Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   infinite space
Primordial Egg
Inactive Member


Message 121 of 125 (94629)
03-25-2004 3:40 AM
Reply to: Message 120 by berberry
03-25-2004 2:47 AM


Background dependence
If Loop Quantum Gravity is correct then spacetime itself plays an active role in the physics of the Universe (a so-called background independent theory).
String Theory, as I am led to believe, on the other hand "happens" in spacetime. Space and time are merely the setting where all the interactions take place.
I don't pretend to know much more about either theory, but wikipedia has some more info on LQG.
It seems to me that any theory of the Universe also needs to be background independent, as you have to be able to explain the existence of the arena in which it all happens (as opposed to the non-existent indolent "void").
I don't understand the problem with time - of course its real - its a parameter we use to help us define the world around us. No different from mass, charge, colour, spin, momentum etc
PE
edit: missed an important "in"
[This message has been edited by Primordial Egg, 03-25-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by berberry, posted 03-25-2004 2:47 AM berberry has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 122 of 125 (94649)
03-25-2004 7:20 AM
Reply to: Message 119 by V-Bird
03-25-2004 2:28 AM


Re: Getting Acquainted
Hi, V-Bird!
Until you get a better feel for EvC Forum, I think it would be best if you confined yourself to topics outside the Main Topic Forums.

--Percy
EvC Forum Administrator

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by V-Bird, posted 03-25-2004 2:28 AM V-Bird has not replied

  
Beercules
Inactive Member


Message 123 of 125 (94691)
03-25-2004 12:12 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Percy
03-24-2004 5:22 PM


Re: More On V-Bird
Sadly, I've come across many individuals who post very similar unintelligent drivel who are in fact, dead serious. I'm afraid it is no longer possible to tell the trolls from the hurting individuals.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Percy, posted 03-24-2004 5:22 PM Percy has not replied

  
Beercules
Inactive Member


Message 124 of 125 (94695)
03-25-2004 12:24 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by crashfrog
03-24-2004 6:23 PM


quote:
I simply don't believe that's the view of science. Spacetime is a very real participant in interactions in the universe. It's not just an empty stage for matter and energy.
The problem that I find to come up with the discussion of whether or not spacetime actually is a "thing" is that it ultimately comes down to semantics. Einstein's general relatvity reveals that spacetime and the gravitational field are equivalent. One could take this finding and conclude that spacetime has no existence independent of the gravitational field. And the source of gravity is energy. No energy means no sources, no gravitational field and no spacetime. On the other hand, one could just as well claim that there is ultimately no gravitational field - only curved spacetime. Semantics, and more of an ontological matter than scientific.
However, science does agree that spacetime is not an empty arena in which events take place. Matter effects the curvature of spacetime and the geometry of spacetime effects the behavior of matter. That is why the absolute vacuum proposed by V-bird is a completely useless and irrelevant concept for physics.
[This message has been edited by Beercules, 03-25-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by crashfrog, posted 03-24-2004 6:23 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
compmage
Member (Idle past 5153 days)
Posts: 601
From: South Africa
Joined: 08-04-2005


Message 125 of 125 (94717)
03-25-2004 2:03 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by V-Bird
03-24-2004 2:14 PM


V-Bird writes:
...and nothing is bigger than endless nothingness...
"Nothing" isn't endless. It takes up no space at all. It's volume is 0. You seem to be speaking about space. Scrap that idea. The two concepts are nothing alike.
V-Bird writes:
Please use 'energy-matter, it is both more correct and makes better sense.
But I'm not speaking about "energy-matter", I'm speaking about space-time. Why would I use a term that doesn't refer to what I am speaking about?

Freedom, morality, and the human dignity of the individual consists precisely in
this; that he does good not because he is forced to do so, but because he freely
conceives it, wants it, and loves it.
- Mikhail Bakunin, God and the State, from The Columbian Dictionary of Quotations

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by V-Bird, posted 03-24-2004 2:14 PM V-Bird has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024