A vast cavern is the stage for tests to find the 'God particle'

The Times ^

[Aric2000]

If you mean, were they firmly in place in the universe? then yes, if the laws of physics indeed match physical reality, then yes, they have been in place, and will continue to be so until the end of this universe.

[Physicist]

Above you seem to be saying that there is still some sensitivity to initial values even with inflation. Is that correct?

No, the point is that Inflation pulls the density to the critical value, so that by the time the Inflationary epoch is over, the density is pegged to it.

Part of your confusion is caused by my sloppy wording, "close to the Big Bang". The end of the Inflationary epoch is much closer to the Big Bang than the energy explored by the LHC. The energy density at the time of inflation is comparable to the grand unification scale, way up there.

[Physicist]

Well done! I couldn't have said it better myself.

[Aric2000]

Darn, I thought you were talking about my 148...

[Aric2000]

Whoops 149, sorry...

[jwalsh07]

LOL, no they appeared as we made them up...

Apparently so.

How about this one. Has dark matter been obeserved in our galaxy?

[Aric2000]

Don't ask me, ask physicist, but I believe the answer is no, but in order for the conservation of energy law to apply, it must exist.

Is that correct physicist?

[longshadow]

Well done! I couldn't have said it better myself.

[Blush] You're too kind... [blush....}

I did leave the details of demonstrating that gravitational fields have negative energy, and elucidating the space-filling with matter machanism, to you.

Oh, yes, you can also explain what drives the Inflationary expansion (all that unstable false vacuum stuff and the repelling effect that occurs....)

[longshadow]

Eyes boggling, brain exploding placemarker.

If PH can manage to read Guth's book on Inflationary Cosmology without his head exploding, you handle the concepts, too.

;-)

[Aric2000]

Either that, or there are a whole lot more blackholes out there then we think, and they must be HUGE!!!

[Aric2000]

Thank you for that vote of confidence, I will wrap my head in duct tape and read it...;)

[ALS]

"Right Wing Prof is opus'ed and gone? ALS and conservababblerJen are still able to delete threads by wandering in, pooping in the punchbowl, and screaming in faces? This really bites bad!"

smart move
especially since HE and YOU got 2 threads deleted, and don't make me post the links to prove it.

where did he poop out his opus?

[RightWhale]

Most people don't know any math above arithmetic.

Well, there you are. Most people weren't qualified to enter Plato's Academy, either. The arithmetic of those days was puny: they didn't have the zero. The zero was invented in India and adopted by the Arabs, and didn't reach Europe until 800 AD or so. But their math was pretty good even if not common.

[jwalsh07]

OK, how about this one. What percentage of dark matter occupies the universe compared to normal matter, proton and neutron stuff?

[donh]

Does Godel's proof mean we cannot ever understand the universe?

It's a fairly safe bet that common formal logics presently contain no flaws. Amusingly enough, Aristotalian logic had two flaws in Aristotle's development of the forms of syllogism, up until they were caught around the turn of the last century.

I've been amused by the various informed takes on Godel's Proof we've seen here, but think no one's quite answered the original question comprehensively, as yet, in my opinion.

To show that Godel applies to the universe in general, as a complete cover, you have to, first of all, demonstrate that the universe cannot be described completely using continuous formal systems, such as Euclidean geometry, or calculus. Godel's proof applies to formal systems that are discrete, not continuous. As best anyone knows, continuous systems have complete cover: all true statements are provable--all false statements are disprovable.

I have my opinions about whether Godel's limitations apply to the universe, or not, but no one, to my knowledge, has submitted a proof either way, and I suspect no one ever will.

Second of all, you have to show that not understanding a thing, is the same as not being able to prove a thing. From use-cases, it would seem to be the case that we can understand many things pretty well, absent proof. Bear in mind that what Godel's proof demonstrates is that there can be true statements that are unprovable. If it's true, it could have meaning, and be understandable, whether you can prove it or not.

[Consort]

You make my case. And none of what you just posted supports your previous post, which stated:

"Math is something men have, it defines man."

[donh]

especially since HE and YOU got 2 threads deleted, and don't make me post the links to prove it.

I'd like to see that.

[ALS]

freepmail me then

I'm not gonna let these clowns get another one yanked

[AndrewC]

Now, for the really cool part: whenever new space is created, it gets permeated by the existing gravitational fields, which means the negative energy associated with those fields is decreasing (meaning increasing negatively).

Doesn't gravity travel at the speed of light?

[longshadow]

Prior to t=0 the Laws of Physics were already firmly in place?

We can only know the laws of physics that apply to our own Universe. Since our cosmological theories say that time came into existence along with the rest of Universe, the expression "prior to t=0" has no meaning, as there is no "before" before time existed, just as there is no place "south" of the south pole.

So in that sense, you've asked what is technically an ill-formed question; for which there is no answer because the question assumes facts contrary to the theories you are expecting to provide the answer.

If you are interested in pursuing the matter further, you should consult a genuine physicist, like "physicist."