Teori Big Bang : Update - Damaged to new collider -

Atomic_Omnikid · Post time 27-9-2008 08:34 PM

Originally posted by MACD at 27-9-2008 06:02 <a href="http://forum.cari.com.my/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=26161878&ptid=373601" target="_blank"><img src="http://forum.cari.com.my/images/common/back.gif" border="0" onload="if(this.width>screen.width*0.7) {this.resized=true; this.width=screen.width*0.7; this.alt='Click here to open new window\nCTRL+Mouse wheel to zoom in/out';}" onmouseover="if(this.width>screen.width*0.7) {this.resized=true; this.width=screen.width*0.7; this.style.cursor='hand'; this.alt='Click here to open new window\nCTRL+Mouse wheel to zoom in/out';}" onclick="if(!this.resized) {return true;} else {window.open(this.src);}" onmousewheel="return imgzoom(this);" alt="" /></a> 

 
Kau ni mesti IQ = 70 kan. 
 
Kalau takde scientists, kau masih duduk dalam hutan buru binatang pakai sumpit. 
 
Bersyukur la sebab scientiests la kau boleh pakai Internet surf forum Cari! Hehehe...

bukan ker IQ manusia plg rendah ialah 85?

bukan manusia kot?...

mbhcsf · Post time 6-10-2008 10:47 PM

sebenarnya bagi seorang Islam, kita berbalik pada akidah yg seharusnya memand kita dalam menetukan sama ada kita patut panik atau tidak... so ada banyak tanda kiamat tapi kan kalau kita dapat tahu even tahun sekali maka kita patut pula berbalik pada Hadith NAbi Muhammad SAW yg mana Baginad ada menyebut bahawa kiamt tu akan bila ia berlaku adalah RAHSIA ALLAH. So..kat sini kalau kita tahu tahun lagi..

aku_EnSeM · Post time 7-10-2008 11:57 AM

oo ye ke.. xtau plak..

aku_EnSeM · Post time 7-10-2008 12:02 PM

nampaknye ade org ckp saintis gile...

Klu kritik saintis in proper ways, aku leh trime. Tp klu ckp saintis tu gile, thats rude man.

KLu nk ckp saintis gile psl rosakkan bumi, bukan saintis je yg rosakkan Bumi. Saintis just develop atomic theory, yg buat bom atom tu org lain.

Btw, hampir sume bende kt sekeliling kite ni saintis invent. So klu xnk sokong saintis, pegi tinggal sorg kt hutan.

nasrulfx · Post time 7-10-2008 02:56 PM

benda yg salu main kat pikiran aku.... what powered the big bang mengikut sainstifik? maybe benda ni terlalu radikal dlm pemikiran..

[ Last edited by nasrulfx at 7-10-2008 03:00 PM ]

aku_EnSeM · Post time 7-10-2008 03:52 PM

Originally posted by nasrulfx at 7-10-2008 02:56 PM
benda yg salu main kat pikiran aku.... what powered the big bang mengikut sainstifik? maybe benda ni terlalu radikal dlm pemikiran..

I'm not too good in this topic, but there is a scientific explanation that might be able to explain what powers the Big Bang. However, yourquestion about what powered the Big Bang might include a little bit discussion concerning the condition and structure of the universe during the Planck epoch (radius of the universe is 10^-35m).

However, physicists are still in doubt of what really happened during this period and you might find different explanation across your readings. I would rather use Hawking explanation, though.

Hawking believes that during the Planck epoch, there is very close relationship between space and time and if we could exist in this period, we won't be able to differentiate them. as we go further in the past, the time dimension really becomes space and instead of having3-pace and 1-time, we had 4-space. So during Big Bang, the universe disbelieved to be in 4-space. Due to quantum fluctuation, the time dimension gets separated from 4-space and it emerges more independently. As time dimension starts to exist, we can now use a lot bunch of physical theory to explain things. Recall that at that time,the universe was infinitely hot and dense. The entropy was really low.But, 2nd Law of Thermodynamics requires the entropy of the universe torise, hence space must expand, as well as time. There is also new assumptions by cosmologists that the dark matter might cause the expansion of the universe.

This might be considered as the smooth Big Bang model, once proposed by Hawking.

P/s: He comes with a new theory all the time, and he wipes previous theory all the time. I do not know if this mechanism still applies.

So, the answer to your question is that quantum fluctuation.Then the universe's expansion is self-contained. In other paper by Hawking, he calculated the probability of the Big Bang to according his quantum fluctuation model, and he arrived to a conclusion that the probability of universe to 'boom' into existence is95%! Then he removed God from Big Bang.

Kepada sesiapa yg percaya Tuhan meletupkan universe ni, explanation ni mungkin membuatkan anda terkejut n ckp hawking ni gile. Tapi ingat,model ni x contradict ape2 n it might be correct. Walaupun Hawking ckp bukan Tuhan yg sebabkan Big Bang, ingat balik siapa yg cipta sume hukum math n fizik yg membolehkan quantum fluctuation tu wujud in the first place?

[ Last edited by aku_EnSeM at 7-10-2008 03:55 PM ]

nasrulfx · Post time 8-10-2008 05:47 PM

ish ish apsal sampai hina mcm tu

aku_EnSeM · Post time 8-10-2008 08:42 PM

xyah sampai cmtu skali...

wanyob · Post time 30-10-2008 05:19 PM

so, sekrg experiment tu tak berjalan lah yea.

aku_EnSeM · Post time 30-10-2008 06:31 PM

ahaha...

apparently, aku x pasti plak result jenis ape yg diorg dpt.. But ape yg aku pasti, diorg buat collision tu untuk detetct ape jenis particle yg terhasil n pattern collision diorg, sme ade die ikut ape yg diramal oleh teori2 or x... Klu betul, so our theories are fine and we can go further. Klu x, we must have made mistakes...

N also, from the experiment, kite mungkin boleh disover bende baru, n kite boleh construct teori baru abaout elementary particle..

Just like the Michelson-Morley experiment utk detect ether, their experiment ended up being a strong evidence to the Special Relativity.

physic · Post time 4-11-2008 01:01 AM

aih...orang yang menghalang projek ini kononnya sangat tahu tentang sains. dengar saja ada lubang hitam tergopoh gapah...mungkin meraka takut mengbongkar rasiah bahawa alam tidak dicipta tuhan pun....campurkan sains dan agam...patutlah dalam malaysia takde yang dapat noble prize..

aku_EnSeM · Post time 4-11-2008 11:16 AM

thats kind of harsh...

kene ingat, nobel prize adelah utk org yg buat penemuan baru yg boleh dibuktikan...

surprisingly, org2 mcm stephen hawking xpernah pun dpt nobel prize... and did he mix cosmology with christianity? No! He never get a nobel prize because his works are in theoretical level...

And did Einstein get his nobel prize for relativity? Again, no.. He get a nobel prize for photoelectric effect, and remember, photoelectric effect is at experimental level....

Beware of your words, physic, nobel prize is for whom found something that can be proven to be true...

As for Malaysian, we dont have a nobel rpize winner due to our lack of ability in writing high quality report and inability to do research at world class level, not to mention our lack of tendency to speak up. When you analyse the population of nobel prize winner, they mainly came from countries where research and development is of the essence of their education system. To compare, Malaysia is very interested in theoretical science. Look at how much we learn math compared to other countries. Mixing relegion and science is not one of the factor of why we dont have any nobel prize winner...

As a prove to this, I've come to a country of 'nobel prize', it you'd like to say that. They are a lot dumber than we are in terms of theoretical science and math. However, if you ask them to write a report, they can complete an 'A' report in just 1 night, but for Malaysian... 1-week time won't guarantee a 'B'. This shows how good they are in presenting things, which is very essential for us to win a nobel prize.

[ Last edited by aku_EnSeM at 4-11-2008 11:23 AM ]

physic · Post time 5-11-2008 01:26 PM

face the reality lahh...

aku_EnSeM · Post time 5-11-2008 04:43 PM

Originally posted by physic at 5-11-2008 01:26 PM
face the reality lahh...

Face the reality of what? If you are referring to the fact that Malaysia is not good enough for a Nobel Prize, I accept that. But if you say that Malaysian do not deserve a Nobel Prize because of our attempt to mix science and religion, that is not accurate.

Seeking for relationship between science and religion is natural, and there is nothing wrong with that. And remember, not all Malaysians do that. The main factor is that we are pretty weak in presenting things on paper, not to mention our lack of skills in performing researches.

Read carefully on my previous post on how Nobel Prizes are awarded before you make any conclusion of why Malaysian have never won any Nobel Prize.

eragon · Post time 5-11-2008 06:28 PM

apa citer lhc nih..
dah start balik ker...
tak sabor nak kena sedut neh...

aku_EnSeM · Post time 5-11-2008 09:19 PM

kite da masuk black hole daa... xprasan ke...

Atomic_Omnikid · Post time 6-11-2008 01:07 AM

Originally posted by aku_EnSeM at 4-11-2008 11:16
thats kind of harsh...

kene ingat, nobel prize adelah utk org yg buat penemuan baru yg boleh dibuktikan...

surprisingly, org2 mcm stephen hawking xpernah pun dpt nobel prize... and did he m ...

Maths curriculum in school has become so diluted,they should be exposed to more,I also would like to learn the history and philosophy behind maths,they can become motivation for students to accomplish more in field of science,but sadly,we are just memorizing formulaes..