In this month's Discover, you'll find a brand-new column written by me. About the multiverse this month. Suggestions for future topics?
10 plus ones
Shared publicly•View activity
View 22 previous comments
- topic suggestion:
- current state of LHC, whats next for it, what next big experiment proposals are out there after LHC.
- white holes: fantasy or theoretically possible?
- your comments on this video: Imagining the Tenth Dimension part 1 of 2Sep 14, 2011
- thank you for your response. Sorry I didn't see it earlier from the flood of cutesy animal / lolcat pics on my stream!
I must admit your answer did come as a bit of a surprise to me. I thought the Big Rip was proposed by other physicists. Both theoretical and mathematical? And I thought it gained popularity soon after the discovery of the increase in acceleration of the expansion of the observable universe? Anyway I respect your opinion. Mostly because the maths is beyond me :)
One thing that does bother me. With regards to current cosmological theories, eg the Big Bang theory, theories about the large scale structure of the universe etc. Surely if we have to create exotic materials such as Dark Matter, and Dark Energy with even more bizarre properties, just so we can account for 96% of the missing mass then surely that's a call for going back to the drawing board with all of our 'working theories' about the structure, history, and age of the universe? I mean, if observations alone only account for 4% of the mass, the rest, 96%, we have to pretty much add as fudge factor just so the observations allow the theories (Big Bang, accelerating expansion of the universe, etc etc) to hold! Doesn't that say more about those theories?
Example: If I was doing a benchtop experiment to test a hypothesis about the theory, and it turned out my theories didn't account for 96% of the mass, I'd seriously consider tossing the theory and start from scratch! ?
Maybe the errors are in the observations? Or maybe we should revisit the WIMPS vs MACHOS dilemma? But whatever we have to do, I am finding a
96%2,400% uncertainty rather challenging :)
Of course, anybody else who wants to chime in is welcome. And , if you feel I should continue this elsewhere please let me know. Thanks.Sep 18, 2011
- Maybe you could do a regular feature on the blog where you expound further upon what you put into the mag column. You could put a call-out somewhere in the column -- including a handy shortened URL -- pointing people to the blog to read more of the details online.Sep 27, 2011
- Might be fun to try. It's hard to do if the column isn't accessible online right away; people who just read the blog would be baffled.Sep 27, 2011
- Could write the column and blog post at the same time, but hold the blog post until the column goes up on the site. I can work with you on when that'll happen [do the same w ].Sep 27, 2011
- Sure, I'd love to do that.Sep 27, 2011