Comments for Chris Lintott's Universe http://chrislintott.net The Universe as seen from the perspective of an astronomical researcher, presenter and writer. Thu, 08 Jul 2010 19:50:01 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 Comment on The man who beat Galileo by simon rose http://chrislintott.net/2009/01/14/the-man-who-beat-galileo/comment-page-1/#comment-103617 simon rose Thu, 08 Jul 2010 19:50:01 +0000 http://chrislintott.net/?p=582#comment-103617 this is the link to the experiment news http://www.physorg.com/news197743021.html this is the link to the experiment news http://www.physorg.com/news197743021.html

]]> Comment on The man who beat Galileo by simon rose http://chrislintott.net/2009/01/14/the-man-who-beat-galileo/comment-page-1/#comment-103616 simon rose Thu, 08 Jul 2010 19:48:58 +0000 http://chrislintott.net/?p=582#comment-103616 Hi Chris, Firstly for some reason this years season of sky at night was almost completely missed, my fault entirely, i wish the bbc would put the full 30 mins on a sun morning/afternoon instead of a snippet, its bad enough waiting a month per episode! especially when there is all too much "fame hog" tv these days (i sound positively geriatric but assure you im under 33!) A note on Jupiter's mysterious turbulent atmosphere, i have always been fascinated by it, its beauty and almost feverish scale and ferocity, i have had a theory for a while that the different rates and direction of spin, the eye are attributed to varying temperatures and density within the fluid of the atmosphere, like cold cream in hot coffee! low and behold someone has created an experiment to ask why cream and coffee behave this way at a university in bath and Connecticut, they dont refer to possible astronomical parallels, but it made me smile to see that an experiment can look awfully similar and pertinent to other fields of study. what do you think Hi Chris,
Firstly for some reason this years season of sky at night was almost completely missed, my fault entirely, i wish the bbc would put the full 30 mins on a sun morning/afternoon instead of a snippet, its bad enough waiting a month per episode! especially when there is all too much “fame hog” tv these days (i sound positively geriatric but assure you im under 33!)

A note on Jupiter’s mysterious turbulent atmosphere, i have always been fascinated by it, its beauty and almost feverish scale and ferocity, i have had a theory for a while that the different rates and direction of spin, the eye are attributed to varying temperatures and density within the fluid of the atmosphere, like cold cream in hot coffee! low and behold someone has created an experiment to ask why cream and coffee behave this way at a university in bath and Connecticut, they dont refer to possible astronomical parallels, but it made me smile to see that an experiment can look awfully similar and pertinent to other fields of study.
what do you think

]]> Comment on A time before the Big Bang? by Bjorn Saw http://chrislintott.net/2008/06/06/a-time-before-the-big-bang/comment-page-1/#comment-103395 Bjorn Saw Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:28:22 +0000 http://chrislintott.net/2008/06/06/a-time-before-the-big-bang/#comment-103395 Sorry, in the above I meant "the slowness of light", not time. Sorry, in the above I meant “the slowness of light”, not time.

]]> Comment on A time before the Big Bang? by Bjorn Saw http://chrislintott.net/2008/06/06/a-time-before-the-big-bang/comment-page-1/#comment-103394 Bjorn Saw Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:26:30 +0000 http://chrislintott.net/2008/06/06/a-time-before-the-big-bang/#comment-103394 Motion of time. Is is correct to understand time as the ongoing expansion of space since it first emerged at the Big Bang. Is it correct to see the expansion of spacetime as co-emerging with the release of light at the time when the universe became transparent? Does light (the speed of which) determines the rate of expansion of spacetime? It seems to me that light and spacetime is closely determined by eachother, or even co-dependent on each other? Or could even be considered to be of one unit; the emergence of light = spacetime? Another great interest of mine lies in the phenomenon that the expansion of spacetime emerges from each and every point in space continuously at every instance; now, now and now. Is this a correct view to hold? Based on Buddhist scriptures the Buddha spoke of instantaneous arising of this event, happening in an unbelievable speed. I myself have had a glimpse through a spiritual experience of this enormous velocity. I call it real time; the time spacetime emerges anew in each instance. We never get to experience this real speed of the universe as we are used to regular intervals of the sun and moon. But sometimes, through extraordinary deeper insights we may have glimpses of the real state of affairs. I have had a vision of reaching back till the very origin of the Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago. This made it clear to me what is meant by deep time, just as astronomers are beholding the origin of the universe by looking into space. As layers upon layers, new spacetime is continuously overlaying and replacing "old" spacetime, making the universe we see today completly a new universe compared to yesterdays. So the slowness of time being the only way to be able to see things of the past. In Buddhist scriptures it's also spoken about the co-extensive emergence of the void with emptiness. This I can relate to the link between the co-emergence of spacetime with the expansion of light. What do you think? And once all light is gone in the end of the universe era there can not be said that spacetime still exist; they are co-dependant. Sincerely, Bjorn Saw London, UK Motion of time. Is is correct to understand time as the ongoing expansion of space since it first emerged at the Big Bang. Is it correct to see the expansion of spacetime as co-emerging with the release of light at the time when the universe became transparent? Does light (the speed of which) determines the rate of expansion of spacetime? It seems to me that light and spacetime is closely determined by eachother, or even co-dependent on each other? Or could even be considered to be of one unit; the emergence of light = spacetime?

Another great interest of mine lies in the phenomenon that the expansion of spacetime emerges from each and every point in space continuously at every instance; now, now and now. Is this a correct view to hold?

Based on Buddhist scriptures the Buddha spoke of instantaneous arising of this event, happening in an unbelievable speed. I myself have had a glimpse through a spiritual experience of this enormous velocity. I call it real time; the time spacetime emerges anew in each instance. We never get to experience this real speed of the universe as we are used to regular intervals of the sun and moon. But sometimes, through extraordinary deeper insights we may have glimpses of the real state of affairs. I have had a vision of reaching back till the very origin of the Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago. This made it clear to me what is meant by deep time, just as astronomers are beholding the origin of the universe by looking into space. As layers upon layers, new spacetime is continuously overlaying and replacing “old” spacetime, making the universe we see today completly a new universe compared to yesterdays. So the slowness of time being the only way to be able to see things of the past.
In Buddhist scriptures it’s also spoken about the co-extensive emergence of the void with emptiness. This I can relate to the link between the co-emergence of spacetime with the expansion of light. What do you think?
And once all light is gone in the end of the universe era there can not be said that spacetime still exist; they are co-dependant.

Sincerely,
Bjorn Saw
London, UK

]]> Comment on Dark is the new black by Bjorn Saw http://chrislintott.net/2008/09/28/dark-is-the-new-black/comment-page-1/#comment-103389 Bjorn Saw Mon, 21 Dec 2009 17:14:49 +0000 http://chrislintott.net/?p=485#comment-103389 Dear Colin, Sounds good! I do not have the academic background to understand exactly what you mean but it resonates with my own understanding. Singularity especially. Are you speaking about what propels the universe's expansion, and/or of the force that will make dark energy obsolete? I enjoy the theory of the singularity that is located in all and every point in space, and as such being the "place" in which a black hole collapses, and at the same time being that place of origin where from the Big Bang emerged 13.7 billion years ago. Together with the understanding of the ever continuous emergence of spacetime from that very source, as layers upon layers in breathtaking velocity. Light being the expression and the creation and the vehicle of spacetime, that propels the expansion of the universe. Dear Colin,

Sounds good! I do not have the academic background to understand exactly what you mean but it resonates with my own understanding. Singularity especially. Are you speaking about what propels the universe’s expansion, and/or of the force that will make dark energy obsolete?
I enjoy the theory of the singularity that is located in all and every point in space, and as such being the “place” in which a black hole collapses, and at the same time being that place of origin where from the Big Bang emerged 13.7 billion years ago. Together with the understanding of the ever continuous emergence of spacetime from that very source, as layers upon layers in breathtaking velocity. Light being the expression and the creation and the vehicle of spacetime, that propels the expansion of the universe.

]]> Comment on A new look by Mark Garth http://chrislintott.net/2009/12/08/a-new-look/comment-page-1/#comment-103381 Mark Garth Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:09:13 +0000 http://chrislintott.net/?p=630#comment-103381 Glad you've come back. Glad you’ve come back.

]]> Comment on A new look by Hanny http://chrislintott.net/2009/12/08/a-new-look/comment-page-1/#comment-103364 Hanny Thu, 10 Dec 2009 21:41:13 +0000 http://chrislintott.net/?p=630#comment-103364 Good you're back here Chris! ;) Good you’re back here Chris! ;)

]]> Comment on A new look by Ryan http://chrislintott.net/2009/12/08/a-new-look/comment-page-1/#comment-103363 Ryan Thu, 10 Dec 2009 06:01:27 +0000 http://chrislintott.net/?p=630#comment-103363 Looks good, now I want to clean up mine. Looks good, now I want to clean up mine.

]]> Comment on Voorwerpen and more : Science in the public eye 2 by Michael Nielsen » Biweekly links for 10/23/2009 http://chrislintott.net/2008/08/08/voorwerpen-and-more-science-in-the-public-eye-2/comment-page-1/#comment-102851 Michael Nielsen » Biweekly links for 10/23/2009 Fri, 23 Oct 2009 10:53:16 +0000 http://chrislintott.net/2008/08/08/voorwerpen-and-more-science-in-the-public-eye-2/#comment-102851 [...] Chris Lintott’s Universe » Voorwerpen and more : Science in the public eye 2 [...] [...] Chris Lintott’s Universe » Voorwerpen and more : Science in the public eye 2 [...]

]]> Comment on Dark is the new black by Colin Slater http://chrislintott.net/2008/09/28/dark-is-the-new-black/comment-page-1/#comment-102713 Colin Slater Thu, 15 Oct 2009 17:25:48 +0000 http://chrislintott.net/?p=485#comment-102713 There is no such thing as dark energy - it is all leverage. If you accept that at some point when a black hole forms and becomes a singularity the laws of space and time become meaningless then if you have a supermassive black hole one side of the universe and over the other side you have another then at some point in the collapse on each one the laws will break down. This means the conditions become identical and with space and time out of the picture the two points snap together. Therefore you can have any number of black holes but one and only one singularity. From the above everything else falls in to place. Dark energy is replaced by leverage - the side of the supermassive black hole, immediately above the singularity point, closest to the next one will collapse (and be compressed) through the point fractionally earlier than the opposite side (which will be stretched). Thus the black holes will move away from each other taking their galaxies with them. The driving force being the matter falling in to the (one and only singularity). If you accept the single singularity then it must lie at the centre of the universe. As the supermassive black holes snap to the singularity then the matter pouring in has to pass through all that lies between although because space is no longer meaningful there is no distance at all. Therefore the singularity occupies a point at the centre of the universe at the same time as occupying all points between. Spread the mass of the singularity across the universe and you have a week force somewhat like gravity. There is more but I don't know how much this post will take before it collapses into a black hole of its own! There is no such thing as dark energy – it is all leverage. If you accept that at some point when a black hole forms and becomes a singularity the laws of space and time become meaningless then if you have a supermassive black hole one side of the universe and over the other side you have another then at some point in the collapse on each one the laws will break down. This means the conditions become identical and with space and time out of the picture the two points snap together. Therefore you can have any number of black holes but one and only one singularity.
From the above everything else falls in to place. Dark energy is replaced by leverage – the side of the supermassive black hole, immediately above the singularity point, closest to the next one will collapse (and be compressed) through the point fractionally earlier than the opposite side (which will be stretched). Thus the black holes will move away from each other taking their galaxies with them. The driving force being the matter falling in to the (one and only singularity). If you accept the single singularity then it must lie at the centre of the universe. As the supermassive black holes snap to the singularity then the matter pouring in has to pass through all that lies between although because space is no longer meaningful there is no distance at all. Therefore the singularity occupies a point at the centre of the universe at the same time as occupying all points between. Spread the mass of the singularity across the universe and you have a week force somewhat like gravity. There is more but I don’t know how much this post will take before it collapses into a black hole of its own!

]]>