Driver Licaense Renew Method Ohio Columbus

Hawking: "It was God who created the universe," Dark matter



The theory of the scientist in the new book "The Big Bang is derived only from the laws of physics." Many reactions of theologians, after this announcement, on the eve of the visit of Pope

From an article in "La Repubblica" on 03 September 2010:

LONDON - The world needs a Creator? "No". The peremptory answer comes from Professor Stephen Hawking, the world's most famous astrophysicist, considered by many the heir of Newton, which has as it inherited the prestigious chair at Cambridge University. In a new book coming out these days, the author of international best-seller From the Big Bang to support blacks holes, based on new theories, that "the universe may have created by themselves, may have been created from nothing" and therefore "God did not create it."

His statement yesterday occupied the entire front page of the Times of London, as a challenge, yet another, science to religion. "Just as Darwin has denied the existence of God with his theory of biological evolution of our species," said Richard Dawkins, biologist defender of atheism, "Hawking denies it now from the point of view of physics." In his most famous book, the astrophysicist had tried to explain what happened "before" the Big Bang, or the time before he was born, leaving the question unresolved. The final chapter contains an argument that some interpreted as the idea that God is not incompatible with a scientific understanding of the universe: discovering what was there before Big Bang, to reach a "complete theory" of the Universe - Hawking wrote - "would be the greatest triumph of human reason, because at that point to know the mind of God."

But in his new work, titled The Grand Design (The grand design or project) and co-written with American physicist Leonard Mlodinow, the scientist gives the answer: instead of being an unlikely event, be explained only by divine intervention, the Big Bang was "an inevitable consequence of the laws of physics." Hawking writes: "Since there is a law like gravity, the universe and may have been created by myself, from scratch. The spontaneous creation is the reason why there is something instead of nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. "In the book, the researcher also predicts that physics is close to formulate a" theory of everything ", a series of equations that can fully explain the properties of nature The discovery considered the Holy Grail of physics since Einstein.

E 'However, his assertion that God created the universe, and therefore does not exist, to raise economic and controversy. "If one has faith," says Professor George Ellis, professor of applied mathematics at the University of Cape Town, "will continue to believe that God created the Earth, the Universe, or at least turn on the light, to trigger the mechanism that has put everything in motion, before Big Bang or alleged anything that preceded it. "But the field of atheism welcomes the publication of the book by Hawking as a victory of reason and science, to be celebrated two weeks after the visit to England by Pope Benedict XVI, who will not be strongly disagree with Hawking.

In the new book, astrophysicist reveals that the reference to "the mind of God" in his previous volume on the Big Bang had been misinterpreted. Hawking has never believed that science and religion were compatible . There is a fundamental difference between religion, which is based on authority, and science, which is based on observation and reasoning, "he says." And the science will win because it works. "

my remarks.
The universe requires a Creator? "NO" is also my answer, but this does not exclude that there might be a God, the great architect who has designed and set in motion the universe came out of the BIG BANG, or vice versa has created what existed before the Big Bang and which led to the Big Bang itself. And I do not think anyone will ever prove the existence or nonexistence of God
Certainly not the God described in the Bible, which operates in several stages or more stages (there is written that the creation occurred in six days and the seventh day he rested). As rightly said Stephen Hawkins everything is linked and is a logical consequence of the laws of physics (without interventions such deus ex machina that modify the processes already in place).
This means that there was a wizard, let alone in biological evolution, but free to develop according to the laws of physics, chemistry and biology.

As he said the founder of my school of thought even in his post of March 24, 2009:
http://nuoveteorie.blogspot.com/2009/03/luomo-era-in-un-progetto-intelligente.html

MAN WAS IN AN INTELLIGENT DESIGN OF GOD?
The problem posed by Pope Benedict XVI in Regensburg has its hub in genetic mutations, random and selected pure environment for the evolutionists, and the second predetermined Pope Eric Kandel, Nobel 2000, as a conceptual framework of five points, said (like many other scientists) that the genetic mutations are random and selected by the environment.

also one of the principles of quantum mechanics (The acausal ') is in support of this thesis (Besides Einstein coined the famous phrase "God does not play dice," Bohr and his friend replied, "Stop telling God Einstein what to do !"... to which Feynman said: "Not only does God play dice, but he throws them where we can not see them).

All this has nothing to do with the so-called "CHAOS", also because the meccanica quantistica sappiamo che esiste il NON LOCALISMO. Il fenomeno nasce con il teorema e la diseguaglianza di Bell, verificato sperimentalmente da Aspect e Al, che mise fine alla lunga disputa tra Bohr e Einstein sulla validità e interpretazione della meccanica quantistica. Il teorema di Bell afferma la non separabilità di alcune entità fisiche (Questo ha comportato uno sconvolgimento drammatico del metodo analitico e riduzionista occidentale). In pratica si afferma che due sistemi quantistici che hanno interagito almeno una volta non possono essere più separati, e alcune delle variabili fisiche (ad esempio gli SPIN) saranno sempre connesse tra di loro anche se i due sistemi quantistici vengono separati a distanze di miliardi di anni luce. Questo dimostra che nell'universo esistono delle connessioni significative che possono essere definite come sincroniche. Quando, ad esempio, un osservatore misura uno spin in una certa direzione automaticamente e simultaneamente lo spin della seconda particella si orienta nella direzione opposta. Questo avviene in modo istantaneo, senza la trasmissione di alcun segnale che dovrebbe sottostare, per il principio di relatività, a non superare la velocità della luce. Tutto questo può avere delle implicazioni inimmaginabili, dal momento che tutta la materia è fatta di particelle elementari che seguono le leggi della meccanica quantistica e che la materia di tutto l'universo era inizialmente, alla sua nascita, situata in una piccola zona di spazio (dalle dimensioni di una tennis ball, which then exploded in the Big Bang). From here it is very likely that all matter exists in the cosmos was once connected, and therefore, for the inseparability of Bell's theorem, it is still connected.
In conclusion, the "metaphysics synchronicity" of CG Jung might be more realistic than you think, and all the world and 10 to the 500 parallel universes (according to M theory of superstrings) could be synchronized with each other, but in a way that we can not detect.

God definitely play dice, but perhaps they are loaded dice, because there is a synchronicity or at least non-local, and this throws them where we can not see them. If

to this consideration we add a second, meaning that all subatomic particles (called strings), or bricks of the Universe, there are a limited number of types is possible, even in that HAD SOME intelligent design of God in a world of our and other parallel universes evolve sooner or later, biological beings endowed with reason and abstraction (ie, the image and likeness of God, according to the biblical concept).

This means that there has been a project manager, who HAS made changes to the initial design work in progress, so the Catholic theology of Pope Benedict XVI will come out of certain defeat, but there is nothing to prevent stato un DIO CREATORE che si sia limitato a dare l’INPUT iniziale a un progetto che, pur libero nella sua casualità, si sviluppasse secondo dei canoni DEFINITI e non INDEFINITI. Per fare un’ANALOGIA, nel gioco degli scacchi, il numero delle mosse possibili è altissimo, ma sempre limitato, e un computer del domani le potrebbe prevedere tutte e non perdere mai. Inoltre, anche partendo da tutta una serie di mosse diverse, le combinazioni dei pezzi sulla scacchiera spessissimo si ripetono (per analogia, in uno,o più, dei quasi infiniti pianeti dell'universo, può nascere o attecchire la vita, anche partendo da condizioni iniziali diverse). E qui c'è l'IMMENSA BELLEZZA E POTENZA DEL POSSIBILE GRANDE DISEGNO DI DIO: A world free to evolve, but contemporanemante reached sooner or later, and with different paths, designs budgeted (including biological intelligent and rational beings).

Meanwhile, according to the latest scientific knowledge about our universe, thanks to dark energy, is constantly expanding, so is ruled out a subsequent re-concentration of matter and a subsequent big bang. This universe will die slowly, perhaps in a few hundred billion years. And so it falls to the theory of the infinite cycle of Big Bang theory, which could exclude a Creator God.

Best wishes
Alessandra

Mathematica 5.2 For Mac Rar

The concept of dark matter makes sense only within the current Big Bang cosmology based on, because we do not know how to explain otherwise have been able to form galaxies and galaxy clusters in such a short time like that observed. Not also explain how galaxies, in addition to form, remain intact even if the visible matter, composed of baryons, can not develop enough gravity for this purpose. Even from this perspective, the concept of dark matter makes sense only within the current Standard Model, in which the sole cosmological gravitational force, if the Standard Model is incorrect, there would be need for dark matter, since there there is no experimental evidence if not violations of a mathematical model.

Despite detailed maps of 'near Universe, covering the electromagnetic spectrum from radio waves to gamma rays, we were able to identify only 10% of its mass, as stated in 2001 at the New York Times by Bruce H. Margon, an astronomer at the University of Washington:

"The situation is somewhat embarrassing to admit that we can not find 90 percent of [the matter] of the Universe. "


The latest measurements indicate that dark matter constitutes about 23% of the universe and about 85% by mass.

was initially indicated as "missing mass", even if there is indeed matter, as they are observable gravitational effects of its mass. However, this matter does not emit any electromagnetic radiation and is therefore not detectable by means of spectroscopic analysis, from which the adjective "dark". The missing mass term can be misleading, since it is not the missing mass, but its light.

Dark matter is not to be confused with the different situation that goes by the name of dark energy.

An important observational evidence of the need for dark matter was given by the rotation curves of spiral galaxies. These galaxies contain a large population of stars placed on nearly circular orbits around the galactic center. As with planetary orbits, according to Kepler's third law with galactic orbits the stars should have larger orbital velocities smaller, but Kepler's third law applies only to nearby stars in the outskirts of a spiral galaxy, because it assumes that the mass enclosed by the orbit is constant. However, astronomers have conducted observations of orbital velocities of stars in the outlying regions of a large number of spiral galaxies, and in any case they follow Kepler's third law. Instead of decreasing at larger radii, the orbital velocities remain constant with very good approximation. The implication is that the mass enclosed by orbits of greater radius gradually increases, even for stars that are apparently close to the edge of the galaxy. Although they are at the boundaries of the bright part of the galaxy, it has a mass profile that apparently continues well beyond the regions occupied by stars.

Considering the stars at the outskirts of a spiral galaxy, with orbital velocities typically observed of 200 kilometers per second, if the galaxy were made only by the visible matter in these stars would drop in the short time since their orbital speeds are four times larger than the escape velocity from the galaxy. Given that there are no galaxies that are dispersing in this way, inside should be the mass of which are taken into account when adding up all the visible parts.


gravitational lens in a group of galaxies. On August 21, 2006, NASA issued a press release that Chandra would have found direct evidence of dark matter in the collision between two galaxy clusters. In early 2007, astronomers of the Cosmic Evolution Survey and Hubble Space Telescope, using the information obtained by the Hubble telescope and ground-based instruments, have drawn a map of dark matter noting that permeates the universe is matter where This should be visible even large amounts of dark matter, but that is also present in areas where there is visible matter.
assumptions about dark matter.
appeared in the literature several theories to explain the missing mass associated with different phenomena.

The dark mass is divided into baryonic and non baryonic:

baryonic dark matter is composed of material similar to that which constitutes stars, planets, interstellar dust, etc.., But does not emit radiation;
non-baryonic dark matter is composed of matter intrinsically different and not yet discovered. It is hypothesized that it may be supersymmetric particles such as neutralinos, or massive neutrinos or axions, or other particles ever observed, and subject only to gravitational interaction and nuclear weak. This material is called WIMPs (Weakly Interacting Massive Particles), large particles of unit mass baryonic weakly interacting with matter, and therefore difficult to detect. Three types of experiments trying to detect these particles: i) producing them in particle accelerators ii) seeing the energy that should be issued when colliding with ordinary matter, iii) annihilation of particles of dark matter present around the center of the galaxy or sun could make ordinary particles such as neutrinos, positrons, anti-protons.
currently is thought that at least 90% of non-baryonic dark matter is. In fact, the cosmic abundance of deuterium, which is a deuterium atom for every 100,000 hydrogen is extremely sensitive to the density of matter in the form of baryons. A baryonic density greater abundance of deuterium would mean much lower. Instead, the observed abundance of deuterium is compatible with the density of observable matter.

The discovery that the neutrino has mass, albeit very low, which may partly explain the excess mass of the clusters and superclusters of galaxies, but not that of individual galaxies, because it moves at a speed near that of light, escaping sooner or later the gravitational pull in and out of them.

Other possible constituents of dark matter have been identified in the MACHO (Massive Compact Halo Objects), compact objects of great mass of the halo galactic primordial blacks in the holes in the soliton stars, the stars of bosons and the quark nuggets.

To the question of the previous post brings us to the fact "if Newton was wrong or not." A physicist friend of mine has a theory on that has a certain charm.

We know from previous posts, that when a body is free to float in space time NOT affected by a severe ', but is subject only to the curvature of space, while it is prevented from freely floating (as it's spot Earth's surface) the seriousness reappears. Now it is true that if is visible matter should also be large amounts of dark matter and dark matter is probably made up largely of supersymmetric particles such as neutralinos, or massive neutrinos or axions, or other particles ever observed, and subject only to the gravitational force and weak nuclear interaction, we can imagine that:
dark matter is a kind of gas of subatomic particles floating in space-time with all the other bodies may do so.
In this case, its large mass cancel out the effects of gravity by Newton, and an astronaut in space does not suffer from the effects because free-floating along with this kind of gas that surrounds. Conversely, if a man or an object is constrained in its movements (such as the Earth's surface), would have a significant effect of dark matter and would be the dominant force of gravity.

According to this theory, Newton was not wrong, but its laws can only apply where it has a decisive influence on the dark, free-floating in space time.

Obviously the theory of my friend does not fall within the M theory of superstrings, which in any case, it is still to be proved, even if it is the most likely today.

Best wishes
Alessandra

Women Bottomless Clips

Newton was wrong? Gravity does not exist?


In the United States has reopened the debate on the principles formulated by the famous scientist with the work of a Dutch physicist: "His theory is an illusion." This is Erik Verlinde hypothesis that links his criticisms of string and the holographic universe.

From an article on the Republic of July 15, 2010:

The theory of gravity is perhaps the most formidable law of physics, the most obvious and universal principle because it corresponds to an empirical irresistible. The child still can not talk and one of the first games in which amuses the chair, is to drop the spoon of jelly. The show is fascinating in its repetitiveness. Grab a spoon, lifting it up, drop it, and each time the miracle is repeated: that object is irresistibly attracted to the ground, forcing the patient's parent to pick it up. Each of us at the age of 18 months without knowing it was Newton. Well, ricrediamoci: the force of gravity is an illusion, a cosmic joke, or a "side effect" of something else that occurs to a much deeper level of reality.

The abandonment of Newton had already been anticipated by the relativity of Albert Einstein but now takes a more radical break. A famous Dutch-American mathematical physicist, the 48 year old Erik Verlinde, which has already linked its name to "string theory" (Supersymmetry in parallel universes), is shaking the U.S. academic world with a series of lectures in which he breaks down the theory of gravity. From Harvard to Berkeley, my fellow scientists are taking very seriously. His new vision it can throw a different light on some of the major themes of contemporary physics: the so-called dark energy (dark energy), a sort of anti-gravity that appears to accelerate the expansion of the universe, or "dark matter" that supposedly holds the galaxies together.

Andrew Strominger, a physicist-mathematician at Harvard, is one of the co-Verlinde who does not hide his admiration: "These ideas are inspiring very interesting discussions, vanno dritte al cuore di tutto ciò che non comprendiamo del nostro universo". Verlinde è l'ultimo di una serie di scienziati che da trent'anni a questa parte stanno smantellando pezzo dopo pezzo la teoria della gravità. Negli anni Settanta Jacob Bekenstein e Stephen Hawking hanno esplorato i legami tra i buchi neri e la termodinamica. Negli anni Novanta Ted Jacobson ha illustrato i buchi neri come degli ologrammi, le immagini tridimensionali usate per la sicurezza delle nostre carte di credito: tutto ciò che è stato "inghiottito" ed è sparito dentro i buchi neri dell'universo, è presente come un'informazione stampata nell'ologramma, sulla superficie esterna. Juan Maldacena dell'"Institute for Advanced Study" ha costruito un modello mathematical universe expressed as a tin of canned soup. Everything that happens inside the jar, including what we call gravity, is synthesized in the label pasted outside: outside instead of gravity does not exist.

think the universe as a box of Scrabble (the Beetle, ed), the game where you make words with the letters of the alphabet. If you shake the box and the letters scattered at random, there is only one possible combination that can give you a poem of Leopardi. An almost infinite number of combinations have no meaning. More shake the box of letters is more likely that the disorder increases as the letters combine in order of probability. This is the new way of seeing the force of gravity, as a form of entropy. Or a "side effect of the natural tendency towards disorder." If it is not clear what will replace it, and yet we are far from imagining the possible practical applications, Verlinde is adamant on one point: "The emperor has no clothes. For some time it was understood that gravity does not exist. Now is the time to scream. "

We read that the abandonment of Newton had already been anticipated by the relativity of Albert Einstein. Let's see why:

From the site: http://www.racine.ra.it/planet/testi/gravit2.htm

"In 1905, an unknown physicist who worked at the patent office in Bern had passed suddenly from obscurity to fame, his name was Albert Einstein. In three articles that appeared in a prestigious physics journal, the young Einstein completely revolutionized the concepts space and time by showing that space and time are not static and absolute as Newton claimed, but are dynamic and relative. In other words, space can shrink or expand the time and can expand or shrink depending on the state of motion of the observer; Furthermore, space and time are intimately tied together so much so that scientists no longer speak of space and time but to space-time.

After these first efforts Einstein began to think about gravity, trying to develop a new theory that would allow to overcome the difficulties that we mentioned earlier.

In 1908, a trivial incident helped to put the scientist on the right track: a painter fell from a roof and fell to the floor, luckily for him (but not its only) survive. Just heard the news Einstein went to the hospital to visit the victim to know what was tried in the fall, the man told him that during the fall he had felt completely weightless, as if gravity were temporarily gone. Because the painter had not felt the gravity?

Surely we have all seen those wonderful television pictures where you see the crew of the Space Shuttle in orbit, floating freely in weightlessness. Imagine then an astronaut inside a spacecraft orbiting the Earth, man is weightless, floating freely, and if he rolls a ball in front of him, the ball moves along a straight line. If we bring the astronaut with his spaceship on Earth's surface we see that things are very different, and the man feels something that keeps him attached to the floor of the spacecraft launches and if the usual ball in front of him this fall on the ground following a curved path . We explain these phenomena are talking about gravity. But the usual demand continues to hum in the brain, because when the astronaut is in space, like dell'imbianchino not feel gravity? Not sure why the influence of the Earth in space is negligible, as sometimes we hear in the media, on the contrary, even in space influence the Earth is very strong (he knows something about the Moon for more than four billion years from the Earth's gravity is imprisoned and forced to turn around our planet). What then is the difference between space and Earth's surface?

There is a big difference: the earth's surface prevents alla navicella e all’astronauta di fluttuare liberamente e, in questo caso, appare la gravità. Ormai sentiamo di essere vicini alla soluzione del mistero.

Immaginiamo un ulteriore esperimento: supponiamo di essere all’interno di una casetta sulla superficie terrestre e di lanciare davanti a noi la solita pallina; la pallina cade sul pavimento dopo un certo tempo seguendo una traiettoria curva. Come al solito noi spieghiamo questo fenomeno invocando la forza di gravità. A questo punto cambiamo le carte in tavola; supponiamo che, nell’istante esatto in cui viene lanciata la pallina, sotto la casetta si faccia improvvisamente il vuoto. Di conseguenza la casetta viene a trovarsi in caduta libera, cioè in libera fluttuazione. Now, compared to the lodge, the points of departure and arrival of the ball and the time taken to travel distance are exactly the same but something else has changed the trajectory has become straight.

In other words, the gravity is gone!

is the great insight of Einstein gravity does not exist, gravity is an illusion. They are right to say that the painter astronaut does not feel gravity because gravity does not exist, it appears as if by magic, when, for whatever reason (in our case due to the Earth's surface), is interrupted the natural movement of free float.

Freedom fluctuation is the natural movement of the body, it is controlled and governed directly from space. Typically, when it comes to space, we tend to think of something blank, nothing, in reality, the space is imagined as a kind of elastic tissue can deform (like that used in those platforms where the children, and not, have fun jumping). Usually space is flat and straight but bodies follow trajectories in the presence of matter curves space.

At this point it quickly becomes clear why, for example, the Earth rotates around the sun or because the moon revolves around the Earth. The Earth rotates around our Sun, the star not because it attracts a mysterious force we call gravity, but because the Sun, because of its large mass, curves the surrounding space, and this curvature is transmitted up to very large distances. Consequently, the Earth, moving in a curved space, nothing can be done to follow a curved trajectory. The same applies to the Moon.

Summing up the union between space and matter can be expressed with the following sentence: space tells matter how to move, matter tells space how to bend.

This conception of gravity, Einstein published in 1916 and known as the Theory of General Relativity, shows a beauty, a simplicity and elegance above all that unbelievable. Instead of being faced with a scientific theory seems to have anything to do with a Beethoven symphony or a Strauss waltz. "

Recall that in general relativity, the gravitational interaction is generated by the curvature of spacetime created by the presence of bodies with mass or energy, and is expected to be propagated by means of gravitational radiation, a wave phenomenon that does not require any material medium to propagate in space, traveling at the speed of light. The gravitational field is a field tensor, represented mathematically by a metric tensor, related to the curvature of space-time through the Riemann tensor.

In originale su "La repubblica" non vi erano nel titolo i punti interrogativi, che ho voluto aggiungere, e nel prossimo POST, vi spiegherò il perchè di questa mia scelta.

Un caro saluto

Alessandra