Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JAK Interesting site - I'll keep reading it. |
Yeah, these guys have independently derived one aspect of this theory, and are constantly referenced on my website. Dorion Sagan is Carl's boy...
Eric Schneider, and James Kay, (whom, unfortunately, is deceased), also wrote this paper which is commonly cited from the EvoWiki as a as source of rebuttal for creationsts common abuse of the second law of thermodynamics:
Schneider, Eric D. and James J. Kay. "Life as a manifestation of the second law of thermodynamics." Mathematical and Computer Modelling 19(6: 25-48.
http://www.fes.uwaterloo.ca/u/jjkay/pubs/Life_as/lifeas.pdf
This is a very clear laymans terms article that cuts to the chase, but that of course means that it's open to a lot more criticism, since it's not supported in the article... and it's funny how people will latch onto that, like it's some kind of weak spot or something.
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit.../30/2003204990 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JAK Did I read that right? Are you suggesting that humans can "create" particles? |
Yeah, we do it all the time in the lab.
See: Antimatter, Pair Creation, Dirac's Hole Theory, Quantum Theory, etc, I'm guessing that you must think that I'm saying something that I'm not.
That bad, because it's important. Imagine that you had a vacuum inside sealed jar so that pressure was zero. Now imagine that you could condense some of the remaining energy down over a finite region of space, until you achieve postive matter density and pressure, (locally).
TaDa... you have successfully created a virtual particle pair from vacuum energy, but you also increased negative pressure, as well, and if there were no walls to the container, then the vacuum would expand naturally as a result of particle creation. You have to hit it with a 1.2 MeV photon to make it a real permanent thing.
Einstein didn't know about this, was the point of the post, or he never would have abandoned his finite closed universe, because the process holds the vacuum flat and stable as it expands, so it isn't unstable at all. Instead, tension grows between the vacuum and ordinary matter, which will eventually compromise the integrity of the forces and we'll have another Big Bang, so... causality is not violated when the effect is the cause of the effect.
You can learn all about how what I've described works by studying Ned Wright's very clear treatment of Einstein's abandoned static model, here:
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmo_constant.html Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JAK Do you have it on-line? |
Yeah, but you aren't going to like it anymore than I like being honest about it, and if you didn't understand my post to the physicist screened research group, then you might want to skip most of the first page:
www.anthropic-principle.ORG