Quantum Wave Cosmology updates 2009

Here is a free one Guest254.

Describe the motion of the galaxies in the overlap space. Please post your ideas about that motion when the expansion momentum is interrupted by the convergence of galaxies.
 
Do you think people can't read this exchange? I guess it's enough that you've demonstrated you can't answer the question.
 
Guest254 said:
Do you think people can't read this exchange? I guess it's enough that you've demonstrated you can't answer the question.
Click to expand...
No, don't give up. I can read just like the other members can read.

I gave you a free one so let me follow up: I asked you ,"Describe the motion of the galaxies in the overlap space. Please post your ideas about that motion when the expansion momentum is interrupted by the convergence of galaxies."

Didn't you see that? Is that where the pixie dust creeps in? No?

My thinking is that if there were two similar expanding arenas and they overlap so that their galaxies converge in the overlap space, then the interruption would cause whole galaxies to pass through each other, gravity would cause mixing and merging (words in the QWC lexicon), and the galaxies, millions maybe billions of them would swirl into a huge accretion disk around a new center of gravity. Do you see it that way too?
 
Guest254 said:
If you can't answer, that's fine.
Click to expand...
Are you talking to me? I'm not sure because you didn't quote me but I will answer.

In my last post I asked you if the pixie dust had crept into my list of speculations yet. It hasn't or you would have said so.

Where we left off was that there was a huge accretion disk forming in the overlap space caused by the two expanding arenas.

Can you figure out what the result will be when billions of converging galaxies swirl into the center of gravity of the overlap space? That is an actual question to you.
 
quantum_wave said:
BTW, your regular schedule of responding to my thread keeps the ideas in the forefront. I remember now that quest254 did mention that he was OK with the idea that a big crunch preceded the big bang type of event. AN, do you agree too or want to dispute that idea? Feel free, but I am thinking that you must have seen the pixie dust creep in with the next idea.
Click to expand...
I don't deny the possibility but just because you've incorporated someone else's idea into your wafflings doesn't make your 'work' science. Other people's work coherent ties together by rigorous derivations, you just tick together things, some from this work, some from that, and hope people think you're worth listening to.

Obviously you can see that I am not talking about space expanding or contracting, space has always existed and is potentially infinite in my book. The expansion is the galaxies all moving away from each other, except in small local groups. The galaxies are separating in a co-moving coordinate system. That means that as time passes, the distance between galaxies increases everywhere across the entire arena.

Agree or disagree? Let’s discuss.
Click to expand...
Still don't get it, do you? Just because Theory A says X and theory B says Y doesn't mean just because "QWC says X and Y" doesn't mean it's up there with theories A and B. You haven't shown X and Y are related in a coherent manner within your 'work'. You have no reason/justification for claiming either X or Y are adequately explained by your work.

I gave you a free one so let me follow up: I asked you ,"Describe the motion of the galaxies in the overlap space. Please post your ideas about that motion when the expansion momentum is interrupted by the convergence of galaxies."
Click to expand...
We can describe space-time from a GR point of view but you have no manner of deriving rigorous descriptions of your QWC's dynamics.

If you can't show how your initial assumptions lead to such things as 'comoving coordinates' why should we believe QWC involves comoving coordinates. Newtonian mechanics doesn't, GR does. How can we find if QWC can? We can't. It lacks any structure, you just make up bits of it whenver you find a particular phenomena is talked about in actual science.

Derive the existence of comoving coordinates in your work, show how it relates to the Hubble constant and then how it matches observation. Co moving coordinates arise in GR via the FRW metric, which is derived by solving the Einstein Field Equations under certain physical assumptions. Let's see QWC's version of that.
 
To be honest AlphaNumeric, I think this guy is beyond help. He clearly doesn't understand the points we've tried to make.
 
AlphaNumeric said:
I don't deny the possibility but just because you've incorporated someone else's idea into your wafflings doesn't make your 'work' science. Other people's work coherent ties together by rigorous derivations, you just tick together things, some from this work, some from that, and hope people think you're worth listening to.

Still don't get it, do you? Just because Theory A says X and theory B says Y doesn't mean just because "QWC says X and Y" doesn't mean it's up there with theories A and B. You haven't shown X and Y are related in a coherent manner within your 'work'. You have no reason/justification for claiming either X or Y are adequately explained by your work.

We can describe space-time from a GR point of view but you have no manner of deriving rigorous descriptions of your QWC's dynamics.

If you can't show how your initial assumptions lead to such things as 'comoving coordinates' why should we believe QWC involves comoving coordinates. Newtonian mechanics doesn't, GR does. How can we find if QWC can? We can't. It lacks any structure, you just make up bits of it whenver you find a particular phenomena is talked about in actual science.

Derive the existence of comoving coordinates in your work, show how it relates to the Hubble constant and then how it matches observation. Co moving coordinates arise in GR via the FRW metric, which is derived by solving the Einstein Field Equations under certain physical assumptions. Let's see QWC's version of that.
Click to expand...
I guess I can reply to that since it is missing the ad homs. I'm sure they will be back but for now, OK.

I'm not doing rocket science.
 
And yet here we are, publishing work in scientific journals and employed by academic departments. And here you are, on an internet forum....
 
Guest254 said:
And yet here we are, publishing work in scientific journals and employed by academic departments. And here you are, on an internet forum....
Click to expand...
So which of us is OK in our own skin? And it seems to me you are paying a lot of attention to me.
 
Guest254 said:
Not at all!
Click to expand...
Ooooh ... sorry.

Where we left off was that there was a huge accretion disk forming in the overlap space caused by the two expanding arenas.

I asked, "Can you figure out what the result will be when billions of converging galaxies swirl into the center of gravity of the overlap space?"

You can say it. It is right there. I know you can see it ....

Can you say "big crunch"?
 
q_w, are you able to show there's a comoving coordinate system in QWC? If not, can you explain why we should believe there is?
 
AlphaNumeric said:
q_w, are you able to show there's a comoving coordinate system in QWC? If not, can you explain why we should believe there is?
Click to expand...
Who said you should believe it? I said I am interested in discussing the cause of the initial expansion of our observable universe.

I said I had some ideas based on several years of brainstorming, input, discussions, web browsing, etc. and had decided on the big crunch as my opinion of the best alternative.

I said that I was presenting the ideas by starting from the bottom up. That means that I am not using existing theory accept as it falls in place in the bottom up process. We observe expansion to be the motion of galaxies all moving away from each other. I accept that motion as being physical separation of galaxies as if in a co-moving coordinate system.

I didn't say you had to believe it.

My steps are reasonable and responsible step by step speculation. I have asked the community to look at them and discuss them and any alternatives they may have to them.
 
quantum_wave said:
Ooh? Why are you helping me then?
Click to expand...
Obviously I wasn't clear enough. I'm not prepared to help you. I've tried to help you realise what a joke your work is, but you're not prepared to listen.

Seriously, this is whole "QWC" thing is an utter joke. Sort your life out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top