Big Bang

cipanbakar

Originally posted by aku_EnSeM at 28-6-2007 10:31 PM


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....

hey my books also written by prof (damn why i'm saying this )

but i have to admit most of the time people regards big bang as a model

cipanbakar

Originally posted by aku_EnSeM at 28-6-2007 10:22 PM


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)

dont just quoting. its like main baling2 batu dari jauh. not fun


i think i know wat calculation that prof referred to. it should be the equation name as fields equation if i'm not mistaken. its not mathematical problem. its cosmologist prob. there is one constant in that equation that nobody know. the name is cosmological constant. now its commercial name is dark energy. this is the constant that einstein put in the equation to show his support to steady state universe. the original version show him that the universe is expanding. but becoz he believe in steady state universe, he adjust the formula. either universe will keep expanding(big rip) or collapse(big crunch) depend on this constant

033589

ko bkn budak sastera ke??

cipanbakar

Originally posted by 033589 at 30-6-2007 11:56 PM
ko bkn budak sastera ke??

degree sastera, master ekonomi, skang tengah phd astronomi

033589

oooo....tapi dahsat dari chem eng ke physics..saspek!!!

wei_loon5063

Originally posted by cipanbakar at 30-6-2007 11:57 PM


degree sastera, master ekonomi, skang tengah phd astronomi

kau dah buang tentang seks ke??

cipanbakar

Originally posted by wei_loon5063 at 1-7-2007 12:23 AM


kau dah buang tentang seks ke??

tuh short course jek tuh

cipanbakar

Originally posted by 033589 at 1-7-2007 12:17 AM
oooo....tapi dahsat dari chem eng ke physics..saspek!!!

educated cam bakal isteri jugak kan?

033589

pan..mehla terg kat aku.pebende bigbang dlm melayu..aku xphm bahse inggeris..

bigbang mest camni kan??

big

prototaip

tak payahla gadoh2 pasal teori big bang...baik korang gadoh pasal camna nak cipta henpon,kapal terbang,serta teknologi2 dari negara asing yang lain....ilmu yang itu je yang dapat menjana ekonomi dan kekuatan negara kita.....ilmu big bang ni tak dapat hasil lumayan langshung....lagipun takde saksi yang melihat kejadian penciptaan alam.Baik korang tanya terus kat Tuhan,teori apa yang betul untuk menerangkan kejadian alam dari terus bertekak kat sini...

033589

tanya terus kat Tuhan???

aku_EnSeM

Originally posted by cipanbakar at 30-6-2007 11:27 PM



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  ...

ooo, now i get it... i was confused because when i had a look at the Principia, all i can see was a bunch of essay... Things are very different in relativity, where there were too much coordinates.... And also, when working with newton's gravity, the mathematics used are not as complicated as working with einstein's equations.... And also, all i can conclude is einstein's relativity is more like a mathematical representation rather than a logical sense.... Now, back to the title of the book...

Newton: Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica
Einstein: The Special Theory of Relativity....

and there where the answer lies.....

i was confused with the application of the paper and the basic thing itself.... sorry....

aku_EnSeM

Originally posted by cipanbakar at 30-6-2007 11:40 PM


dont just quoting. its like main baling2 batu dari jauh. not fun


i think i know wat calculation that prof referred to. it should be the equation name as fields equation if i'm not  ...

its the one with ten equations at a time and hundred terms of each equation....

aku_EnSeM

Originally posted by cipanbakar at 30-6-2007 11:57 PM


degree sastera, master ekonomi, skang tengah phd astronomi

phd astronomy.... so teori baru ape ngko buat??   sesuatu yg menyangkal imaginary time ke?

ooo, lupe plak..... bace x post aku pasal probability universe untuk tibe2 muncul 95%? Itu maksudnya universe bukan dicipta.... bagus gak kalau ko buat pasal tu kan....

[ Last edited by  aku_EnSeM at 1-7-2007 04:40 PM ]

cipanbakar

universe bukan dicipta? so u nonbeliever? sori if too harsh, just curious bang

cipanbakar

Originally posted by prototaip at 1-7-2007 09:46 AM

tak payahla gadoh2 pasal teori big bang...baik korang gadoh pasal camna nak cipta henpon,kapal terbang,serta teknologi2 dari negara asing yang lain....ilmu yang itu je yang dapat menjana ekonomi dan kekuatan negara kita.....ilmu big bang ni tak dapat hasil lumayan langshung....lagipun takde saksi yang melihat kejadian penciptaan alam.Baik korang tanya terus kat Tuhan,teori apa yang betul untuk menerangkan kejadian alam dari terus bertekak kat sini...

ko nih orang utan ke ape. negara dah lame buat mende2 mainan tadika tuh pun ko tatau lagi ke?


aku akan gi tanye terus kat tuhan kalo aku ada roket yg laju. tuhan duduk pun tak jauh. 9 tahun cahaya jek dari sini. ini adalah hasil pengiraan yg dilakukan setengah abad lalu bila orang europe buat doa besar2an mengharapkan jepun ditimpa bencana tp bencana alam hanya berlaku kat jepun beberapa belas tahun kemudian. assume doa bergerak ngan kelajuan cahaya plus minus 5% dapat la 9 tahun cahaya tuh. sad but true aku takde duit nak beli roket tuh

cipanbakar

Originally posted by 033589 at 1-7-2007 01:48 AM
pan..mehla terg kat aku.pebende bigbang dlm melayu..aku xphm bahse inggeris..

bigbang mest camni kan??

big

big bang ialah name untuk memperingati peristiwa datuk K untuk memecahkan selaput ct. disebabkan ia sangat tebal, maka penembusannya menghasilkan satu bunyi yang amat kuat

ussopp

Originally posted by aku_EnSeM at 1-7-2007 04:34 PM



ooo, lupe plak..... bace x post aku pasal probability universe untuk tibe2 muncul 95%? Itu maksudnya universe bukan dicipta.... bagus gak kalau ko buat pasal tu kan....

no berapa post...

tak jumpe..

[ Last edited by  ussopp at 2-7-2007 05:38 PM ]

ussopp

Originally posted by aku_EnSeM at 1-7-2007 04:34 PM



ooo, lupe plak..... bace x post aku pasal probability universe untuk tibe2 muncul 95%? Itu maksudnya universe bukan dicipta.... bagus gak kalau ko buat pasal tu kan....

im so so roookie about general relativity , quantum, and string theory....all together with the newton law....rookie fizik ar senang crita...
tapi nak tanya...

dikatakan syarat2 untuk alam semesta terbentuk begitu sempurna seperti sekarang ni adalah sangat2 ketat...

kerana banyak syarat2nya....

contoh,--- kalaulah alam semesta ni berkembang dengan kelajuan yg laju sikit dari sekarang atau slow skit dari sekarang maka bintang tak bley terbentuk....

tetapi sekarang kita tengok ciptaannya begitu sempurna...
dari bintang, kemudian planet, kemudian air, kompleks lagi ada algae, kompleks lagi ada pokok...a
da binatang sehinggalah ada nya manusia yg boleh berfikir...sungguh sempurna dan komplicated...

so saya nak tanya, dikatakan(mana aku baca tak ingat dah, buku stephen hawking kot)....
katanya nak biar dunia ni tercipta ngan sendirinya dengan lulus semua syarat2 sehingga wujudnya manusia yg boleh pikir pasal kejadian alam semesta ....kemungkinan yg ada ialah seolah2 hendak menegakkan sebatang pensel di atas meja...?

maka kemungkinan ini adalah sangat2 mustahil...??? tak bercanggah ke dengan teori ko tu aku_ensem?

sekadar bertanya...

[ Last edited by  ussopp at 2-7-2007 05:58 PM ]

ussopp

Originally posted by aku_EnSeM at 26-6-2007 02:43 PM
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.

doesnt matter how God look like,

God still God....rite?