Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Pink Minion who wrote (70693)	10/11/2003 1:34:56 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Respond to of 70976

I used Big Bang as a short hand for "the moment universe as we know it was created". I think Hawking also put forward a theory that said there could have been multiple baby universes in existence at a delicate harmony with each other (therefore no need for a big bang but perhaps a collision between them). In all honesty, I think any layman's guess is as good as any acclaimed theorist when it comes to the origin of universe. The layman may not be able to articulate it as nicely as the "experts". But I don't think the experts actually know more than the rest of us in this regards. Here is my off the top of my head hypothesis in support of the big bang: The universe was made of "nothing" and this "nothing" was split into matter and anti-matter in a big bang explosion. They each mostly went their separate ways and created two universes: one made of matter and the other made of anti-matter. At the boundaries they are annihilating each other which is creating the vacuum that is causing the expanding acceleration of both universes. Does this sound good? If not, just give me an advanced degree in theoretical physics and watch people ah-ooh over it after I sprinkle some techno-jargon on it. Sun (now going to enjoy this beautiful day with my mountain bike) Tzu

To: Pink Minion who wrote (70693)	10/13/2003 10:57:51 AM
From: zonder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

I thought they've scrapped the Big Bang theory since it has been proved the universe is expanding at a faster rate. Meaning there is a force creating the expansion rather than slowing down from a Big Bang No they didn't. That there was a Big Bang is fairly easy to verify from background radiation. What scientists found out recently is that the expansion of the universe is accelerating, which is rather curious (considering the four forces we know of: the strong force, which holds the nucleus of an atom together; the weak force, which causes atomic decay; electromagnetic force, which holds electrons in orbit in an atom; and gravity) but not impossible (if there is another force we don't yet know of). Scientists are currently working on finding out what that fifth force might be. Some started calling it "dark force". And a recent discovery: chron.com Oct. 10, 2003, 11:42PM Start of universe's expansion discovered New York Times CLEVELAND -- Astronomers said Friday that they had determined the time in cosmic history when a mysterious force, "dark energy," began to wrench the universe apart. Some 5 billion years ago, said Dr. Adam Riess, an astronomer at the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore, the universe experienced a "cosmic jerk." Before then, he said, the combined gravity of the galaxies and everything else in the cosmos was resisting the cosmic expansion, slowing it down. Ever since the jerk, though, the universe has been speeding up.