litespeed Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 POSTERs - My novice understanding needs comment. First, the theory of inflation supposes the Universe expanded faster then c for some period of time after BB. This is attributed to a scalar field that fulfilled itself, sort of like a coil spring suddenly achieving its full extenstion. Second, recent studies show the Universe expands at an increasing rate. More importantly, many seem to speculate this acceleration will continue without interruptions until subatomic particles themselves are separated. However, if this increasing acceleration is nothing more then the phenomena created by an additional scalar fireld, or is even the remnants of the inflation scalar field, then I see no reason not to believe it also, will, in turn, stop. Quote
freeztar Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 However, if this increasing acceleration is nothing more then the phenomena created by an additional scalar fireld, or is even the remnants of the inflation scalar field, then I see no reason not to believe it also, will, in turn, stop. Please explain your reasoning (preferably with citations). Quote
litespeed Posted February 21, 2009 Author Report Posted February 21, 2009 FREE You asked me to explain my reasoning with citations. Well. The reason I bring this up is I have seen no citations showing accelerated expansion might be a scalar field. I simply bring skepticism to this subject. Specifically, for more then about 50 years I accepted the idea the universe was expanding at a decreasing rate. The only question seemed whether this slowing was sufficient to reverse to a big crunch. So, all of a sudden, all of physics and all of astronomy simply stated "never mind". Accordingly, you may forgive me in my suspicion this latest certainty might also be less then certain. For instance, can you show a citation that supports this accelerating expansion is certain to continue? Thats alll..... Quote
freeztar Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 You asked me to explain my reasoning with citations.... ...can you show a citation that supports this accelerating expansion is certain to continue?Hmmm... Still waiting on the evidence... Regarding cosmology: nothing is certain! We can only know what we currently know. It seems an obvious point, but one that seems overlooked. I can understand your frustration/shock though. When I was studying this in school, the consensus was 50%. AKAICT, not much has changed in this regard. I wish I had access to the full paper, but perhaps this will help?ScienceDirect - Physics Letters B : Cosmological expansion governed by a scalar field from a 5D vacuum Quote
Tormod Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 The reason I bring this up is I have seen no citations showing accelerated expansion might be a scalar field. But you refer to recent studies on the subject of accelerated expansion. Which ones? It does help the discussion if we could read the same things. So, all of a sudden, all of physics and all of astronomy simply stated "never mind". I highly recommend this book: Amazon.com: The Constants of Nature: The Numbers That Encode the Deepest Secrets of the Universe: John Barrow: Books http://www.amazon.com/Constants-Nature-Numbers-Deepest-Universe/dp/1400032253/ It does explain how the discovery that the accelerated cosmic expansion was discovered - in a natural, nuclear deposit here on Earth. Quote
maddog Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 Still waiting on the evidence...Regarding cosmology: nothing is certain!I know this is somewhat oblique to what litespeed was implying, yet I find it pertinent. Iam reading this book by Roger Penrose, "The Road to Reality". In chapter 28.5, p 753,Penrose states his own reticence towards Alan Guth's Inflationary theory. He is not trashing it outright, yet just admitting that Inflation still rests more on theory than fact. For those who have not read an alternate view (forget the Portuguese physicist), title is"Faster than the speed of light". His view is for a Variable Speed of Light (VST) theoryinstead of Inflation. I recommend both books. You will find Penrose's book a bit tedious if all you want to do discuss is the Big Bang (first discussed in ch 28). maddog Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.