ISU (Infinite Spongy Universe) Model - SciForums Update 2018

[Michael 345]

If your br


If your broom stands up by itself you have not used it enough.

Alex

Not true

Bristles don't wear out when used in Flying mode

 

[quantum_wave]

When you are right you are right but really I think you are more wonderful than me but rather than say you could be wrong I will agree that indeed I am the most wonderful.

Lol, well then that’s settled.

I find the proposition that the universe must be infinite the most logical conclusion but we must remember we can never know other than to rely on the Devine messages I receive on a daily basis.

Being on that mailing list must be what keeps you clued in.

What I found interesting is that the discussion re inflation is taking place at all. But certainly if it gets any traction you can be well pleased.

I often think that there are actually very few original thinkers and when you spot a new idea you look back what you have written over the years and find that you thought about it and said so well before the tide turned.

I’m not really an Inflation fan, but it very well might seem that way since I do talk about expanding big bang arenas that are necessary to account for the observed local expansion. On a grand scale, I think of an infinite universe where both expansion and contraction occur here and there as big bangs occur and big crunches form.

OK what's next..you have basically laid out cosmology as it must be..you need something else...my favorite is a theory of everything...how everything works..I mean I know but I won't say a thing as that is like spoiling the ending of a book.


You can't ask it but how does gravity work at a mechanical level...I think that is the big one...how does the "message" of gravity work?


How does the force of attraction work...my question is..is there really such a force?


Anyways you may need a new project.


Keep safe and no slacking ok.


Alex

Thanks Alex, but my speculations on the cause of gravity are described in my musings about gravitational waves and wave energy mechanics. I believe there is a gravitational force that features gravitational wave energy density, where wave energy is both emitted and absorbed by objects with mass. But let’s not get too enthused about my model, since it is speculation and conjecture at best; a form of entertainment for my retirement years, lol.

 

[river]

Lol, well then that’s settled.



Being on that mailing list must be what keeps you clued in.




I’m not really an Inflation fan, but it very well might seem that way since I do talk about expanding big bang arenas that are necessary to account for the observed local expansion. On a grand scale, I think of an infinite universe where both expansion and contraction occur here and there as big bangs occur and big crunches form.

Thanks Alex, but my speculations on the cause of gravity are described in my musings about gravitational waves and wave energy mechanics. I believe there is a gravitational force that features gravitational wave energy density, where wave energy is both emitted and absorbed by objects with mass. But let’s not get too enthused about my model, since it is speculation and conjecture at best; a form of entertainment for my retirement years, lol.

Hmm...this " Gravitational Force " moves outward from the source , not inward .

 

[paddoboy]

I’m not really an Inflation fan, but it very well might seem that way since I do talk about expanding big bang arenas that are necessary to account for the observed local expansion.

Inflation theory was certainly a fudge factor raised to explain a couple of nagging anomalies with the standard BB model.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...-cosmic-inflation-been-verified/#67c0a1a1d07c
But so to was DM a fudge factor, and now we do have evidence that it is indeed a valid component of present day cosmology.

Just one other thing....the observed expansion is definitely not a local observation. It is an observed fact taking place over the largest universal stage. Local regions, like our own local group of galaxies, are "decoupled" from the overall expansion rate by gravitational effects.

But let’s not get too enthused about my model, since it is speculation and conjecture at best; a form of entertainment for my retirement years, lol.

And quite commendable is that, and a shame that others [river] would rather delude themselves into believing that their own hypothetical modeling is real, despite have no observational and/or experimental evidence to support their nonsense.

Thinking is great, but any thinking must be supported by observational and experimental evidence, to be of any value at all.

 

[quantum_wave]

...

Thinking is great, but any thinking must be supported by observational and experimental evidence, to be of any value at all.

I tend to agree, except that we have entered the Alternative Theories section of the forum, and though the rules of science must always apply, you must admit that there are places where the "as yet unknown" still challenges the best observational and experimental evidence. Hypothesis, speculation, and conjecture are tools out here, and the ISU model does not balk at the lack of proofs, but thrives on the fact that science often begins out here and builds support over time.

 

[paddoboy]

I tend to agree, except that we have entered the Alternative Theories section of the forum, and though the rules of science must always apply, you must admit that there are places where the "as yet unknown" still challenges the best observational and experimental evidence. Hypothesis, speculation, and conjecture are tools out here, and the ISU model does not balk at the lack of proofs, but thrives on the fact that science often begins out here and builds support over time.

Agreed, but that is what science is doing all the time...that is actually the scientific methodology. Hypothesis, research, experiment and/or observe, repeat, and then conclude.
The inane problem here, is that we have those that hypothesis, and shout Eureka!, automatically concluding that their wild "thoughts/ideas" are valid, without any concern for the intermediate steps. We all know who that applies to, don't we river?

 

[quantum_wave]

Agreed, but that is what science is doing all the time...that is actually the scientific methodology. Hypothesis, research, experiment and/or observe, repeat, and then conclude.
The inane problem here, is that we have those that hypothesis, and shout Eureka!, automatically concluding that their wild "thoughts/ideas" are valid, ...

I haven't seen the content that you are describing as problematic but if it is posted in the right sub-forum, ... hey, that is what "alternative theories" is often about. I'll have to see a link to the post and judge for myself.

This thread has content that is more border line than some because I do try to go into the as yet unknown, in a reasonable and responsible way. I value comments from all, and like to read about different ways of thinking about the possibilities. Take for example the topic of the "beginning". If at first there was nothing, nothing could ever be; but just look around at the many fine things as far as the eye can see. I conclude that there was never nothing , i.e., an infinite past. Not sure how to express that in a way that is compatible with the scientific method

Thread has 5726 views when posted

 

[paddoboy]

I conclude that there was never nothing , i.e., an infinite past. Not sure how to express that in a way that is compatible with the scientific method

Thread has 5726 views when posted

And that "nothing" could very well be quantum foam from whence the BB arose. Just surmising.

 

[paddoboy]

I haven't seen the content that you are describing as problematic but if it is posted in the right sub-forum, ... hey, that is what "alternative theories" is often about.

I'm not really interested in any hypothetical nonsense, people want to drag out of their arse...even in the alternative section. But when they automatically contrive to claim that some totally unsupported nonsense is fact, [without any observational or experimental evidence] well then, that just aint the scientific methodology, and deserved all the rebuttal one can muster. I'm not particularly inferring any hypothetical of yours either.

 

[quantum_wave]

I came across this while looking at recent finds ...

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddar...discover-a-world-orbiting-a-unique-young-star

This is just the tip of the iceberg. I like to think about what we are going to find there and beyond.

5986,5993,

 

[quantum_wave]

Just a note, the ISU model is a layman's logical take on the nature of the universe. How sound is the logic of it? No meaningful opposing arguments have been brought to my attention, as if that was indicative of anything .

6771