Big Bang

aku_EnSeM

Originally posted by Atomic_Omnikid at 19-5-2007 06:57 PM
I heard when big crunch the universe wil be going backward until the  moment of big bang..

yeah.. it was first proposed by Prof Hawking... However, he abandoned this idea later, if i'm not mistaken....

aku_EnSeM

Originally posted by cipanbakar at 23-6-2007 10:52 PM


hello, ko ingat teori tuh maknanya tak soheh lagi ke? baik teori mahupun law, perlu soheh dulu baru dapat title tuh. bezanya law nih biasenye dalam formula matematik dan teori nih in words

However, most astronomers believe this is a mere model... Then, Big Bang is always quoted as the 'hot big bang model'. For your info, 'model' tu pangkat die lagi rendah dari 'theory'...

aku_EnSeM

Originally posted by cipanbakar at 23-6-2007 10:52 PM


hello, ko ingat teori tuh maknanya tak soheh lagi ke? baik teori mahupun law, perlu soheh dulu baru dapat title tuh. bezanya law nih biasenye dalam formula matematik dan teori nih in words

jadi relativity kite panggil ape??? setahu aku, genius math pun takut nak solve equation relativity tuh!!!! :nyorok:

cipanbakar

Originally posted by aku_EnSeM at 24-6-2007 10:42 AM



However, most astronomers believe this is a mere model... Then, Big Bang is always quoted as the 'hot big bang model'. For your info, 'model' tu pangkat die lagi rendah dari 'theory'... :l ...

ohhh my ada lagi orang yg pertikaikan big bang nih. so so classical. the debate already over 40 years ago and big bang klan win KO. the opponent, 'steady state universe' already vanish from science community. the only remnant for this loser group is  the 'big bang' term which come from them just to mock their opponent. however this name stick despite their sarcasm and wrong intention

cipanbakar

Originally posted by aku_EnSeM at 24-6-2007 10:45 AM


jadi relativity kite panggil ape??? setahu aku, genius math pun takut nak solve equation relativity tuh!!!! :nyorok:

theory la bang. equation ape yg diorang takut sangat tuh

cipanbakar

Originally posted by aku_EnSeM at 24-6-2007 10:42 AM



However, most astronomers believe this is a mere model... Then, Big Bang is always quoted as the 'hot big bang model'. For your info, 'model' tu pangkat die lagi rendah dari 'theory'... :l ...

oh ye sebelum ko terus memandang rendah model big bang kesayangan aku tuh semata2 sebab ia berpangkat model , jom tengok another case. heliocentric model atau pun sun-centered model yg diperkenalkan oleh copernicus untuk menjelaskan bumi yg mengelilingi matahari dan not vice versa. its known as model becoz the model term itself mean a complex idea yg biasenye expressed geometrically. and nearly the same time also keppler believe the same thing but he express it in mathematical equation a^3=p^2  with a is planet's distance from the sun and p is orbital period. and its known as kepler law. now we know both r true but we still didn't promote copernicus' to sun-centered law. keywords law=equation, theory=words, model=pic. most of the time la, not everytime ;)

aku_EnSeM

Originally posted by cipanbakar at 24-6-2007 03:28 PM


theory la bang. equation ape yg diorang takut sangat tuh

ade post kate formula matematik biasenye dipanggil law....

The comparison between Newton's gravity and Einstein's gravity:
  Newton: A type of attractive force. We have F=(GMm)/(r^2). This calculates the force between 2 bodies. For 3 bodies, need to calculate each of them, and sum them up. For 4 bodies, the same thing, but more lines of force between bodies. In the solar system itself, like throwing your paper, pencils, and calculators out of the window.

Einstein: Curvature of space-time. No one will ever managed to imagine that. Everything is embedded in equations. For 2 bodies, your brain still works. 3 bodies, damn.... 10 bodies, nightmare... In addition to that, E=mc^2. Between these bodies, different types of energy exist. By mass-energy relation, they also gravitate.... Contribute to extra curvature, extra nightmare.... Go and stab yourself....

aku_EnSeM

Originally posted by cipanbakar at 24-6-2007 07:45 PM


oh ye sebelum ko terus memandang rendah model big bang kesayangan aku tuh semata2 sebab ia berpangkat model , jom tengok another case. heliocentric model atau pun sun-centered model yg dip ...

x ar memandang rendah... setakat ni Big Bang masih lagi teori terkuat untuk alam semesta.. Tapi big bang belum lengkap lagi... ade soalan yg x dpt jawab... so, there will be 1 point where big bang fails to give great answer.... Big Bang secara general describe universe yg dari sungularity expand smpi sekarang... Tapi, earlier than Planck's time, big bang masih buntu.... So, kebanyakan text cosmology masih gune term 'model' instead of 'theory'. Compared with other model, big bang yg paling kuat, byk prediction die yg dah ade observation...

aku_EnSeM

hmmm.... big bang model... big bang theory.... almost the same.... do we have another example? number theory..... number model....

btw, belum ade lagi observation yg menyangkal big bang, so kite anggap ia sahih... tp sehingga ia boleh buat 1 complete picture of the history of our universe, big bang masih belum lengkap.... the world need another genius... stephen hawking dh x cukup mase.... gurau je

aku_EnSeM

the great objection towards big bang might actually have come towards this following fact:

almost 1 million of people in this world believe that God is the universe itself.

cipanbakar

Originally posted by aku_EnSeM at 26-6-2007 02:26 PM


ade post kate formula matematik biasenye dipanggil law....

post aku la tuh. ape masalah bang? relativity memang teori. formula matematik? oh u mean e=mc2 tuh ke? tuh part of special relativity teori la bang. special relativity said 1) speed of light menten through space 2) law of fizik same for all observer. and e=mc2 tuh dipanggil mass-energy conservation law kalo tak silap aku

The comparison between Newton's gravity and Einstein's gravity:
  Newton: A type of attractive force. We have F=(GMm)/(r^2). This calculates the force between 2 bodies. For 3 bodies, need to calculate each of them, and sum them up. For 4 bodies, the same thing, but more lines of force between bodies. In the solar system itself, like throwing your paper, pencils, and calculators out of the window.

newton law fail to explain mercury orbit. general relativity succeed. and the more extreme the condition, the bigger relativity influence

Einstein: Curvature of space-time. No one will ever managed to imagine that. Everything is embedded in equations. For 2 bodies, your brain still works. 3 bodies, damn.... 10 bodies, nightmare... In addition to that, E=mc^2. Between these bodies, different types of energy exist. By mass-energy relation, they also gravitate.... Contribute to extra curvature, extra nightmare.... Go and stab yourself....

don make joke la. nearly century ago scientist already use relativity to explain, predict and solve a couple of thing

1) explain mercury orbit
2) predict star location during sun eclipse and the star location exactly same to einstein's calculation
3) satelite. when scientist want to launch the first satellitte, they consider relativity also. clock would tick slower due to high speed, and at the same time clock will tick faster due to gravity. kire kire and they got it. they also put a device to adjust it back if einstein was wrong. but they never use it
4) explain einstein cross (a couple of similar quasars nearly each other)
5) yg terbaru dark energy

adoiii.................

[ Last edited by  cipanbakar at 26-6-2007 06:43 PM ]

cipanbakar

Originally posted by aku_EnSeM at 26-6-2007 02:34 PM
x ar memandang rendah... setakat ni Big Bang masih lagi teori terkuat untuk alam semesta.. Tapi big bang belum lengkap lagi... ade soalan yg x dpt jawab... so, there will be 1 point where big bang fails to give great answer.... Big Bang secara general describe universe yg dari sungularity expand smpi sekarang... Tapi, earlier than Planck's time, big bang masih buntu.... So, kebanyakan text cosmology masih gune term 'model' instead of 'theory'. Compared with other model, big bang yg paling kuat, byk prediction die yg dah ade observation...

adoi pasal name lagi ke? aku jawab la jugak. the nama is big bang theory yg mengatakan universe bermula dari bla bla bla. and the model big bang is yang gambar kon melintang ngan muncung kecik di sebelah kiri bermula ngan planck time dan expand ke kanan iaitu current time. sebelah bawah adalah skala masa dan sebelah atas adalah suhu. itu model big bang yg ko cakap kan?

cipanbakar

Originally posted by aku_EnSeM at 26-6-2007 02:40 PM
hmmm.... big bang model... big bang theory.... almost the same.... do we have another example? number theory..... number model....

btw, belum ade lagi observation yg menyangkal big bang, so kite anggap ia sahih... tp sehingga ia boleh buat 1 complete picture of the history of our universe, big bang masih belum lengkap.... the world need another genius... stephen hawking dh x cukup mase.... gurau je

big bang nih bukan senang2 jek diterima mula2 dulu. opponent iaitu steady state universe dulu memang kuat dan paling ramai pengikut. antaranya tak lain dan tak bukan the great albert einstein. beliau sanggup mengadjust formula general relativitynya semata2 untuk menunjukkan sokongan pada group. until edwin hubble discover that universe actually expanding, baru la ramai2 jump into bandwagon termasuk einstein yg terus readjust balik formula tuh. expansion universe onli can be explained by big bang. but the problem is if the universe start with a bang, then we should see light everywhere. but we could see none. but according to calculation later, the radiation already redshifted so the light we see now is at 1mm wavelength. and it's proved later when a radio detector detect the 1mm wave everywhere around the universe. and that's the end

selain tuh, abundance of helium also can explained by big bang. its nearly 30% although base on calculation, the stars from primordial till now onli able to produce 3%

the prob now bukan lagi nak debate big bang happen or not but to have fully understanding bout it. like u said, planck time. we can't even able to explain wat happen after plank time apatah lagi sebelumnya. my interest now is grand unified theory which happen during expansion time. if anybody interested, please start talking about it

maybe there is onli a few numbers of proof for dis teori but to disprove it, its none. sekian

aku_EnSeM

Originally posted by cipanbakar at 26-6-2007 06:41 PM


post aku la tuh. ape masalah bang? relativity memang teori. formula matematik? oh u mean e=mc2 tuh ke? tuh part of special relativity teori la bang. special relativity said 1) speed of light  ...

i'm not joking... a professor of astrophysics in a university said that, i was just quoting... it depicts the extremely complicated relativity is (its calculation)

aku_EnSeM

Originally posted by cipanbakar at 26-6-2007 06:48 PM


adoi pasal name lagi ke? aku jawab la jugak. the nama is big bang theory yg mengatakan universe bermula dari bla bla bla. and the model big bang is yang gambar kon melintang ngan muncung keci ...

no, it is not that.... i got this info from a paper, or perhaps, a book, written by a prof of astrophysics... he had to say that big bang is a model. a successful model....

aku_EnSeM

okay, stop rite ere... big bang model, theory, hypothesis, they are all the same....

and, i was shocked with the statement mathematical principles are called law. that is why i came out with the einstein's relativity thing..... and i was thinking of why newton's motions are called law, while einstein's space are called theory, even if einstein's space are more mathematical than newton's...

aku_EnSeM

we cannot see naked singularity.....

wei_loon5063

Originally posted by aku_EnSeM at 28-6-2007 10:48 PM
we cannot see naked singularity.....

when half naked, we see two singularity.. sometime pink, sometime black....

aku_EnSeM

Originally posted by wei_loon5063 at 29-6-2007 01:36 AM


when half naked, we see two singularity.. sometime pink, sometime black....

hahaha.... :nyorok:

cipanbakar

Originally posted by aku_EnSeM at 28-6-2007 10:48 PM
okay, stop rite ere... big bang model, theory, hypothesis, they are all the same....
i was shocked with the statement mathematical principles are called law. that is why i came out with the einstein's relativity thing..... and i was thinking of why newton's motions are called law, while einstein's space are called theory, even if einstein's space are more mathematical than newton's...  

yeah einstein vs newton again. lets classified the given name(law, theory or model) in 2 version. first mine, second u. my argument is:


1) base on kasta (ur version)

so who have the authority to decide whether the name is theory or law? does newton law underwent this cycle? from newton model then promoted to newton theory and then to newton law? was that how it evolve? and wat happen when we found fallacy later, should it demoted? for einstein's i know it start with another name but it was theory of invariance and not model of relativity (invariance changed later to relativity maybe due to commercial purpose). does that mean einstein was arrogant enough to skip the model tag?

yeah i agree there is still kasta system for the name but it just start with idea or hypothesis. after pass thorough test, its then promoted to theory or law


2) base on how it expressed (its mine)

i said einsteins relativity used theory tag since its expressed in words onli and newton's used law since its mathematical term

special theory of relativity:
i) light speed constant relative to observer
ii) law of fizik same for all observer at constant speed

thats all(i can't see mathematical terms!). others like time dilation, e=mc2 bla bla comes later as the products of this theory


newton law:
i) F=0
ii) F=ma
iii) F1+F2

newton law of gravity:
F=MmG/d2

p/s- when newton working on his law of gravity, he also invent calculus to help him. and u said his work less mathematical than einstein's. u must be  brave enough to makse such announcement