Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Kosh on August 27, 2008, 09:10:59 am
-
http://www.universetoday.com/2008/08/25/cosmic-needle-in-a-haystack-confirms-dark-energy/
-
Cool, maybe we can use it to build antigravity drives
-
I don't think they proofed anything. They just showed that the theory about dark energy completes the equations, if the theory of general relativity is applied on a galactic scale.
Pretty cool they found such a cluster though.
-
do they have some of this dark energy on a shelf somewhere? if not that means it's still to be confirmed. it's alright writing down numbers and letters on paper but that proves nothing until they have this stuff. saying they think they see some in a cluster nearby out little solar system also means nothing imo.
-
“The existence of the cluster can only be explained with dark energy,” says Lamer.
I call bull**** on that statement.
-
Me too. That article provides no justification for why the cluster requires dark energy.
I'm still doubtful that "dark [matter|energy|whatever]" is anything other than an incomplete understanding of gravity.
-
or a lack of human intellegence, which is entirely possible.
reminds me of star trek voyager, a dark energy being and enterprise after the story of how archers friend of competitive rival broke the warp 2 barrier in 2 experimental warp ships where he fired to rockets from his shuttle craft to light up the dark energy nebula. starcraft protoss psi blades are included with dark energy also.
-
Dark Matter actually has some scientific basis for existing.
-
Even if dark energy were to exist, there is no practical way to harness it. So I'd call that article rather useless anyway.
-
The original article can be found at:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/0805.3817v3
There is no mention of any Dark Energy or Matter.
I guess this is again one of those blogger owns the internet -moments.
Mika
-
do they have some of this dark energy on a shelf somewhere? if not that means it's still to be confirmed. it's alright writing down numbers and letters on paper but that proves nothing until they have this stuff. saying they think they see some in a cluster nearby out little solar system also means nothing imo.
*headdesk* This is not how science works.
Even if dark energy were to exist, there is no practical way to harness it. So I'd call that article rather useless anyway.
We don't know that. Given its properties, it might be possible to use it to prop a wormhole mouth open, which could be the closest thing we ever get to subspace travel.
-
We don't know that. Given its properties, it might be possible to use it to prop a wormhole mouth open, which could be the closest thing we ever get to subspace travel.
Or use it to get a warp drive working.
-
We need to find out what happens at absolute zero temperature, and what happens when you exceed the speed of light. There are too many things Terrans do and don't know. They are capable of high intelligence, but the majority of the species can only use at most 10% of their brains for the process known as "thinking". The rest either remains unused, is used for memory, or processing of stimuli, or sorting of memories.
-
Actually that's kind of a myth, since if you had all neurons working at all time (which is what people mean by saying using N% of the brain) you would be having seizures.
-
We need to find out what happens at absolute zero temperature, and what happens when you exceed the speed of light. There are too many things Terrans do and don't know. They are capable of high intelligence, but the majority of the species can only use at most 10% of their brains for the process known as "thinking". The rest either remains unused, is used for memory, or processing of stimuli, or sorting of memories.
"You get nothing! You lose! Good day [to you], sir!"
*fixed*
-
failed the quote
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKG07305CBs&feature=related
Although it's not quite correct. :)
-
do they have some of this dark energy on a shelf somewhere? if not that means it's still to be confirmed. it's alright writing down numbers and letters on paper but that proves nothing until they have this stuff. saying they think they see some in a cluster nearby out little solar system also means nothing imo.
*headdesk* This is not how science works.
might not be, however you know i am right until you do find something to prove me wrong..
-
failed the quote
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKG07305CBs&feature=related
Although it's not quite correct. :)
Fixed. Silly me, forgetting brackets. :ick:
-
might not be, however you know i am right until you do find something to prove me wrong..
Strangely enough, I don't. How puzzling. Let's move on.
We need to find out what happens at absolute zero temperature, and what happens when you exceed the speed of light. There are too many things Terrans do and don't know. They are capable of high intelligence, but the majority of the species can only use at most 10% of their brains for the process known as "thinking". The rest either remains unused, is used for memory, or processing of stimuli, or sorting of memories.
We know exactly what happens at absolute zero temperature -- please go look it up on Wikipedia. Absolute zero is not physically attainable.
We also know exactly what happens when you exceed the speed of light. Again, look it up.
What you say about using a small fraction of the brain is, as has been pointed out, a myth.
-
as you wish to be bias, so be it.
-
Confusion of Dark Energy and Dark Matter - like some guys here did - is happening often. It's not quite the same though.
-
What's so special with Dark Energy or Dark Matter?
They are explanations for observed phenomena. Think it more like a general term for presently unknown reason that keeps the observed universe together. One could go with "unknown source of gravity / energy that keeps Universe together", but it has been named as Dark Matter/Energy since the actual mass/energy has not been observed yet, hence they remain in dark.
Or that is my understanding of the issue.
There are another explanations for those observations, like localized warping (galaxy level) of space-time. I'm not the right person to comment about the validity of those explanations. What I gathered from that stuff was that it is thought that there are more 'dense' spacetime areas and less 'dense' spacetime areas, curvature of the spacetime causing the observed phenomena in denser areas. This isn't mainstream explanation, though.
Mika
-
More of that stuff can be found at:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0508116v2
http://www.fnal.gov/pub/presspass/press_releases/darkenergy_3-16-05.html
http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0510453v1
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/31910
http://www.world-science.net/othernews/060214_darkenergyfrm.htm
There should be the original Scientific papers and some journalists comments about them (hopefully they got this one right). Anything more than this, you're on your own => I'm off to bed.
Mika
-
Confusion of Dark Energy and Dark Matter - like some guys here did - is happening often. It's not quite the same though.
"Not quite" as in not even related in the slightest degree. The similarity between the concepts of "dark matter" and "dark energy" ends with the names. "Dark energy" is largely a misnomer. The name conjures up images of negative matter exerting an anti-gravitational force on the rest of the universe. At best, that is a misconception. The theories out there that make even the slightest bit of sense to me would make it an innate property of space-time or the way in which discretized space-time organizes itself, not really "energy" in the classical sense of the word.
"Dark matter" may similarly turn out to be a misunderstanding of how gravity operates at very large (or very small) scales. However, the operating theory at the moment is that dark matter would be physical matter like normal baryonic matter, but it only interacts with normal matter through the gravitational (and possibly the weak nuclear (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weakly_interacting_massive_particles)) force.
-
However you explain it, we can't even master more familiar and "tangible" sources of energy, so I'd put any notions of pulling infinite energy out of thin air into the "fairy tale" category.
-
However you explain it, we can't even master more familiar and "tangible" sources of energy, so I'd put any notions of pulling infinite energy out of thin air into the "fairy tale" category.
Where does it say in the article or indeed anywhere in this thread except your post, anything about infinite energy?
-
What if we build truly sentient, partially manlike computers? Would they be able to make all research for us by their advanced logic? Like, say, proving/disproving Dark Matter/Energy?
-
What you say about using a small fraction of the brain is, as has been pointed out, a myth.
Although when people keep insisting it is true after being told that it's not it does make you wonder.... :D
-
You only use 10% of your brain because you can't use your math skills to read a book.