Starship Asterisk*

As a direct consequence of inflation, the Universe appears to be the same in all directions (isotropic) and the cosmic microwave background radiation is distributed evenly wikipedia

geckzilla wrote:Wouldn't it be fun to work at that facility for a month or two, even just to say you did it? Do they have any janitorial positions open? I could qualify for that.

ritwik wrote:

As a direct consequence of inflation, the Universe appears to be the same in all directions (isotropic) and the cosmic microwave background radiation is distributed evenly wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)
anyone care to explain why this exist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huge-LQG

Boomer12k wrote:I looked up Gravitational Waves....but they lost me at the math section. And had been thinking about them for years now, and thinking about Gravity since September of 2007. It took me 9 months to get my head around..."Mass does not attract Mass".

Personally, I have a problem with Gravity Waves...or Gravity Radiation...

If the waves exist....as they are predicted, and this shows they have been detected....then this is not really GRAVITY.....it is SPACE WARPING....it is a SPACE WAVE....a WAVE IN SPACETIME.....not really gravity as SUCH,...as in the sense of Gravity of a Planet. Tossing a rock into a pond...You would not call the Ripple in a pond of water....ROCK RIPPLES.....for example...they are Water Ripples....ripples in the medium.

It is something that is happening to SPACETIME...

geckzilla wrote:
Wouldn't it be fun to work at that facility for a month or two, even just to say you did it?

geckzilla wrote:
One of Pat's coworkers who happens to live within biking distance...the crazy guy biked over yesterday not realizing how cold and windy it was and his hands nearly froze off.

geckzilla wrote:
I somehow ended up reading this article which describes one aspect of how researchers deal with the cold.

He said he does not personally know how that kind of cold feels, but that he knows researchers to expose themselves to it. To be able to breathe without feeling pain, researchers have to breathe through a snorkel that travels through the arm of their coat. This warms the air and ensures the person does not accidentally inhale the cold air.

In other words, you will damage your tissues on the inside simply breathing in such a place and that's not even in the areas which were measured. You probably wouldn't even want a tiny portion of skin exposed to get that feel.

http://www.skyandtelescope.com/news/home/Proof-of-Inflationary-Universe-To-Be-Announced-Monday-250522521.html wrote:

[url=http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap100921.html][size=150]E-modes[/size][/url] [b][color=#0000FF][size=125](left side) look the same when reflected in a mirror.[/size][/color][/b] [url=http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap091011.html][size=150]B-modes[/size][/url] [b][color=#0000FF][size=125](right side) do not.[/color][/b] Image Credit: Nathan Miller[/size]

---

<<The inflationary theory of the Big Bang was worked out some 34 years ago to explain several paradoxes in today's universe. The inflation theory solved these problems, and then it succeeded even more spectacularly in a new way. It proved to explain the intractable mystery of the origin of cosmic structure: how today's galaxies, galaxy clusters, and the overall cosmic web could have formed out of the extremely smooth Big Bang. Today's structures turned out to be explained almost perfectly by inflation rapidly expanding to cosmic size the microscopic, random quantum fluctuations that would be present in the dense matter before the first 10^–34 second.

Notes cosmologist Max Tegmark (MIT), "Parallel universes are not a theory — they're predictions of certain theories." And one of those theories, after Monday, may look a big step closer to being testable science that experimenters can get their hands into.>>

http://www.haroldowilson.com/literary-criticism/entropy-and-the-arrow-of-time.htm wrote:

• Entropy and the Arrow of Time
  In Thomas Mann’s The Magic Mountain
  By Harold O. Wilson
  
  <<[Thomas Mann] has conveniently cut his novel The Magic Mountain
  into slices of space and time for us with his chapter headings:
  
  Arrival, [Hans Castorp’s] Room 34, In the Restaurant, etc.>>

Boomer12k wrote:What is my problem with Gravity Waves, and Gravity Radiation?....Gravity is an "Inward Falling" to a mass body, the body warps the spacetime "lines", toward the mass body. Waves move away from the source....gravity makes things fall towards the source....Radiation moves away from the source. Like light. Gravity makes things fall towards the source....Gravity...does not radiate. Gravity itself is not a outward motion. Gravity does not push...it SUCKS....

ritwik wrote:anyone care to explain why this exist

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huge-LQG

Chris Peterson wrote:

ritwik wrote:anyone care to explain why this exist

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huge-LQG

The linked article essentially answers the question: the scale of isotropy is not well defined. And it is statistical in nature.

ritwik wrote:

Chris Peterson wrote:

ritwik wrote:anyone care to explain why this exist

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huge-LQG

The linked article essentially answers the question: the scale of isotropy is not well defined. And it is statistical in nature.

upper limit for the homogeneity scale in the universe is 260/h Mpc

The Sloan Great Wall, discovered in 2003, has a length of 423Mpc

ritwik wrote:im not agreeing to universe is isotropic/homogenous hypothesis

an expected signal of unexpected strength

Guest wrote:

an expected signal of unexpected strength

What was unexpected about the strength ?

from yesterday's astrobite
http://astrobites.org/2014/03/17/bicep2 ... sor-modes/
...
Inflation takes many forms, but the most plain vanilla version is to have a field or fields (just some amount of energy at every point in space), which might describe particles, losing potential energy and driving exponential expansion. A good analogy is a ball rolling down a hill: as the ball rolls down, it loses height but gains speed. To generate exponential expansion, the ball has to be rolling on a very shallow hill. Otherwise, it would end up at the bottom too quickly and the Universe would fail to inflate enough to solve the problems inflation was proposed to address. Inflationary models where the ball is rolling down a shallow hill are called “slow-roll” inflation.

In slow roll inflation, r has a simple physical interpretation: it measures the slope of the hill the ball is rolling down. The hill is shallow, so the slope is small. That’s why r was expected to be small, and consequently hard to detect.
...
A surprising aspect of the result is that the value of r BICEP2 found is actually above current constraints from other experiments. The Planck mission found that r < 0.11 at 95% confidence, about two BICEP2 error bars below the BICEP2 result.

MargaritaMc wrote:

Guest wrote:

an expected signal of unexpected strength

What was unexpected about the strength ?

from yesterday's astrobite
http://astrobites.org/2014/03/17/bicep2 ... sor-modes/
...
A surprising aspect of the result is that the value of r BICEP2 found is actually above current constraints from other experiments. The Planck mission found that r < 0.11 at 95% confidence, about two BICEP2 error bars below the BICEP2 result.

Boomer12k wrote:I looked up Gravitational Waves....but they lost me at the math section. And had been thinking about them for years now, and thinking about Gravity since September of 2007. It took me 9 months to get my head around..."Mass does not attract Mass".

Personally, I have a problem with Gravity Waves...or Gravity Radiation....But I do see the analogy with FRICTION....Two large steel balls, rolling on a trampoline, close to each other, are going to generate a wave on the fabric of the trampoline. The contact with the fabric will eventually slow them down and they will inward spiral. With Spacetime this would be infinitely less tenuous. And even two such Neutron Stars will probably continue their dance for a great many billions of years. I can see that this is much like the Laws of Thermodynamics. Where the effort is bled off as heat...that is an electromagnetic wave, and an emanating radiation.

What is my problem with Gravity Waves, and Gravity Radiation?....Gravity is an "Inward Falling" to a mass body, the body warps the spacetime "lines", toward the mass body. Waves move away from the source....gravity makes things fall towards the source....Radiation moves away from the source. Like light. Gravity makes things fall towards the source....Gravity...does not radiate. Gravity itself is not a outward motion. Gravity does not push...it SUCKS....

If the waves exist....as they are predicted, and this shows they have been detected....then this is not really GRAVITY.....it is SPACE WARPING....it is a SPACE WAVE....a WAVE IN SPACETIME.....not really gravity as SUCH,...as in the sense of Gravity of a Planet. Tossing a rock into a pond...You would not call the Ripple in a pond of water....ROCK RIPPLES.....for example...they are Water Ripples....ripples in the medium.

It is something that is happening to SPACETIME....not a planet.
"Gravity Radiation" would be a BY PRODUCT...like heat from friction. The energy is changed from kinetic to electromagnetic, and radiated off....Space....should be a shade of a touch....warmer....but that is probably too much to ask to be detected...it is minuscule at best...infinitesimal....just like detecting waves from Neutron Stars thousands of light years away. Inverse Square Law. The waves do not go far....just like a ball on the trampoline...the waves or indentation does not necessarily reach or affect the edges of the trampoline. As with the trampoline, there has to be something that the Gravity Bodies are in contact with....well....we are talking outer space....or at least some in system stellar medium...In the case of black holes, maybe that is the Accretion Disc. Detecting any appreciable addition from an unseen source is going to be difficult.

So, I propose we use a more apt term for this phenomena... Spacetime wave...and maybe Space Radiation...which would be a "dump load"....excess energy bleed off....
Gravity, in this case....my opinion....is a misnomer. Gravity points IN...not out...Space may be warped....but not really produce..."GRAVITY". You could "ride" a curve of spacetime, but not fall toward anything, for example.

If you are close to two spinning Neutron Stars...you will have a tendency to fall into their sphere of influence....regardless of any outward motion by a wave...It may also be so tenuous that you cannot really "Ride The Wave".

The Moon is close to the Earth...this SHOULD be going on, on a very small scale...but The Moon is still pulling away from us at about 1.5 inches a year.

But then this will still, either way, increase our knowledge of the Universe, and that is our Quest...

Just my observation about gravity, and opinion.

:---[===] *