Theos-Talk Archives (January 1995 Message tl00025)

> John,
>
> It is very fascinating just how many theories
> have come out of Einstein's equations.  Black
> Holes is one possible solution.  Personally, I
> like the theory of Black and White Holes.
> I would be upset and disappointed if they ever
> prove them to be unreal.  Speaking of "thorn,"
> I enjoyed the book from Kip Thorn on time
> traveling.

Misner/Thorne/Wheeler "Gravitation" is a good reference work.  We
used it as a text my senior year at Grinnell.  I agree with you
about the symmetry and beauty of allowing Black and White holes.
I never felt it was such a great thorn either.  But some of us
find the pecular very normal!

>
> The torsional theory, I believe, comes from
> Roger Penrose (who together with Hawking also
> came up with Black Holes).  Actually, this is
> very theosophical - all elementary particles
> have a spin which is either positive or
> negative - because it would confirm the theory
> of dualism.

yup.  however as I understand it, they introduce the torsional
element into the GR equation outright.  hence, my concern was one
where we needed a *Cosmological* Torsion (versus individual spin
as per particles).  It seems strange there would be a preferred
spin/torsion within the latent space-time (ST) fabric.  I may
have misread their point.  It was about third hand by the time I
got it in Science magazine.  The news reporters are good....
just not perfect.  :-)

> > I heard that Hubble found a much younger
> universe than science had thought, ...

by a factor of two (2).  so age(old) = 2*age(new) the Hubble
Constant is actually the inverse of the age of the Universe
(given the Big Bang theory as a working hypothesis).  hence, the
age decrease implies that H(old) is actually 2*H(old) = H(new)

basically :

RedShift ~ HubbelsConstant * Distance
with the age of the universe = H**-1
(note c=1 in geometrodynamics -- dymensionless constant)
(i.e. 3 * 10**8 meters ~= 1 second)

this actually makes the missing mass WORSE!
the mass density parameter goes as Rho ~ H**2
so the old value was Rho(old) ~ H(old)**2
which implies
Rho(new) ~ (H(new)**2) ~ 4*(H(old)**2) ~ 4*Rho(old)

not good for the big bang theory.

> that this extra matter has been found?
see above --- I must have stated it backward to imply that.

>
> How do you like the string and superstring
> theories?  I think the idea of a 10 dimensional
> universe is rather theosophical.

yes.  However the string theory leaves me somewhat cold since the
fundamental object has preferential dimension (1).  Zero would
make more sense if one was to choose a preferred dimension (i.e.
a point) from which to build from.

oh well --

peace --

john mead