Comments on: Dark Energy

By: David Bradley

David Bradley — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 09:13:40 +0000

@Brian Why should common sense apply. Common sense is simply an evolutionary adaptation that allowed our earthbound ancestors to understand their environment and survive, there’s no reason why our brains should be able to understand the universe using common sense.

But, look at it this way: stare at the back of your hand, the light reflected from your skin that reaches your eyes and is transformed into an image in your brain that you “see” takes a finite amount of time to reach your consciousness, that means that you’re seeing the back of your hand in the past. It’s the very recent past but the past nonetheless. Light from the sun takes a few minutes to reach the earth, so that’s slightly further into the past. Light from distant stars takes even longer…

By: Brian

Brian — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 23:27:04 +0000

Then there is the claim that by looking further into the Univserse we are looking back in time.
This pre supposes that from where we are in this scheme of things our sitiuation is relativly new……
and “out there” is very very old.
Try proving that.

Then there is this contradiction……
If all this around us is the product of the “big bang….” should that not ensure
that everty thing we see and measure in the universe, will be of the same age?

Where in the Universe are things stationary, and where are those that are moving away…..away from what?
surely not us here!
There shouild be a new chair introduced in our Universities, and an oportunity for students
to study for a degree ( PhD ) in Commonsense. what a difference that would make.

By: David Bradley

David Bradley — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:51:45 +0000

“far reaches” doesn’t just mean a long, long way away…observing phenomena at “far reaches” cosmologically speaking means a long, long time ago too.

By: Brian

Brian — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 14:47:59 +0000

We are constantly reminded that all things in the Universe. that will provide us with the answers to “how, why and when” with regard to the Universe, are always identified as being in the “far reaches of the Universe “

The planet that we all rest on, it also is located in the far reaches of the Universe.

We have a sample of the countless trillions of Suns in the Universe, right here on our door step,
Not to mention moons, planets ….It’s all here. Why bother with rest.

Accuracy is more easily achieved right here, inaccuracies are proportional to the square of the distance from Earth.

Distance and Astronomers are amongst the biggest liars in the Universe.

Dark energy? You mean Invisible energy.

All of the potential energy that drives the Universe is all around us. Universe means universal.
All energies are universal through out the Universe.

The only dark energy in the Universe is in the form of the black clouds of doubt,
Hovering over the heads of the cosmologists.

By: David Bradley

David Bradley — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 08:53:47 +0000

@Brian “Edudicator” – nice homonym, or was it just a typo. For a theory to be considered it most certainly does not have to be understood by as many people as possible. I suspect there are millions of people who don’t understand the theory behind tunneling diodes and yet they know it is valid every time they switch on their TV or various other electronic gadgets…

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 23:16:20 +0000

If A theory ,is to be concidered, it must be understood by as many people as possible, not just
by a small group of intelectuals.
Common sense must be the edudicator.

The “big bang”concept is so devoid of commonsense that it is embarrassing .
Ask a proponent of the “big bang”concept to explain this idea but with out using any
mathematical formulae whats so ever……then see what emerges.
This planetery system of ours is almost insignificant in this infinite Universe.
We àre not in the centre of anything….. we are almost not there at all.

Try sitting on your mortor boards, and think carefully about it before jumping to some
unreasoable conclusion. the Univere is much more simple that the physists would have us believe.

By: David Bradley

David Bradley — Sat, 30 May 2009 08:10:14 +0000

Mark. There are indeed a lot of unknowns, but I’m afraid reverting to universal consciousness as some kind of binding force is just plain nonsense. We dress our consciousness up with all sorts of fancy notions, commonly known as spirituality, but the fact of the matter is, we’re just that matter, nothing more nothing less.

By: Mark Rist

Mark Rist — Fri, 29 May 2009 20:06:15 +0000

We have a lot of unknowns. So, let me make the situation worse. Assuming we humans have evolved a form of consciousness and plants have a form of it, is it not likely that the whole universe is conscious in some way. Yeah, I know, “go to the spirituality blogs ding ding.” But I’m not into spirituality here. I’m really just saying that, if we have a form of consciousness and we are made of the same stuff of the cosmos (and we are). Then matter and energy are potentially or wholly conscious. Maybe what we are looking for in Dark matter is the soup that binds us to consciousness or it is consciousness. Any imagination from you folks might help me get this.

By: David Bradley

David Bradley — Thu, 28 May 2009 07:11:46 +0000

Yeah, it’s hard to get one’s head around all this. In some senses the universe is like a vast black hole, in fact in more than some senses…everything we know is locked within our universal “event horizon”, what is beyond that, who knows? More universal black holes, perhaps, bumping into us and giving rise to dark energy anomalies?

By: Mark Rist

Mark Rist — Wed, 27 May 2009 20:32:41 +0000

Perhaps the 11 dimensions and parallel universes that pass through them account for the dark matter and energy. And, what about the whole electromagnetic spectrum. Space also is a fabric. What kind of fabric is it? Potential energy and mass. Maybe if we squeezed space down as in a black hole we would not only run into other layers, but layers of differing types of matter matter – like a deck of cards. Maybe that accounts for the mystery force.

Just a notion