Infinite Space and Time...How?

rush,

I believe an appropriate analogy would be your closet ceases to exist if you remove your clothes from it. I suggest it is your view that is limited.

And I suggest that you might want to withhold your "absolute" position pending conclusion of testing currently underway. It will show that certain things in physics, such as the inverse square gravity function, can not exist in a infinite universe, it can only exist in a finite universe - albeit bigger than we might be able to imagine much less measure but finite none the less.



Mac

rush,

Would you respond please t0 the bigger question regarding the seperation of details of BB or pre-BB vs describing the universe as we experience it?

I still contend these are distinctly different issues. They are going to involve a complete different set of physics as we understand it. UNLESS you can now describe for us the construction of the Chiral Condensate, and how it functions, because there is where I believe we will find most of the answers.

Any debate about the universe at this juncture is far premature, only when and if the condensate can be described and understood (not merely mathematically, but understood in a physical way) will there be any definative answers.





Mac

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Mac:
I believe an appropriate analogy would be your closet ceases to exist if you remove your clothes from it. I suggest it is your view that is limited.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

No. When I take my clothes out of the closest I'm not changing anything fundamentaly. My clothes will still exist, as well as the closet, the air within the closet, etc. Still we have space connected to matter. One can not exist without the other.

Can you show me a piece of space? If you are gonna tell me to look at my "empty" closet I'll tell you that there are energy all over the place in there, as well there are energy outside the closet, inside the wood, etc. Therefore, no space alone.

The only way to have space without matter is drawing a chart on a piece of paper, Mac. You can draw 3 ortogonal axes (don't know how to spell it, because english is not my first language) and then put your "things" in there. But that axes, that "empty space" does not exist in reality.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Mac:
And I suggest that you might want to withhold your "absolute" position pending conclusion of testing currently underway. It will show that certain things in physics, such as the inverse square gravity function, can not exist in a infinite universe, it can only exist in a finite universe - albeit bigger than we might be able to imagine much less measure but finite none the less.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

You can not prove that the Universe is finite just because you can not calculate mathematically some things that goes to zero or infinite. The Universe does not care about what we can calculate or not.

rush,

Don't sweat the english. I'm sure your english is far better than my ability to speak your native tongue - I am not bilingual.

We each have our views. At one point you almost said what I would like you to say but I don't think it was your meaning, so let me expound and explore this area.


**************************
Can you show me a piece of space? If you are gonna tell me to look at my "empty" closet I'll tell you that there are energy all over the place in there, as well there are energy outside the closet, inside the wood, etc. Therefore, no space alone.
**************************

First of all I anticipated that you would assume the closet was just a limited analogy. Certainly it is full of air and energy. Certainly its walls contain matter and energy. Nor does the universe have WALLS as a boundry. For then the question of what is outside the walls would be a valid question.

So lets try to go beyond an analogy and talk about the universe itself. I agree whole heartedly that space is not void. It is full of energy. It is called the "Chiral Condensate". Are you familiar with that research?

Since at this juncture I am unaware of anyone claiming to understand the Condensate, only conjecture about its makeup and function can be made.

We only know that it does exist and it is more awesome than can be imagined at this point. I have seen one study that predicts that the energy per cubic cm of "Void - Vacuum" of space converts by m = E/c^2 to more than all the mass in the currently known universe.

And yet we can't touch it or feel it but by energy density it simply must be super-solid.

My view currently is that it is pre-BB material. That the BB was a rip in the fabric of that dimension that allowed a horrendous release of energy (some of which condensed into matter) that forms our universe.

In this view the (3) spatial dimensions themselves are nothing more that Chiral Condensate energy pouring into this new 3D bubble that was and is being created.

Space without dimension doesn't exist in our universe. Time doesn't exist without flow of energy and the Chiral Condensate may be, and in my current view is, "Static" and without time.

Where our universe reaches to the point that there is no more energy or spatial dimension is a finite boundry beyond which nothing (and that does not imply a void with dimension or time)exists or can exist.

Again you are not looking at an egg with a shell. That requires a boundry wall for which requires space beyond the boundry. But more a finite boundry beyond which there is no space.

I understand that MM contends the universe is "Infinite" but I think magoo has a very sound argument against that position. I understand that MM says the universe is not expanding but for me at least the expansion of the universe is indicated and is represented by a form of conversion of whatever the Chiral Condensate is into our form of existance which is 3D. The flow of that conversion energy produces the "illusion" of time flow and gravity.

Right or wrong this view doesnot create the pitfalls and FLAWS (False Logic About WaveS) that are prevelant in Relativity.


Mac

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
The observational evidence is simply all the evidences of general "principles of physics", all things physical are finite, the finite cannot become infinite. Infinity only exists in mathematical models.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Here again pure assertion, you declare infinity can only exist in mathematical models because you say so, even though you allowed energy to be infinite. Your observational evidence is apparently the standard model which we will have to agree to disagree on.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Now, I must ask you...In your opinion, is space physical or non-physical?
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

I don't know. What is the dividing line between physical and non-physical? Is air non-physical because I can't see it and barely feel it? Mac suggested it might be an incredibly dense solid. If it is continuous substance then I suggest it would constitute an infinite solid which you say can't exist. Geometric space is non-physical but is based on and intimately related to reality.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Think about it Jeremy, there are too many facts that show physical things cannot be infinite.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Just gave you an example of what might be an infinite physical thing...space. And if there are too many facts then contribute more than zero of those facts.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
It is said that Einstein started getting away from mathematics in his final days, perhaps it was because he realized the maths could cause problems.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

At heart Einstein was a classical physicist. He became unsettled with modern theory because it was growing ever more non-intuitive and senseless. He would probably gag at a lot of what is going on right now.