[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX] |

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |

Jan 03, 1995 11:24 PM

by John Mead

> 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

Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application