So, given this 'unfortunate' crisis of imagination...ie, your thought universe, no one should blame the non physicists for indulging in the idea of a God....to fill the vacuum of uncertainty. I could be wrong.
On Aug 14, 2011 4:43 PM, "sadovnik socratus" <is.socra...@gmail.com> wrote: > Does an Absolute Infinite Frame of Reference exist? > Hmm? > 1. > The detected material mass of the matter in the Universe > ( the cosmological constant / the critical density of Uuniverse) > is so small (the average density of all substance in the > Universe is approximately p=10^-30 g/sm^3 ) that it cannot > ‘close’ the Universe into sphere and therefore our Universe > as whole must be ‘open’, endless > 2. > The Universe as whole is Empty. > But the Emptiness isn’t emptiness because it is filled with > dark matter and dark energy : ‘ 90% or more of the matter > in the Universe is unseen / dark.’ > 3. > Now (!) the physicists think that the Universe as whole > the Absolute Frame of Reference of the Universe is: T=2,7K . > ( Nobel Prize in Physics 1978 for discovery > of cosmic microwave background radiation). (!) > It means the Universe as whole has negative parameter, > it is negative temperature, it is Kingdom of Coldness. > Only Minkowski spacetime continuum has negative parameter. > Therefore I say the Minkowski spacetime continuum is model of Vacuum. > The parameter T=2,7K is not constant. It is temporal. > In the future ( in the Future- ? ?) it will come to T=0K. > 4. > What is a vacuum ? > The empty space between stars ( Galaxies ) > Is this space really empty? > . . . . . > Although we are used to thinking of empty space as containing > nothing at all, and therefore having zero energy, the quantum > rules say that there is some uncertainty about this. Perhaps each > tiny bit of the vacuum actually contains rather a lot of energy. > If the vacuum contained enough energy, it could convert this > into particles, in line with E-Mc^2. > / Book: Stephen Hawking. Pages 147-148. > 5. > According to QED Electron in interaction with vacuum has > infinity parameters ( energy, mass …etc ) > Physicists do not understand what to do with infinite sizes, > and therefore they have invented "a method of renormalization", > The method of renormalization is a method > " to sweep the dust under the carpet." / Feynman./ > 6. > The concept of infinite/ eternal means nothing > to a scientists. They do not understand how they could > draw any real, concrete conclusions from this characteristic. > A notions of "more", "less", "equally, "similar" could not > be conformed to a word infinity or eternity. > The Infinity / Eternity is something, that has no borders, > has no discontinuity; it could not be compared to anything. > Considering so, scientists came to conclusion that the > infinity /eternity defies to a physical and mathematical definition > and cannot be considered in real processes. > Therefore they have proclaimed the strict requirement > (on a level of censor of the law): > « If we want that the theory would be correct, > the infinity/eternity should be eliminated ». > Thus they direct all their mathematical abilities, > all intellectual energy to the elimination of infinity. > But effect of infinity comes again and again and then > physicists say: that’ Infinity is the cause of the crisis in Physics.’ > Another example of physicist’s thinking: > ’ If there’s nothing wrong with me then, > maybe there’s something wrong with the Universe.’ > / One PhD physicist ./ > # > Does an Absolute Infinite Frame of Reference exist? > I say: this unthinkable Absolute Infinite Frame of Reference > has two physical parameters. > First: T= 0K, > Second: E= 0 (the lowest state of cosmic background energy). > ===. > Hmm? > What to do with this Infinite Absolute Emptiness ? > # > " Remember gentlemen, we have not proven > the aether does not exist, we have only proven we do not > need it (for mathematical purposes)".. > / Einstein's famous University of Leyden lecture of May 5, 1920./ > !!?? > So ! What to do with this Infinite Absolute Emptiness ? > ==========. > Best wishes. > Israel Sadovnik. Socratus. > ========================.. > P.S. > Infinite, unbounded, endless, never-ending ,unending, > perpetual, interminable, eternal, dateless, spaceless, > borderless . . . > - What do you read, Prince ? > - Words, words, words. > # > It is no matter how you call it. > The matter is: > How can Infinity be concrete? > ===========. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. > To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
