What IS space?

[sergey500]

Drosera, Wow, i must be in my "refused to understand" mood. But it sounds to me like it saying that space is nothingness. But i disagree, as i stated in my first post. Space is something, it can not be nothing, nothing just doesn't exist.

[sergey500]

ColdCreation, this is slightly...ok completely, off topic but your previous statement forced me to remember an old chinese quote that goes with a part of your paragraph.

 

"If you believe everything you read, then you shouldn't read."

 

But wait, the universe could be complete, we just don't know that, but it has to be expanding, as galaxies move away from each other they move space furthur. Like i tried to explain, but most likely phrased incorrectly, space, like in ballon, the galaxies, in camperson to atoms could make space grow smaller and larger...so there is an expansion.

 

Now about the big bang. Sounds to me like you don't trust it. Then what was the radiation detected that was led to be suspected from the big bang? Asides for the religious assumption, i can not think of any scientific ones that might lead to creation of universe. But then again...coldcreation theory...

[coldcreation]

ColdCreation, this is slightly...ok completely, off topic but your previous statement forced me to remember an old chinese quote that goes with a part of your paragraph.

 

"If you believe everything you read, then you shouldn't read."

 

But wait, the universe could be complete, we just don't know that, but it has to be expanding, as galaxies move away from each other they move space furthur. Like i tried to explain, but most likely phrased incorrectly, space, like in ballon, the galaxies, in camperson to atoms could make space grow smaller and larger...so there is an expansion.

 

Now about the big bang. Sounds to me like you don't trust it. Then what was the radiation detected that was led to be suspected from the big bang? Asides for the religious assumption, i can not think of any scientific ones that might lead to creation of universe. But then again...coldcreation theory...

 

In my opinion, the universe was not created (sorry Questor).

There's another saying Sergey that goes, 'Believe nothing you read and half of what you see.'

 

The CMB radiation thermal blackbody spectrum is effectively another subject, for another thread, though not entirely unrelated to this thread. It is after all the temperature of space. So it describes more one of the properties of space than what space actually is. The question (for another thread) is how it arrived at that temperature and what is its source. There is no clear consensus on that, as all alternative models predict the CMB, but yes, the standard model has adopted it as one of the pillars of support (as could any theory).

 

Coldcreation

[coldcreation]

OK, Sergy500, Rascal Puff (Turly Yours), Turtle, Infy, EWright, Drosera, etc. If one asks the question, What is not space? The answer has to be, that which fills space: energy, atomic constituents, people, etc (Forget for a moment the space between atomic components). If one were to extract, or remove all that fills space, one would then be left with pure space. So far, so cool? Not so fast. Heat to has to be removed, curvature (gravity), electric charges etc.

 

What then is left? Zero point fluctuation? Remove those too (they are associated with the ZPE anyway, so they likely would have left during the first extraction). What is left now? This is the definition of a classical vacuum state. To be more precise, it is a flat, geometrically Euclidean, hypothetical empty space with no gravitation, no curvature of the manifold. Time flows in the same direction as it does today, from the past to the present, toward the future.

 

The extant temperature of this vacuum state is zero Kelvin (absolute zero): the ultimate limit of 'coldness,' beyond which nothing can be colder even in principle. There is no kinetic energy or motion to heat the environment. This is the definition of a classical vacuum, an ideal state, indeed unattainable, but our point is to show that this state is a natural limit: not in distance or time intervals, but in physical, geometric and topological structure. Because there is nothing more to extract, space can be no flatter, no colder, no darker, we are left with an ultimate 4-D surface.

 

Yes, it is true that both quantum mechanics and GR have permanently altered the classical interpretation of the background vacuum. The real or new concept of the vacuum is based on the somewhat natural idea that space and time are irreducible. The four-dimensional spacetime manifold is the only platform, a stage-set without which there is no theater. And fortunately for people (and all other life forms in the universe), ZPE and ZPF too are irreducible.

 

Coldcreation

[sergey500]

Nice Quote. Well anyways, i have a problem with that idea, removing everything. If everything is removed...then you really do have nothing. Now that was written much simplier than your previous posts, yet i still missed the "point". Do you mean to say, to prove to my question "what IS space?" that when everything is removed, all is left...is time? (4th dimension is time, isn't?). If this was your point, it makes sense i suppose, but i was looking more for physical aspect. Or did i misinterpret you?

[sergey500]

Well thank you, puff, but i must say, that quite a large opinion you gave there... (going to read it now...). Well as for the perfect vacuum part, no there is indeed none, unless you would like to assume that what is outside the universe (if there is an outside) is emptyness, then you really would have a perfect vacuum...where not even time goes, hm, wouldn't this be like the 0 dimension?

 

hm, absolute zero...sounds so familiar. Maybe something i read in "The Fabric of the Cosmos" by Brian Greene or in "Quantum Reality" by Nick Herbert. Regardless it sounds to me, as i am no expert; i can only assume, that to achieve absolute zero, an enviroment of which CC spoke off must be reached. If this is so, i am not suprised that nobody reached absolute zero, as it would seem that absolute zero can only be achieved in the absense of all ... ALL! (matter, energy, everything in space). Since in no labatory situation, or at this time, can we eradicate (sp?) an enviroment of everything...kind of reminds me of anti-matter.

 

So, as i tryed to understand, the purpose of your post was to show that CC answer and hypothsis to my question is an almost impossibilty. Is this correct?

 

Oh, just in case you were too busy to research people on the post (which i did, because i was bored). If you have looked into my profile you would've have noticed that you are 49 years older than me...consequently your years of knowledge overwhelm my own, i hardly comprehend most of the words you use, thus i spend a greater deal translating most word into a dummer meaning than that of which you used. I am impressed at your level of knowledge, but do keep in mind i am no where near as smart as you are. Ergo i ask of you to shorten your vocabulary in which a simplition (i would say "like me" but i don't do not total agree (nice, that rhymed)) can understand, if it helps use analogies, as mental visuals help me in my "learning" process.

[coldcreation]

**********************************

B)

From what may be gleaned from the major lineage of your missive, Mr. CC, you speak of what is defined as 'Absolute Space' (refer: 'Nothing begets nothing' - Hume. 'There is no space empty of field.' - Einstein Aka, an anthropomorphically fabricated condition for which there is no known existential counterpart. The opposite of what is known 'to be ('Ser' - Sp. 'Sera'- Italian - 'Se' - reflexive Latin vereb): Your central dissertation seems to target an non existent bullseye.

The opposite of which is 'Metric', and 'Functional',, and 'non absolute', space. I am open to be gainsayed (Even once, by anyone, condition and/or equation.)

Thank you for your review and excercise in reverent reconsideration of the obvious.

 

- Truly (All reverentially) Yours. (and Co.)

B)

 

Actually, what I wrote was that absolute zero temperature is a fundamental limit just as is empty space is. There are points in space empty of field: L1

 

Coldcreation

[coldcreation]

B)

May it be furthermore considered that Mr. Cc seems to be - generally - alluding to Classical Newtonian Mechanical ('Absolute') Space (accompanied by 'Absolute' Time), as this record accords, from his (TRP's) understanding of Newton's Classical Mechanical definitions and concepts (No contrition unattended?).

Puff

 

Herr Puff,

 

Absolutely not. You are good at writing (though you haven't answered 500's question, what is space). If you were as prolific a reader you'll have noted that your alluding to my alluding to Newtonian space is erroneous. Yes erroneous. I make explicit reference to Einstein space with Minkowski space (or special relativistic space) as a limiting case, i.e., there are points in the field of massive gravitational systems where the field value is equal to zero. See Lagrange points L1 (check out L2 and L3 while your at it). Yes too I go further than Einstein by presenting his cosmological term as a fundamental constant of nature attached to a new universal law of physics (see Coldcreation theory).

 

True, it is obvious you've not yet read my work, but I too am guilty of not having read yours. Maybe someday soon we can converse on another level of equal footing. That may be interesting. As it seems few have reached the level of expertise, personal opinions aside, as we.

 

Until then, stay cool...

 

Coldcreation

[sergey500]

Well seeing how both of you just ignored both of my last messages, I will go my next question, mostly to CC, what the heck is L1, L2, and L3?

[sergey500]

It hasn't been resolved at all. We get different views, which i try to fuse into one.

 

So far I got this; the universe is fulled uniform energy, other then that what holds it all, the fabric of space, this answer has been evaded and basicly i was given that it is "Something" not "nothing", i was well aware of this when i posted my first post, so this leads me nowehere. . Simply put, i was given explanation on what it can't be due to temperture difference and other way contributed before. So i did not exactly get my answer. I got reasons and ideas, but no plausible or understanble answer.

 

I am confused about your views, clearly you tried to state an opinion on hwow this thread is going, but I didn't understand which side your facing, do you like the way this continueing or your annoyed that no furthur knowledge was presented.

[Turtle]

Well thank you, puff, but i must say, that quite a large opinion you gave there...I hardly comprehend most of the words you use, thus i spend a greater deal translating most word into a dummer meaning than that of which you used. I am impressed at your level of knowledge, but do keep in mind i am no where near as smart as you are. Ergo i ask of you to shorten your vocabulary in which a simplition (i would say "like me" but i don't do not total agree (nice, that rhymed)) can understand, if it helps use analogies, as mental visuals help me in my "learning" process.

___Sergey, get a dictionary. I am negrepping you for this post & sending a complaint to the admins. If you continue your rudeness, I'll request the admins consider banning you.

[Qfwfq]

Actually Turtle, he mainly seems to be professing his own igorance, B) but perhaps his intent is a little on the insolent side.B)

 

There have also been complaints about exceeeedingly looooooooong posts. Unfortunately, these days, I am really unable to pay attention in detail but I'm considering closing the thread. If I hear of more trouble I will.

 

Thanks to those who have reported posts lately, and apologies for my inability to pay closer attention.

[EWright]

Actually Turtle, he mainly seems to be professing his own igorance, B) but perhaps his intent is a little on the insolent side.B)

 

There have also been complaints about exceeeedingly looooooooong posts. Unfortunately, these days, I am really unable to pay attention in detail but I'm considering closing the thread. If I hear of more trouble I will.

 

Thanks to those who have reported posts lately, and apologies for my inability to pay closer attention.

 

I must say that I find this response from a moderator to be insulting towards the initial poster. Is it ignorance to inquire in one's quest to seek knowledge? If you want to insult him, perhaps you should do so through a private message, as opposed to such public scrutiny.

[EWright]

___Here's some more public scrutiny before the thread closes Ewright CD27 third ever banned from Hypography Eric Sir.

 

No idea what you're talking about, if and you're going to make assumtions, get to the point.

[infamous]

No idea what you're talking about, if and you're going to make assumtions, get to the point.

I'm politely asking everyone involved in this discussion to please calm down, everyone has the right to their own opinion. If sergey500 chooses to confess his ignorance that is his right, so long as he's not directly pointing the fingure of accusation at others. As one of the moderators of this forum, I'm asking everyone to back off just a little space and allow this discussion to continue in a civil manner.....................Thanking everyone for their continued co-operation.............Infy.

[Qfwfq]

I must say that I find this response from a moderator to be insulting towards the initial poster. Is it ignorance to inquire in one's quest to seek knowledge? If you want to insult him, perhaps you should do so through a private message, as opposed to such public scrutiny.

No EWright, I did not want to insult him.

 

Try to make the distinction. As Infy says, he has the right to profess his ignorance if he so chooses, it isn't an insult if I remark that he was doing so, but I got the impression he meant it as veiled insolence toward the initial poster. This was presumeably what Turtle meant to report.

 

I hope Infy can deal with the situation here.

[sergey500]

___Sergey, get a dictionary. I am negrepping you for this post & sending a complaint to the admins. If you continue your rudeness, I'll request the admins consider banning you.

 

Rudeness? What in the world did i do?