Recent content by finiter

The definition of 'time' has changed with time. I think that the change was made to suit the requirements, like changing the goal post during the course of the play. Now based on the changed definition of time, it is argued there was no time before big-bang. I think it is the relative time (the...

It is just the connections, the signals and the processing, whether it is neurons or other things. If any man-made processor can be as efficient as the brain, it will mimic consciousness. But, of course, it will need the required peripherals. Once we provide the peripherals, it will need the...

It is somewhat like a printed circuit being replaced by long wires. The system would work, but its efficacy would be affected. The factors pointed out by Cassander would affect the efficacy, and hence, the consciousness. However, being a thought experiment, we can assume that efficacy is not...

Old organizations collapse and new ones take their place. The change is in quantum jumps and not continuous. However, over a long period, the change may appear to be continuous. The same is the case with science. The questions you have put forth are very relevant. I think we have to go back to...

Existence is something connected with time. So space or distance cannot exist without time. Similarly, no body can exist without space. So, irrespective of whether Einstein’s theory of relativity is correct or not, time and space are required for the existence of matter in the form that we now see.

I would have said, 'a four dimensional moebius with three space dimensions and a time dimension'. In a two dimensional moebius, one dimension has borders while the other dimension has no borders. In a similar manner, the three space dimensions of the universe can have borders while the time...

As the actual shape of the universe is yet undecided, the space can even be visualized as a three dimensional moebius!

That means the 'entropy of a gravitating system' is a grey area, and one can try some unexplored ideas to relate heat, gravity and entropy.

Can becoming clumpy be regarded as becoming cold? In that case, the entropy should decrease; so it would appear that the approved model of the black hole goes against what is expected.

Then, can the expansion be regarded as three dimensional, the shape of the universe remaining either spherical or as a spherical surface? Then can we simplify the whole thing as: once matter particles were formed, matter started contracting due to gravity while the universe continued expanding.

If the universe is homogeneous, on a large scale, at every instant, can we regard it as a system in which the members interact gravitationally? Or is it just an absurd collection of galaxies and that the actual reason why it remains uniform remains unknown?

I agree with your observation. May be. More probably, may be with both. I think Newton's law of gravity also predicts a singularity. Something wrong with the concept of gravity itself?

Quoting from 'nismaratwork': "It's an impressive stepping stone" "and obviously still an approximation". So is it not logical to search from there itself?. Quoting again from 'nismaratwork': "QM and GR need to merge, or be replaced". If replaced, the right predictions of GR would be explained...

I don't know whether hinting a possibility is tantamount to floating unpublished personal theories. If it is, I will avoid.

I agrre with you. GTR is a turning point. But its is the best point from where one can start an alternate search. Either you may get trapped or you may come out with a new explanation, which avoids GTR, but endorses its right predictions.