Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Advances in the investigation of the physical universe we live in.
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27242
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by Typhoon »

May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5637
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Time is gone, where is it?

Post by Parodite »

Doc wrote:Killer quantum theory could explain literally what is killing us

Correlation the causation of the Arrow of Time

https://www.wired.com/2014/04/quantum-theory-flow-time/
New Quantum Theory Could Explain the Flow of Time


I suppose if true, this could imply a lot of things about life, the universe, and everything. Perhaps we are all correlating to belly button fuzz on the surface of the universe. :D
I find the article obscure. Which is nothing new when people take a ride on Quantum Physics where one mystery is used to try explaining another.

Some remarks and thoughts:

The article suggests that the arrow of time results from an increasing entanglement of objects with their surroundings. But it seems more accurate to just say that the entanglement configuration changes all the time; in general as well as in (arbitrarily chosen) confined locations. Added to that, there are no systems that are fully closed systems. The exchange of energy, and hence entanglement of particles, is in a constant flux everywhere. Every subsystem, when considered in isolation, will display a tendency towards equilibrium but all regions in the universe are (still) open to energy exchange and interaction; shorts distance and long distance, so within our Universe all processes are open systems, never closed systems. One could theorize that the Universe as a whole is a closed system, like a bubble floating in literal and absolute nothingness, but for that there is no proof and most physicists don't believe our Universe is the only one.

If a coffee cup that is standing on a table and cooling down (irreversibly) is understood as an increase of entanglement of the coffee cup with its surroundings which would explain the arrow of time (in the confined location of the room with the coffee cup in it)... it then begs the question what the arrow of time is when you wouldn't let the coffee cup cool down.. but actually heat it up; you add energy to the system (assuming the source of the energy is outside the room). Would a coffee cup that looses energy have a forward arrow of time, and one that is heated up an arrow of time that goes backwards? That makes no sense at all, since no matter from which perspective you look at things, the 2nd law of thermodynamics holds true under all circumstances where processes interact. Meaning, "the arrow of time" simply points to the fact that things change all the time and that there is no going back, no matter how much or how little entanglement fluctuates between relative parts. But we knew this already.

What the article pays little attention to is that time is a mental percept that arises in the brain, "where things happen before or after other things". Brain science seems to me the first place to look when you want to understand time, and the arrow of time which is a mental experience.

Mental images of past events and expectations about future events that arise in our brains do not point to physical realities outside our brains, and are therefor hardly relevant to physics other than as an abstraction useful to analyse things through measurement, such as at t1 this happened, and shortly after at t2 that. But most physicists consider time not (anymore) a physical reality or dimension.

Albert Einstein:
Since there exists in this four dimensional structure [space-time] no longer any sections which represent "now" objectively, the concepts of happening and becoming are indeed not completely suspended, but yet complicated. It appears therefore more natural to think of physical reality as a four dimensional existence, instead of, as hitherto, the evolution of a three dimensional existence.
Quantum Mechanics makes difficult common sense. Richard Feynman advised not to try understand it and stay away from ontological interpretations unless new experiments force you to reconsider.

Quantum entanglement is mysterious. Time is mysterious too, but in my view "the arrow of time" is less mysterious if you keep it out of physics altogether and just let it be researched in the brain sciences first. Time (always has an "arrow") is an experience and as all experiences it arises in human body-brains, and probably other mammals. Take the experience of a color like green, if you are not color blind. You won't find that green in the physical world as it exists independent of our experience and which is what science tries to investigate: all you find about green is a correlation with wave lengths. Same with time and its arrow I suspect. Science may not find it all all... out there.
Deep down I'm very superficial
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27242
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by Typhoon »

Stuff Physicists Don't Understand: Sonoluminesence
How can tiny collapsing bubbles inside a vat of water or other liquid reach temperatures of 20,000°C? Nobody has a clue
GJolILUbdNw
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12561
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by Doc »

Typhoon wrote:Stuff Physicists Don't Understand: Sonoluminesence
How can tiny collapsing bubbles inside a vat of water or other liquid reach temperatures of 20,000°C? Nobody has a clue
GJolILUbdNw
Interesting. I thought this was well understood.
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12561
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by Doc »

Can Twinkies destroy the planet? If so what would it be called? "Global Twinky change"? "The sweetest end ever"? "The God pastry"?

Anyway if you have made it this far into this post, enjoy:

i8LIDFGawDU
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27242
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by Typhoon »

May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12561
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by Doc »

Scientists hypothesize new speed limit for light after big bang

http://qz.com/846498/the-speed-of-light ... ssumptions.
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11567
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

.


2016 Breakthrough Prize in Fundamental Physics.

.
Vafa is a string theorist.

His research is focused on the nature of quantum gravity and the relation between geometry and quantum field theories. He is known in the string theory community for his co-discovery, with Strominger, that the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of a black hole can be accounted for by solitonic states of superstring theory, and for expounding the relation between geometry and field theories that arise through string dualities (culminating in the Gopakumar-Vafa conjecture). This topic has been known as "geometric engineering of quantum field theories". In 1997, he developed F-theory.

He is also interested in understanding the underlying meaning of string dualities, as well as trying to apply superstring theory to some unsolved questions of elementary particle physics such as the hierarchy problem and the cosmological constant problem.

He has made contributions to topological string theories and to the understanding of mirror symmetry.

He is also a trustee of Network of Iranians for Knowledge and Innovation (NIKI).

.

Dr. Vafa Awarded 2017 Breakthrough Prize In Fundamental Physics

.
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27242
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by Typhoon »

This new prize reminds one of the Soviet Russians after they lost the space race and went around putting up giant monuments to their other successe.

There is only one problem with string theory: after over four decades of intense research no one has to-date produced a single experimentally testable prediction. So those awards are for untested and possibly untestable hypotheses rather than "breakthrough physics".

On the other hand, the award for the experimental observation of gravitational waves, the LIGO experiment, is highly deserved.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
noddy
Posts: 11318
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by noddy »

and so the wait begins.
ultracrepidarian
Simple Minded

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by Simple Minded »

noddy wrote:and so the wait begins.
Are we there yet? No....? How bout now?

Is it possible with string theory to just jump into another parallel universe where scientists have already solved this problem and plagiarize their work?

If I was a string theory scientist, that's what I'd do.
noddy
Posts: 11318
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by noddy »

string theory is the extension of cosmic vibration energy theory and obviously a favourite of the guitar strumming fraternity with an inate bias towards strings.

its a conspiracy against brass

Image
ultracrepidarian
User avatar
Apollonius
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:32 pm

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by Apollonius »

The trouble with quantum mechanics - Steven Weinberg, New York Review of Books, 18 January 2017
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2017/01 ... mechanics/
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

Thank you, Noddy.

I have always wondered why they call that instrument the French Horn.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27242
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by Typhoon »

Simple Minded wrote:
noddy wrote:and so the wait begins.
Are we there yet? No....? How bout now?

Is it possible with string theory to just jump into another parallel universe where scientists have already solved this problem and plagiarize their work?

If I was a string theory scientist, that's what I'd do.
The results from the full 13 TeV LHC dataset are just a few weeks away, no rumours of evidence for SUperSYmmetry
so it seems that a theory called SUSY is going to get another swift kick in the pants.

Not that that will deter the faithful, they will simply fine tune their models to a higher energy than at available at the LHC and argue for a new accelerator.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27242
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by Typhoon »

Sci Am | Cosmology - Pop goes the universe [pdf]

An "old school" Sci Am article that harks back to those of its Golden Age. Written by scientists working in the field.
The latest measurements of the cosmic microwave background (CMB), the universe’s oldest light, raise concerns about the inflationary theory of the cosmos — the idea that space expanded exponentially in the first moments of time.

Inflation typically predicts a different pattern of temperature variation in the CMB (although it can be made to predict almost any outcome). It would also produce primordial gravitational waves, which have not been found.

The data suggest cosmologists should reassess this favored paradigm and consider new ideas about how the universe began.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5637
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Quantum weirdness

Post by Parodite »

WIyTZDHuarQ
Deep down I'm very superficial
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27242
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Quantum weirdness

Post by Typhoon »

Parodite wrote:WIyTZDHuarQ


QM is a strictly linear theory with the all important principle of linear superposition of states.

The experiment, extrapolated as a model for the pilot wave theory, is governed by the highly non-linear equations of fluid dynamics.

So, no.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5637
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Quantum weirdness

Post by Parodite »

Typhoon wrote: QM is a strictly linear theory with the all important principle of superposition.
I think the video tries to make possible physical sense of superposition beyond the mathematical formalism. Superposition and collapse of the wave function are mathematical descriptions, what they mean/represent physically is open for debate and a controversy still.

The Trouble with Quantum Mechanics - Steven Weinberg

I like the Feynman approach to safely remain agnostic about the physical reality of things before a quantum measurement. Is a "wave-particle in a superposition when all possible states (outcomes) exist at the same time?" Makes no linguistic sense.

Claims about the un-observed are not helpful it seems to me. I prefer terms like "unknown" "undecided" and leave it at that. So a legit phrase would be: the mathematical formalisms and their proven reliability to predict and be applied in technology, suggest that before a quantum measurement (mathematically: the collapse of the wave function), it is as-if a wave-particle exists in a superposition of all possible outcomes "at the same time". With the emphasis on as-if. Same with non-locality claims: as-if a particle can be at two different places at the same time.
The experiment is governed by non-linear equations.
You mean the experiment in the video?

Not sure this is relevant: harmonic oscillations in classical physics yield linearity. In the video the wave that goes with the bouncing particle is a standing wave.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qu-jyrwW6hw

and

http://www.ks.uiuc.edu/Services/Class/P ... F/chp4.pdf
Deep down I'm very superficial
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27242
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Quantum weirdness

Post by Typhoon »

Parodite wrote:
Typhoon wrote: QM is a strictly linear theory with the all important principle of superposition.
I think the video tries to make possible physical sense of superposition beyond the mathematical formalism. Superposition and collapse of the wave function are mathematical descriptions, what they mean/represent physically is open for debate and a controversy still.

The Trouble with Quantum Mechanics - Steven Weinberg
Lots of very bright people are uncomfortable with QM.

None as yet have come up with a viable testable alternative.
Parodite wrote:I like the Feynman approach to safely remain agnostic about the physical reality of things before a quantum measurement. Is a "wave-particle in a superposition when all possible states (outcomes) exist at the same time?" Makes no linguistic sense.
That is a limit of language, not of nature.
Parodite wrote:Claims about the un-observed are not helpful it seems to me. I prefer terms like "unknown" "undecided" and leave it at that. So a legit phrase would be: the mathematical formalisms and their proven reliability to predict and be applied in technology, suggest that before a quantum measurement (mathematically: the collapse of the wave function), it is as-if a wave-particle exists in a superposition of all possible outcomes "at the same time". With the emphasis on as-if. Same with non-locality claims: as-if a particle can be at two different places at the same time.
I don't worry much about the linguistics, as mathematics is the language of nature.
Parodite wrote:
The experiment is governed by non-linear equations.
You mean the experiment in the video?
Yes.
Parodite wrote: Not sure this is relevant: harmonic oscillations in classical physics yield linearity.
No. The solution of the linear Schrodinger equation with a quadratic restoring potential yields a quantized harmonic oscillator.
Parodite wrote: In the video the wave that goes with the bouncing particle is a standing wave.
nmC0ygr08tE

Lovely. Except that no one has come up with a underlying medium, such as water, that would act as a "pilot wave" to "guide" an electron.

Reminds one of the luminiferous aether hypothesis of the late 19th century that was thought to be necessary for the propagation of light.

Analogies can only take one so far.

There are further issues. QM based on the Schrodinger equation is only an approximation and is incomplete.

One has to reconcile QM with the constraints of special relativity:

The consequences of relativistic QM [RQM], the Dirac equation, are the existence of antimatter and the spin of the electron [and positron].

As far as I'm aware, no one has successfully written down a RQM for the de Broglie-Bohm pilot wave hypothesis.

However, this is not the end of the story, by any means.

For example, RQM comes close to predicting the correct difference between the 2S 1/2 and 2P 1/2 energy levels of the hydrogen atom and the magnetic moment of the electron, but not close enough. RQM it turns out, is only another higher level of approximation.

To achieve agreement between theory and experiment required the development of quantum field theory [QFT for the EM field, quantum electrodynamics - QED, by Schwinger, Tomonaga, Feynman, and Dyson].

[Aside. The history of this heroic intellectual effort is documented here:

https://www.amazon.com/Selected-Papers- ... +schwinger ]

QFT is required to described the fundamental EM and weak and strong nuclear forces in nature.

As far as I'm aware, no one has successfully written down a QFT for the de Broglie-Bohm pilot wave hypothesis.

QFT is the required description of fundamental quantum processes in nature.
If you wish to learn QM, then I can suggest no better source than

QM; Vols 1 and 2

by Cohen-Tannoudji, Diu, and Laloe

https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Mechanic ... 047116433X

The chapter on the quantization of the harmonic oscillator is classic.

Although the MIT OpenCourse is also certainly worth viewing.

Btw, the quantum harmonic oscillator (QHO) and the ladder operator formalism of Dirac
are fundamental to the development of quantum field theory.

For example, the excitations of the EM field correspond to the energy levels of the QHO.
The ladder operators become the field creation - annihilation operators.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5637
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Quantum weirdness

Post by Parodite »

Typhoon wrote:
Parodite wrote:I like the Feynman approach to safely remain agnostic about the physical reality of things before a quantum measurement. Is a "wave-particle in a superposition when all possible states (outcomes) exist at the same time?" Makes no linguistic sense.
That is a limit of language, not of nature.
Of course. But this limit is often not taken into account when people with supposed authority talk about QM are actually selling bad poetry to the public instead of physics. Bad language has inspired many gullibles to go on a spiritual ride with the magic of quantum mechanics making claims about human consciousness for which there is no coherent argument let alone experimental evidence.
Parodite wrote:Claims about the un-observed are not helpful it seems to me. I prefer terms like "unknown" "undecided" and leave it at that. So a legit phrase would be: the mathematical formalisms and their proven reliability to predict and be applied in technology, suggest that before a quantum measurement (mathematically: the collapse of the wave function), it is as-if a wave-particle exists in a superposition of all possible outcomes "at the same time". With the emphasis on as-if. Same with non-locality claims: as-if a particle can be at two different places at the same time.
I don't worry much about the linguistics, as mathematics is the language of nature.
I would call math the grammar of nature, and nature being multilingual. Even so, part of what physicists do, as opposed to pure mathematicians, is wonder ponder who/what is doing the talking. Sort of analogous to a Turing test.
Parodite wrote: In the video the wave that goes with the bouncing particle is a standing wave.
[youtube]...[/youtube]

Lovely. Except that no one has come up with a underlying medium, such as water, that would act as a "pilot wave" to "guide" an electron.
I'm happy to leave that to physicists who feel the need to prove such a thing. :)
Reminds one of the luminiferous aether hypothesis of the late 19th century that was thought to be necessary for the propagation of light.
But such an "aether" as a concept is qualitatively not much different from something mysterious like "a force field". What is a force field in "empty space"?

The "aether" seems to me more like a provisional soundbite that points to the idea that "nothingness" in regions of space-time cannot be considered empty in a literal sense. Another way of saying that one can safely assume that physical reality is indivisible. That whatever objects, forces, fields we identify.. they cannot be considered to co-exists in pure isolation interacting via something like a medium of pure nothingness. What "glues" everything together turning the sum of parts into an indivisible whole? My 2 cents: we won't find that glue.
Analogies can only take one so far.
Indeed. But analogy and contrast have always been great tools for discovery.
There are further issues. QM based on the Schrodinger equation is only an approximation and is incomplete.

One has to reconcile QM with the constraints of special relativity:

The consequences of relativistic QM [RQM], the Dirac equation, are the existence of antimatter and the spin of the electron [and positron].

As far as I'm aware, no one has successfully written down a RQM for the de Broglie-Bohm pilot wave hypothesis.

However, this is not the end of the story, by any means.

For example, RQM comes close to predicting the correct difference between the 2S 1/2 and 2P 1/2 energy levels of the hydrogen atom and the magnetic moment of the electron, but not close enough. RQM it turns out, is only another higher level of approximation.

To achieve agreement between theory and experiment required the development of quantum field theory [QFT for the EM field, quantum electrodynamics - QED, by Schwinger, Tomonaga, Feynman, and Dyson].

[Aside. The history of this heroic intellectual effort is documented here:

https://www.amazon.com/Selected-Papers- ... +schwinger ]

QFT is required to described the fundamental EM and weak and strong nuclear forces in nature.

As far as I'm aware, no one has successfully written down a QFT for the de Broglie-Bohm pilot wave hypothesis.

QFT is the required description of fundamental quantum processes in nature.
Interesting. Maybe big-bang (or big bounce) physics could give clues to that? After all.. from that point 13.6 billions years ago nature/cosmos evolved to what it is now. Just my 2 cents.
If you wish to learn QM, then I can suggest no better source than

QM; Vols 1 and 2

by Cohen-Tannoudji, Diu, and Laloe

https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Mechanic ... 047116433X

The chapter on the quantization of the harmonic oscillator is classic.

Although the MIT OpenCourse is also certainly worth viewing.

Btw, the quantum harmonic oscillator (QHO) and the ladder operator formalism of Dirac
are fundamental to the development of quantum field theory.

For example, the excitations of the EM field correspond to the energy levels of the QHO.
The ladder operators become the field creation - annihilation operators.
Thanks.

Forgot which discovery, but something when Einstein (i think) added a provisional glitch in his equations to get a solution.. and later this glitch turned out to be a famous constant. Going back and forth between the math of physics and experimentation/observation, sometimes observe things that don't fit the math yet or vice-versa making the math fit and then hunt for the potential thing missing in the physical world, must be very rewarding! In my next life I want to have a wee bit more talent for math though. The probability distribution for that to happen is unknown unfortunately. Maybe it is in the aether.
Deep down I'm very superficial
User avatar
NapLajoieonSteroids
Posts: 8390
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm

Re: Quantum weirdness

Post by NapLajoieonSteroids »

Simple Minded wrote: I think Michio Kaku may be one of the current rock stars. Whether he is full of it or not, I have no clue.
Michio Kaku is the man!

He's got the look, he's got the talent, he does all the interviews!

Does he do any science; does he specialize in anything? Who cares!

When he was the go-to pop science guy, he was everywhere; I have no clue how he had time to sit on the cutting edge.

Then Neil Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye honed in on his pop science turf. And like hound dogs, they are everywhere these days. You don't see Michio Kaku out there all that much.

But they are pretenders to the throne. I like think somewhere out there, the king is in a laboratory preparing his comeback, to take his rightful place as "confirmed popular science guy", one atom at a time. :D

Image
Simple Minded

Re: Quantum weirdness

Post by Simple Minded »

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote:
Simple Minded wrote: I think Michio Kaku may be one of the current rock stars. Whether he is full of it or not, I have no clue.
Michio Kaku is the man!

He's got the look, he's got the talent, he does all the interviews!

Does he do any science; does he specialize in anything? Who cares!

When he was the go-to pop science guy, he was everywhere; I have no clue how he had time to sit on the cutting edge.

Then Neil Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye honed in on his pop science turf. And like hound dogs, they are everywhere these days. You don't see Michio Kaku out there all that much.

But they are pretenders to the throne. I like think somewhere out there, the king is in a laboratory preparing his comeback, to take his rightful place as "confirmed popular science guy", one atom at a time. :D

Image
Self-loathing, self-righteous, selfless, altruistic, regressive, progressive Physicists are an oppressed minority! ;)

Hopefully, somewhere over the rainbow, in an alt-universe, they are more appreciated.

I hear Typhoon is warming up in the batter's box, ready to become your king. As soon as he can get an appointment with Trump's hairstylist. But, are you worthy?
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27242
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by Typhoon »

Intermediate asymptotics:

uYbNlgQyz84
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12561
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics

Post by Doc »

dark-energy-not-exist-2.jpg
dark-energy-not-exist-2.jpg (80.48 KiB) Viewed 1962 times
http://newatlas.com/dark-energy-existen ... ned/48708/
Simulation suggests 68 percent of the universe may not actually exist
Michael Irving Michael Irving March 30, 2017
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
Post Reply