Recent content by Cold Winter

Also, there now appears to be an "unexplained particle" from the data from LHC ( I think its them ). Exciting stuff recently. Wonder if anybody has compared the data to Lisi's E8 mapping?

Sure, if the universe is expanding as per the "big bang", then effectively the separation would be "superluminal". However, in inertially defined space, the answer is still no... Clear as mud eh?

? Are you trying to suggest that a singularity would ease to exist if its radial velocity was approx. 15% of "c"?

Only if you think that its practical to assume that the big bang came from nothing. That "something" lead up to the big bang would seem quite reasonable to me. A completely sterile "beginning" for the big bang might be the more improbable...

Well, it "could" be, if the distance from an isotropic radiator is so far, that the energy level falls below quantum limits of resolution. We "solve" that problem by using a larger aperture. But just maybe there is no practical aperture once you get past a certain distance. Even gravitational...

Or perhaps, any signal originating beyond 13.7B LYs is going to be effectively below the Planck limit and therefore not detectable by any instrument. Now that would also throw a rather large brick at a lot of cosmological theory? Thoughts?

And now folks... The trick question. Has all this work produced any "testable" propositions, outside of what Garret started with in the first place?

Perhaps I should have said "the truth may be" ...however taken in the context of my original post I don't think it matters. I might also add, that we've known since the 1930s that mathematics is not necessarily linearly predictive. So I still stand by my basic policy. there's my lab bench...

ThankYou for that. String Theory is a very elegant mathematical "castle in the air". Its a bit like creating a word to describe this thing we call the "cosmos". We only need one word. The math crowd created one massive multi "option" algebra to do the same thing. OTOH, it is precisely...

Over in another thread, someone asked "what about time?"... to which I ask you, have you looked at this? As well as inertia, gravity, and you did mention vacuum energy. A simplification of your focus, ( perhaps on one or more of the above items ) might get something that we can lab test...

I've looked at the Atlas code. Yes it seems to be all "C", but with a few modules that seem more GUI related. I am perhaps a bit more jaded when it comes to iron than others. For e.g. I have a supplier pawning DDR2 ram for $9.99/GB... that puts 128GB in the $1278 range. Same source has a 16...

LOL, I have no sympathy for iron. I just pound it hard. While the prospect of running my little monster here for 8 weeks straight doesn't bother me ( I have nice cool place for it here in my home ), I want to build a new little monster. The Atlas redo kinda justifies it... sort of gives me an...

Well, you've been pointed to the LieGroup website which "may" answer your question. My interest is in duplicating experiments. And in this case, I'm looking to "duplicate" the E8 computation done by the Atlas program which is the source of these tables. If it can't be duplicated or I come...

On what time scale do the theories predict decay? I seem to recall the decay time is long enough to go to the big crunch...

I'm looking to mechanize E8 in a manner that anyone can use ( without 16way Opteron based computers ). Then I'm wondering at some method of "posing questions" to the model.