Model Universe: Calculating Gravitational Info Rate

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Hippasos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Modelling Universe
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of calculating the gravitational information rate that a particle receives in a modeled universe. Participants explore the definitions, implications, and challenges of modeling the universe, touching on both theoretical and practical aspects.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how to define "gravitational information rate" and proposes a definition based on the data gathered from the vector sum of attractions in a modeled universe.
  • Another participant argues that it is impossible to model the universe due to the requirement that the modeling facility must be larger than the universe itself, raising concerns about the feasibility of such a model.
  • A subsequent reply seeks clarification on the term "facility" and its implications for modeling, using the solar system as an example.
  • Further elaboration suggests that to perfectly model anything, one would need to replicate it life-size, including all particles, which presents significant challenges.
  • Some participants assert that mathematical modeling is possible, though the accuracy of such models in relation to actual situations is uncertain and may require extensive trial and error.
  • There are considerations about the effects of cosmic microwave background radiation and solar particles on a modeled particle, as well as potential influences of dark energy and dark matter on local orbits.
  • One participant notes that while modeling is a common pursuit, it is a complex task that may take considerable time and effort.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with some asserting the impossibility of modeling the universe while others believe mathematical modeling is feasible. There is no consensus on the definition of gravitational information rate or the practicality of such models.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations related to the definitions of terms, the scale of modeling required, and the complexities involved in accurately representing gravitational influences.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring theoretical physics, cosmology, and mathematical modeling in the context of gravitational phenomena.

Hippasos
Messages
75
Reaction score
0
If we were to model the universe can we calculate the gravitational information rate which a particle receives in a universe?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Well, first one would have to define "gravitational information rate".
 
Could it be defined like this:

Gravitation information rate = How much data is gathered when calculating the vector sum of the modeled particle (all attractions) in a given time in a modeled universe.

Would the order in which the particles affect each other become problem i.e. how could we handle the causality in our model in a proper way?
 
Flat out simple answer is that it's impossible to model the universe, so it's an irrelevant question. No offense intended, but a lot of people don't realize that in order to model something, the facility has to be significantly larger than the item being modeled. So what such facility, readily available, is significantly larger than the universe? This is one of my reasons for being an Atheist, but that's beside the point.
 
Danger said:
... that in order to model something, the facility has to be significantly larger than the item being modeled.

I am not sure I understand the use of the term "facility" or, as a matter of fact, the statement itself. Could you elaborate? For example, if the "item" to be modeled is the solar system (a centuries old problem), what is the "facility"? Thanks.
 
What I mean is that to perfectly model anything, you have to duplicate it life-size right down to the subatomic particles, and even virtual particles, involved it its structure. The facility (laboratory or factory or whatever) then obviously has to be large enough to house that model with some space left over. To model the universe, the facility therefore has to be larger than the universe itself.
 
I see.
 
Danger none taken.

I should have made this a bit clearer. The reason I asked is not if I would like to actually model but to find out how the universe works.
 
First, off ignore anyone who claims you "you can't do that". That's not how science has ever progressed. Post #6, however, IS valuable because it explains obstacles which must be overcome.

Of course you can model anything you want mathematically. How well it matches the actual situation involved is another matter. That likely involves lots of trial and error, calculations,etc...not an easy task...

Likely there are such models around to start...surely NASA must use such for space travel, for example. The Earth's orbit around the sun for example, likely has little to do with distant galaxies as gravity varies by the inverse square of distance...And likely you could include the effects of a few if necessary by approximating them as a single source. But nearby planets in our own solar system probably do have an effect.

For a particle, I wonder if cosmic microwave background radiation has an effect? Surely particles from our own sun have an effect that must be considered.

On the other hand, I did read about some abberations in planned trajectories of vehicles headed for Mars, I think...am unsure if those were ever sorted out...it would be interesting to know if dark energy and dark matter have any effect on our local orbit...perhaps such effects tend to cancel due to the overall uniformity of the cosmos?

Lots to consider...
 
  • #10
Hippasos said:
Danger none taken.
The reason I asked is not if I would like to actually model but to find out how the universe works.

Ahhh... I see. Well, we all want that, and a few PF members pursue that information professionally. It's going to take a while, though. :biggrin:
 
  • #11
I presume by "model" he means model mathematically. That is certainly possible, and is what a lot of people try to do!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
7K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K