[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 684 KB, 575x847, universefromnothing.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4250794 No.4250794 [Reply] [Original]

How feasible is such a thing? Seems like a load of crack pottery to me.

>> No.4250803
File: 26 KB, 396x349, 1279169203621.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4250803

>>4250794
>how feasible?

So feasible that it fucking happened.
Saged and reported for shitty thread.
\thread

>> No.4250808

>>4250794
That's because putting it that way is oversimplifying the problem so much it doesn't mean anything anymore. You have to learn physics to understand it.

>> No.4250815

>biology
>a hard science
pick one

>> No.4250821

humans will always have difficulty understanding non-causality

>> No.4250817

>>4250803
B...B..But I'm asking specifically about Krauss' perspective. He claims that gravity/matter exactly 'cancel each other out' by one being 'negative' and other being 'positive' (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_universe).). That doesn't really make any sense with our current understanding of physics and fields.

>> No.4250830

>>4250815
just because dawkins name is on the fucking book doesn't imply it has biology

>> No.4250834

>>4250817
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo

>> No.4250845

>>4250830
>>4250815

LMAO

>> No.4250857

>>4250834
Yeah, that's what his book details on. I'm just asking if its possible in physics for gravity to be 'negative energy' and mass to be 'positive'. How would this equate with gauge fields and mass-less particles? What about the Higgs field? It doesn't make and sense for the gravitational field to somehow compensate for all of this without being some sort extremely strong force (which, it isn't).

>> No.4250865

> How feasible is such a thing?
How feasible is it to take this equation:
5 + -5 = 0
And turn it around to read:
0 = 5 + -5
?

>> No.4250866

>>4250794

because Krauss is a physcists and doesn't understand nuanced philosophical concepts

>> No.4250884
File: 31 KB, 498x322, 12760383157ccc56.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4250884

>>4250857
Gravity is counted as "potential energy" which has a negative sign. This book oversimplifies a lot of concepts.

This book is only good for the very layman, who won't try to understand actual physics. If you want to understand actual physics, DONT READ SHITTY POPSCIENCE, READ FUCKING TEXTBOOKS!

\THREAD

>> No.4250888
File: 185 KB, 853x937, ponypink.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4250888

posting in a thread that will do iron man numbers

>> No.4250900

>Lawrence M. Krauss
>Sounds like crock pottery to me

You're knew to this, aren't you?

>> No.4250905

Protip, assuming our perception of causality holds: if space and time didn't exist before the big bang, causality did not exist either and thus no cause was needed for the universe to spring up.

>> No.4250923

>>4250884
B....B...But I do, good sir. I understand his conclusions. It isn't feasible with our current understanding of physics. Why do we need these inane concepts when we just have time translation invariance to solve all of our problems?

>>4250888
..Wait... What? What the hell is that thing?

>>4250905
Yeah.. That's what I can deduce. I can't deduce this 'zero energy' crap and 'flat space-time'. It goes against our entire understanding of physics and chaotic inflation.

>> No.4250946

bump - all I really wish to know is if this concept is compatible. It intrigues me.