Drunken Thoughts

[Amphictyonis]

I was just outside, looking at the cosmos-thinking....looking at the stars thinking about particle physics; reality.. Could our universe not be a universe in and of itself but a part of a larger structure... not our universe per say but "reality", could our universe be a part of some larger structure? This topic is also philosophical because of the qiestion...the question of being"

What it is the meaning of this structure?

I'm aware this is a socialist forum, but, at the end of the day, the ultimate question is why? Like I said this can be moved into the philosophy section but I want to know, at the end of the day, what drives you? When you ask yourself why what answer do you come up with? Another topic we can talk about is dark mater and dark energy... and the...the standard model and now why they/we now need dark "force" to explain the standard model.

[Amphictyonis]

^ Proof a person should never attempt to think deeply when extremely intoxicated. I won't be offended if this thread is deleted. Or you can let it stand as a reminder of why I should stop after 5 drinks. :) I would like to talk about dark matter and dark energy though. It almost seems to me when we have to 'invent' something just to make the standard model work perhaps the standard model is wrong? Are there already some threads on dark matter/energy?

[Octavian]

1. I was just outside, looking at the cosmos-thinking....looking at the stars thinking about particle physics; reality.. Could our universe not be a universe in and of itself but a part of a larger structure... not our universe per say but "reality", could our universe be a part of some larger structure? This topic is also philosophical because of the question...the question of being"

2. What it is the meaning of this structure?

3. I'm aware this is a socialist forum, but, at the end of the day, the ultimate question is why?

1. You can always ask an infinite series of "What if" questions like what if were in a machine? what if the universe is just the dream of someone? The reality of the situation is that you wont get any answers this way and we probably never will get the answers to these questions.

2. Most would argue an inherent meaning can't exist and that meanings are created

3. "Why" Is again a question you sooner or later have to stop asking. I demonstrate with "Jack and Jill went up the hill" Why? "To get a pail of water" Why did they do that? "To get the water to drink" Why? "So they can live" Why do they want to live "Because of their survival instinct" Why do they have one? Etc.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

This belongs in Chit Chat, I think.

[mikelepore]

I would like to talk about dark matter and dark energy though. It almost seems to me when we have to 'invent' something just to make the standard model work perhaps the standard model is wrong? Are there already some threads on dark matter/energy?

The name "standard model" is usually used for a particular explanation of the smallest things, where gravity has no place at all, while dark matter and dark energy are ideas about very large things, where gravity is the main force. But perhaps you are saying "standard model" in a more generic way, because the models of how gravity works have become standard.

If so, then the answer to your question is yes, it's already widely recognized that the references to dark matter and dark energy may not necessarily refer to actual things, but may instead refer to a fault in the understanding of how gravity works. The people who use those terms already knew that.

With dark matter, for example, there's a mathematical method that gives the right answers for the behavior of planets, moons, and artificial satellites, but gives the wrong answer for galaxies. No one knows how to fix the method except tentatively assume that the galaxy has an extra component. The real correction may be to fix the equation, not to fudge the terms substituted into that equation, but just saying that doesn't provide any hints about how to do it.

[Amphictyonis]

This belongs in Chit Chat, I think.

Although admittedly I was a tad drunk when I posted this thread :) ignoring the rambling in the beginning of the post I think the question of dark matter/energy is relevant. One would think after your critique of black holes you'd understand where I'm going with this train of (now sober) thought. I would also suggest people get drunk every now and then and try to figure things out. It's fun to see the results the next day when you're thinking clearly, fun but embarrassing at the same time. I somewhat agree though, this was defiantly one of my silliest posts.

Whats your view on dark matter/dark energy?

[Amphictyonis]

The name "standard model" is usually used for a particular explanation of the smallest things, where gravity has no place at all, while dark matter and dark energy are ideas about very large things, where gravity is the main force. But perhaps you are saying "standard model" in a more generic way, because the models of how gravity works have become standard.

http://www.scilogs.eu/en/blog/the-dark-matter-crisis/2010-09-19/the-standard-model-of-cosmology

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

A: Fair enough!

[mikelepore]

http://www.scilogs.eu/en/blog/the-dark-matter-crisis/2010-09-19/the-standard-model-of-cosmology

Thanks. I was unaware of that term being used, the "standard model of cosmology". I thought people said "standard model" only when they meant quarks, leptons and bosons.