothesis?

 

[harrycostas]

G'day

Some people take the cake.

I do not want you to read all the papers. Just to be awear of the topic.

Its called lateral thinking.

Reading is a choice.

Its called getting the GIST of it.

It seems that some want to argue for the sake of it.

I just want to learn more about cosmology and what makes it tick.

The properties of hidden matter sub atomic particles that some call Dark Matter is extremely important and may give us some understanding of pre BB or no BB at all.

 

[origin]

G'day

Some people take the cake.

I do not want you to read all the papers. Just to be awear of the topic.

Its called lateral thinking.

Reading is a choice.

Its called getting the GIST of it.

The problem is that YOU don't get the gist of it. You post searches of random papers that have little or nothing to do with your points - as vague as they are. The only papers that have supported anything you believe in is the type of drivel from pseudoscience sites like thunderbolts.

You have demonstrated over and over that you do not know what you are talking about and you have yet to support any of your conjectures with real science.

 

[SpeedFreek]

I do not want you to read all the papers. Just to be awear of the topic.

Its called lateral thinking.

Reading is a choice.

Its called getting the GIST of it.

I am now aware that there are lots of papers that mention 2009, cosmology and axions, including the latest, most detailed WMAP results for the Big-Bang universe. Can you help me understand the gist of these papers?

It seems that some want to argue for the sake of it.

I just want to learn more about cosmology and what makes it tick.

It seems some people want to post scientific papers for the sake of it, too. What is the point in posting a link to all those papers? Am I being argumentative for asking?

If you want to learn any more about cosmology than you already know, I suggest you stop right where you are, forget everything you think you have learned so far and go right back to first principles.

 

[ramparts]

I fail to see why people still respond to Harry, after 34 pages.

 

[vladdrac]

Just saw another video about Multiverse Theory the jist of which was that there may be a cosmological reality where Universes form continuosly ...a genuinely infinite 'Universe'

 

[FlatEarth]

I fail to see why people still respond to Harry, after 34 pages.

Because we love Harry.

 

[ramparts]

And sometimes if you really love someone, you don't enable them