Changing curvature as a universe evolves

In summary: I'm not completely sure. It's something to do with the equation of the hyperboloid. But again, the topology of a spatial hypersurface with k=+1 is usually the same as the topology of a hyperboloid, and the topology of a spatial hypersurface with k=0 is usually the same as the topology of a sphere. So your question is basically irrelevant.
  • #36
Concerning post #28 in general.
I seem to have caused a problem or offence and I can only apologise for that. Perhaps I could explain the motivation for my actions so that you might see that no harm was intended and how easily a new foum member can get things wrong.

I was looking for a place to discuss some Physics and a Google search came up with Physics Forum. I skim read some of the terms and background for this website and found statements like this -

Our mission is to provide a place for people (whether students, professional scientists, or others interested in science) to learn and discuss science as it is currently generally understood and practiced by the professional scientific community

So I started to use the site. When this thread was created it was my intention to discuss a topic and learn as I went and I tried to make that clear in the OP and early posts. I thought a forum like this one might work as something comparable to a "study group" or just a coffee shop inside a place of learning, where one person can discuss both their ideas and their difficulties in understanding with others. That is what I have tried to do.

I have listened to all of the posts from others, engaged with every person that took the time to discuss anything and openly admitted where they were right and I had been wrong. See post #6 and #7 as a short example of an exchange between @Orodruin and myself. If I hadn't done this it would have been wrong and that's not the sort of person you would want in a study group or any discussion. However, you wouldn't want a person in a discussion or study group if they don't pull their weight either. This seemed to be especially true in a forum where you are the original poster. For example, in post #5 I got a message from a moderator that seemed to be saying something along those lines.

PeterDonis said:
Just saying you can't see any reason why not is not suffcient; you would actually need to find a solution that has the property.
So I increased the amount of writing in my own comments and replies and set about demonstrating why a solution should exist. In later posts, I continued writing more and learned how LaTeX works in this forum. In all likelihood I went too far, my posts were too long and may have seemed like some direct challenge backed up with half-correct references and nonsense mathematics. There were then comments from others along those lines. There is a phrase we use locally, "you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't". Making a discussion without any references or avoiding Mathematics wouldn't have been good either. The situation is understood, I hope, when you see that I was just trying to discuss things as if in a study group.

I have made a similar mistake while trying to keep a forum thread on topic and updated. I thought it was generally good to stay on the main topic and drifting off topic is often considered as "hijacking". In my limited experience of forums I've also noticed that very old and very long threads with many replies are almost impossible to join in any constructive way. It is not possible to read and appreciate all the replies that have gone before and to see what the current state of the discussion has become. It is useful if someone, often the OP, can occassionally update the thread somehow. This is the sort of thing I was trying to do in post #23. I seem to have got this completely wrong and attracted comments along those lines.
PeterDonis said:
Perhaps that was the purpose of your OP in this thread, but it's not what the purpose of this thread has evolved into.

It is a narrow line to walk, learning to use a forum and new members will get it wrong. My sincerest apologies.

PeterDonis said:
None of us get paid for this
I did not know but suspected that may be the case. I have always been and remain grateful for the time spent. You have never been under an obligation to reply. One of the ways in which this thread has failed is that it has failed to attract attention from people in a similar position to myself and instead consumed time from you. I am very sorry, it is not working as I hoped and I will cease. I cannot offer to pay you for your time since that seems to conflict with the terms and conditions of use, however there are many banners indicating ways in which I can support PF as a whole and I will be looking into those.

I can only repeat the message from post #23:
Will Learn said:
I'm making good progress answering my own question by looking at ..(stuff)... I've bored everyone else enough already and probably won't write anymore about that. I'm very grateful for all the time, attention and replies I have received on Physics Forums.
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #37
Will Learn said:
I seem to have caused a problem or offence
You haven't caused any offense.

Will Learn said:
you wouldn't want a person in a discussion or study group if they don't pull their weight
It's not at all a matter of "pulling your weight". Obviously we don't expect you to have the same understanding of the topic under discussion as members who have studied the topic for years. If you feel like you need to somehow display that level of knowledge in order to continue posting, that is not at all the case. In fact it's the opposite: as a newcomer to a topic, we would rather you did not try to guess or hypothesize or theorize about it at all. That's why PF has rules about personal theories and personal speculations being off limits.
 
  • Like
Likes Orodruin

Similar threads

  • Cosmology
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
25
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
29
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
863
Back
Top