A_A

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Those mostly create magnetic and electomagnetic radiation. Some are also magnetars

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

There is already a link in my post for one big source of gravitational waves

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Thanks 😊. This comes from a discussion at !askscience@lemmy.world

... from this discussion thread

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (10 children)

Cosmological Microwave Background

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)
[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Please follow developments here :
~~https://lemmy.ca/post/3539374~~
https://lemmy.ca/post/3553583

I had to rebuild completely my post (questions and answer) from other users also, because some moderator, at "ShowerThoughts", deleted the post while it was in progress.

shower thoughts at lemmy.world, so :https://lemmy.world/post/3425772

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (5 children)

if we find a mechanism that continually creates matter in the universe we don't need a big bang. Creation of matter and gravity fields, (net zero) could somehow increase the expansion of the universe. 3d interference pattern of gravitational waves would create rogue waves at specific points in SpaceTime that would create matter and the CMB.
Oops ! I just defined a new cosmological model 😄 !

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Yes we had a nice exchange five or six days ago in your post :
Beyond the Darkness - Dark Matter: A Baseless Hypothesis?
I am not a physicist and I don't work in this field. I just read since many years and I made my mind about what was going to be successful and what was not.

My best prediction so far was that JWST was going to see the same type of galaxies very far away as those in the local universe. (at least partially verified) I made that same prediction when Hubble telescope was put into orbit. Back then physicist started doubting their theories.

I was most impressed by a single fact of physics ......that all energy in ordinary matter is equal to the negative potential gravitational energy of that matter. Because of this I am scanning all I read for clues for a mechanism where matter could be created from gravitational field ...something like Hawking radiation. For the same reason I am also looking for evidence that the universe could stand for a much longer time since the CMB. This would be the case for a universe that would be exponentially expanding. Suppose the accelerating rate of expansion double each 10 billion years or so. Then, if you go in the past every 10 billion years the rate of expansion is smaller and smaller exponentially decreasing and the universe is extremely old.

I have so many more ideas but I don't want to make a wall of text.

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (9 children)

You are talking about Penrose now and it is a nice coincidence that I wrote about him yesterday here :
https://lemmy.ca/post/3363583

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (11 children)

Wanted to see this since a long time ! Do you have a source ? Please ?
Unless maybe you are talking about this :
Zero-point energy

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I do believe there is a strong link to be understood between what is observed in this post and what was posted :
X-Ray echo suggests our galaxy was "active" (quasar-like) just 200 years ago - Nature
by @CanadaPlus one month ago.
Thanks for this (X-Ray echo) post and for the last comment you made here in the other thread, about Penroses' current work.

So I will read through some of this and try to come back with something worthwhile to say.

Update : I read some more and most of that is just out of my reach. The only paragraph I kind of understand somewhat is this :

(...) conformal cyclic cosmology (CCC) theory.[67] In this theory, Penrose postulates that at the end of the universe all matter is eventually contained within black holes which subsequently evaporate via Hawking radiation. At this point, everything contained within the universe consists of photons which "experience" neither time nor space. There is essentially no difference between an infinitely large universe consisting only of photons and an infinitely small universe consisting only of photons. Therefore, a singularity for a Big Bang and an infinitely expanded universe are equivalent. [68]

...and now I need some rest.

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

I like what you say. So, in a few minutes I will make a new root comment inside this post so you could continue this thread some more with me.

view more: ‹ prev next ›