No physical mechanisms predefines future events (or is there one ?).
So, I could state that the future does not exist yet and the past as ceased to exist.
in that statement I have a problem with the definition of existence. Does the definition of existence exist itself ? This is (is it ?) more a problem of terminology than philosophy or physics.
Thanks for your time and attention.
We have never observed anything in the universe just popping into existence from nothing (…)
if we did, that would be a major shift in physics. in this regards I heard of (or read of) two candidates :
.1 if universe’s expansion continues to accelerate, (it would mean) dark energy is increassing.
.2 an excess of hydrogen (clouds) outside of galaxies was observed that is difficult to explain with current cosmology.
I know these are not direct observation of something popping up, …but still.
I think there must be a mechanism behind the (stated) laws. This is what interest my reflection.
On a side note :
is there something in nature that prescribes the conservation of energy ?
(please, if you answer this, do so under my other comment (big bang…) …I don’t want to lose track of the main topic).
I am trying to find a loophole for the origin of the big Bang or whatever created the universe.
P.S. What I’m saying could be something like : “if a system is empty it doesn’t contain the first law”.
My misquotation was on purpose.
in the same thread of thoughts : if there was a system without the first law, anything could appear as if by magic !
…that is, until the 1st law appears.
I believe in this community you have to write the word “rule” in the title, like so :
Banana? Banana rules !
(you can edit the title even after posting, that is, if you want so)
The original Big Bang also violates conservation of energy.
For the moment this is just a shower thought. More work would have to be done along these lines.
Those mostly create magnetic and electomagnetic radiation. Some are also magnetars
There is already a link in my post for one big source of gravitational waves
Thanks 😊. This comes from a discussion at !askscience@lemmy.world
… from this discussion thread
Cosmological Microwave Background
This comes from this discussion thread
Thanks for explaining in simple words things that are out of my reach.
I couldn’t understand the first equation in that article (which has 148 equations) : Hamiltonian formulation of gravity as a spontaneously-broken gauge theory of the Lorentz group by Tom Zlosnik.
I read through the blog post you linked from Dr. Pavel Kroupa, The Dark Matter Crisis which is more easy to understand.
From that blog I get that an explanation of the cosmos without the Big Bang is far from the main focus now.
Before writing to you, I was already convinced MOND is superior to LCDM and this for the same reasons you give in your comments and some more.
I hope in the next decades we will see consistent cosmology theories not only without dark matter but also without a big bang.
P.S. : You might like this :
A non-Standard model, David Merritt, Aeon Magazine, July 2021
Could MOND (or RMOND) allow the description of the cosmos without any big bang ?
I do not work in this field but I read quite a bit and I’m interested.
Yes lol well, this is my hobby.
I find radio and TV mostly boring.
Here we have many nice people, liberty of speech and very low social pressure.
Lemmy is Fun 😄
From the sidebar of the main page of lemmy.world, so :
That 76% was 2 hours ago, now at 74%
indeed Snowden is a real hero !
thanks for your kind comments 😋 !
Please notice the edit of my previous comment answering your question.
Up time 76% on lemmy.world // last 24h.
No message from any of their admis.
Outside attack : usual shitheads.
And if LM LW fails, they will attack the next big one.
Edit #1 : LM is Lemmy.world
Edit #2 : oups LW … not LM
Edit #3 : Lemmy.World status
Edit #4 : from 4am utc //24h :
Anthropologically speaking this is the best answer. Our brain needs a certain span of time to establish perceived reality.