"Observations always involve theory."Edwin Hubble
Hopefully some day, I will be accepted as a student of this universe, and it's intrigue?
Sometimes it is necessary to understand that having come to different consclusion about the geometry of this universe that underneath the complexity of these equations a schematic drawing of reality is unfolding? I think this is where Einstein's success came from? So assume from this point a supersymmetrical view of the universe?
You can check out
Wayne Hu's site for further info on computer simulation below
A simulation of large-scale structure
formationAs the Universe expands, galaxies become more and more distant from each other. For an observer, such as ourselves, it appears that all other galaxies fly away from us. The further the galaxy, the faster it appears to recede. This recession affects the light emitted by the distant galaxies, stretching the wavelengths of emitted photons due to the Doppler redshift effect. The distance between galaxies is proportionalto the measure of this effect 1+z, where z is what astronomers call redshift. The redshift can be measured for each object if its spectrum is measured.
All three geometrical positions demonstrated below each held the cosmologists to views of our universe. But we now know that Einstein may have been right. What allows us to think this way?
Sorry about the quality of artistic rendition. But you get the jest right?
Why is the universe speeding up, and what does this mean geometrically? There has to be some physics going on that would explain this? What may this be?
Current evidence shows that neutrinos do oscillate, which indicates that neutrinos do have mass. The Los Alamos data revealed a muon anti-neutrino cross over to an electron neutrino. This type of oscillation is difficult to explain using only the three known types of neutrinos. Therefore, there might be a fourth neutrino, which is currently being called a "sterile" neutrino, which interacts more weakly than the other three neutrinos.
Of course this information is based on 2003 data but the jest of the idea here is that in order to go to a "
fast forward" the conditions had to exist previously that did not included "sterile neutrinos" and were a result of this "cross over."
If we look back to the measures of supernova Ia measure and find that in that time measure there were differences in the inflationary aspect of that universe, then, the universe today would have allowed us to consider the universe quite capable of changing it's speed of inflation.
While indeed we had held to inverse square law in our assumptions, what shall we do now? As you know, spending a couple of years on my own, I am learning, and yes, it shows sometimes. The "idea back then" presented by Savas Dimopoulos of Stanford University. "This gives us a totally new perspective for addressing theoretical and experimental problems," is what was understood in any theoretical development by scientists then and today?
Inverse Fourth Power Law
Savas Dimopoulos of Stanford UniversityInstead of the Newtonian inverse square law you’ll have an inverse fourth power law. This signature is being looked for in the ongoing experiments.
Also, I wouldn't one to think that the experimental process had been defunct what we are doing with Cosmic ray collision processes, to not include it with what the LHC is doing as well. Not only have we created the conditions for it in LHC we recognize as a natural process.
While we know of the components of our universe distributed we understand that their is a part of this whole thing that is casing some questions about what we had thought held to the big bomb's inverse square law rules.
What is causing the Speed increase?While indeed the layman here speculates, it made more sense if we can now explain what is going on. It has been a long journey in terms of comprehension development but I must say it has been rewarding.
So while indeed I show cosmos particle showers here, it is to point out something that helps to fuel the idea behind the speeding up and slowing down of the universe? Cross over production demonstrate in LHC serves also to speak to the fluctuations in "differing speeds of inflation" in our cosmos?
The "crossover" is a point in the collision process of LHC. So by creating these conditions in the LHC, we have effectively recognized where the "new physics" will emerged from. Also, it presents the opportunity for the "first time here" to address what the effects of the LHC will do for us in terms of what has been presented in terms of the dark energy announced below.
So as close as we came to discerning the mass of the neutrino, what have we now come to know? That their could be "a form" of dark matter? The "point here" was to look for the crossover that was taking place and presenting the opportunities for "new physics" to emerge.
The Los Alamos data revealed a muon anti-neutrino cross over to an electron neutrino. This type of oscillation is difficult to explain using only the three known types of neutrinos.
I have some "thought bubbles" percolating to the surface awareness of my mind(a philosopher?), so we will have to see what strange brew materializes. This is a post in developmental mode.
Scientists using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope have discovered that dark energy is not a new constituent of space, but rather has been present for most of the universe's history. Dark energy is a mysterious repulsive force that causes the universe to expand at an increasing rate. Investigators used Hubble to find that dark energy was already boosting the expansion rate of the universe as long as nine billion years ago. This picture of dark energy is consistent with Albert Einstein's prediction of nearly a century ago that a repulsive form of gravity emanates from empty space. Data from Hubble provides supporting evidence to help astrophysicists to understand the nature of dark energy. This will allow them to begin ruling out some competing explanations that predict that the strength of dark energy changes over time.
The title itself of this blog post is not to make fun of what is happening in cosmology right now with the new announcement today. It is about "forcing the mind" to look at "Friedman's equation" in each of the rings. Now the thought is the "whole show" is the Einstein cosmsological constant circus and entertainment, that is happening simultaneously.
Yet it is the idea of the "oscillating nature" behind the geometrical principals that is what I am speculating about.
But thanks to good professor below there is an more in depth explanation shared.
Maybe with the development of the vision, "beyond the spacetime" we had come to know and love, we have now come to a unique point in time? That we understand the greater "depth of the universe" is now open for questions about it's inherent nature?