Understanding Cosmology (Post 4)

[Meow Mix]

There is one model in cosmology called the "holographic universe" which assumes we are living inside a black hole. And that is technically correct as when you sum up the known mass of the universe and calculate the Schwarzschild radius it comes out slightly bigger than the observable universe.

This might be easy to get mixed up with the Holographic principle, which is much less fringe depending on whether there is a strong or a weak holographic principle. This is regarding the information in a black hole being encoded on the surface of the horizon. The strong holographic principle would hold that the dimensions we're familiar with are similarly encoded on a horizon, which IIRC is different from "living inside a black hole" (but not by much).

 

[Meow Mix]

We don’t see CMB all the way to the horizon; we can only see CMB to the point of last scattering. I’ll post a graphic that will intuitively show what I mean by this later today. I’m going to sleep now ^.^

@JoshuaTree

Here's the graphic I promised re: the CMB, visibility, and last scattering.

[GALLERY=media, 9519]Lastscatter by Meow Mix posted Jun 30, 2021 at 10:06 PM[/GALLERY]

 

[Native]

Subject: Astrophysicist Sabine Hossenfelder about "Dark Matter".

She raises concludingly the important question whether the standing theories hold water and why modern cosmology hasn´t made any significant progress.

SH Abstract:
"Today I tell you how my opinion about dark matter has changed and why. Is modified gravity better or worse? What evidence speaks for one side or the other, and is the case really as clear-cut as many astrophysicists claim?".

0:00 Intro 0:23 What is dark matter? 2:22 Evidence for dark matter 5:11 Evidence against dark matter 7:25 If not dark matter, then what? 9:43 Why we haven't made progress

What do you think of these philosophical food for thoughts?

 

[Meow Mix]

I touched on the Holographic principle a little bit in my black hole thermo papers actually.

Subject: Astrophysicist Sabine Hossenfelder about "Dark Matter".

She raises concludingly the important question whether the standing theories hold water and why modern cosmology hasn´t made any significant progress.

SH Abstract:
"Today I tell you how my opinion about dark matter has changed and why. Is modified gravity better or worse? What evidence speaks for one side or the other, and is the case really as clear-cut as many astrophysicists claim?".

0:00 Intro 0:23 What is dark matter? 2:22 Evidence for dark matter 5:11 Evidence against dark matter 7:25 If not dark matter, then what? 9:43 Why we haven't made progress

What do you think of these philosophical food for thoughts?

Now here is a video that makes concrete claims! I will not have the time tonight, I'm going through a 48 page roadmap for my thesis. However, I'll be happy to come back to this tomorrow or later this week. There's quite a lot to respond to, but that's a good change of pace: concrete claims are made that can actually be discussed and digested qualitatively AND quantitatively.

Also, some of the things discussed relate to my thesis.

 

[Native]

Now here is a video that makes concrete claims!

Philosophical claims (Ghade Chelade) and scientific claims (Sabine Hossenfelder) are basically the same to me.

They both are dealing with the same basic and standing conditions in modern cosmological science, and they both have their doubts of some cosmological validities.

I´m looking forward to your reply

 

[JoshuaTree]

I will read about modified gravity, maybe gravity is faster than light now ha ha.

 

[Native]

I will read about modified gravity, maybe gravity is faster than light now ha ha.

Well, according to the consensus "infinite" definition of the gravity range, it IS faster than light as it is assumed to "be everywhere at the same time", which cannot be said about a beam of light.

Ok, this definition doesn´t bother me as I don´t believe in Newtons "occult agency" apple force at all, and the same goes for it´s cosmologically occult cousin, "dark matter".

 

[Meow Mix]

I still owe a video response, just don't have the dedicated time just yet. I can post in snippets tonight.

 

[gnostic]

What do you mean by the "strong EM force," do you just mean the strong force? Are you assuming it's electromagnetic in nature? Or are you referring to GUT stuff like with the electroweak force?

I think that he believe EM force and Strong Nuclear force are one and the same. He doesn’t distinguish between the two.

But for these these two to be one force, as I understand it, the energy would have to enormously hotter than any star can generate. No source of heat today, can generate the heat required to unify EM and strong nuclear into one force.

 

[gnostic]

I don't yet know what "gravitational radiation" is but I will soon find out.

A black hole emitting "gravitational radiation" seems a very close analogy to "cosmic background radiation"... Are they the same thing essentially?

No, CMBR is microwave radiation, which are EM photons.

It is cause by photon decoupling WHEN electrons with (positive charged) element nuclei (atoms with no electrons), to form into electrically neutral and stable atoms. This event occurred during the Recombination Epoch, that started around 377,000 years after the Big Bang.

For instances, BEFORE electrons bonded with hydrogen nucleus (only 1 proton, no neutron) or deuterium nucleus (hydrogen atom with isotope of 1 neutron) and helium nucleus (2 protons, 2 neutrons), these atoms existed without electrons, hence they were ionized atoms.

BEFORE the Recombination Epoch, these ionized atoms existed in plasma state, not as in gas state. If you recall basic high school science, matters exist in four different states: gas, liquid, solid and plasma, so in plasma form, matters existed with charged atoms.

During the Recombination Epoch, these neutral atoms changed from being plasma to gases, which transformed the “opaque” universe into “transparent” universe. It also allow photons to travel freely in transparent universe.

 

[gnostic]

Also, concerning dark matter falling into a black hole, wouldn't the conversion (if this makes any sense at all) from dark matter to dark energy be 100% as opposed to 10% conversion to gravity waves for real matter in merger of black holes?

From what I understand about (stellar) blackhole, any matter, baryonic matters or dark matters get pull in by blackhole and impact on the BH’s surface, it will just add more masses to the blackhole.

Don’t ask me if it will explode on impact of the surface, because we currently have no technology to observe behind the event horizon.

So I will reiterate that adding matters (eg a Earth-size planet) to the blackhole, the added object will increase the total mass of the blackhole.

 

[Native]

I think that he believe EM force and Strong Nuclear force are one and the same. He doesn’t distinguish between the two.

Correct. Electromagnetism is electromagnetism no matter where it works.

But for these these two to be one force, as I understand it, the energy would have to enormously hotter than any star can generate. No source of heat today, can generate the heat required to unify EM and strong nuclear into one force.

It is the very EM charge in atoms and molecules which creates the heat when activated, no matter how hot. (As it also is written in the Egyptian Ogdoad Creation Story, you know).

 

[Native]

From what I understand about (stellar) blackhole, any matter, baryonic matters or dark matters get pull in by blackhole and impact on the BH’s surface, it will just add more masses to the blackhole.

It´s quite funny. The consensus cosmology works theoretically with an attractive black hole and when something is pulled into the hole, all further explanations of what then happens takes a full stop.

Don’t ask me if it will explode on impact of the surface, because we currently have no technology to observe behind the event horizon.

This is not correct. Several telescopes have observed what is going on, but the observations are almost all interpreted according to Newtons occult gravitational thoughts - which in fact and otherwise was falsified in the galactic realms.

Here, logical thinking is needed in order to understand what´s going on, namely: If some matter is going into the swirling center of a galaxy, something else appears from this.