A Physics forum. Physics Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Physics Banter forum » Physics Newsgroups » Current Physics Research (Moderated)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Tags: , , ,

Fine-Tuning from First Principles... don't laugh...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 20th 06 posted to sci.physics.research
island
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 39
Default Fine-Tuning from First Principles... don't laugh...

It seems quite ludicrous to me that we have no stability mechanism that
explains why an expanding universe doesn't just blow itself apart, and
even then, the entropy of our near-flat universe is much less than it
should be, given any practical model of structure forming turbulence
that occurs with expansion.

Unless far from equilibrium dissipative structures, like us humans and
black holes serve to somehow enhance the entropic process, thereby
repaying the *most apparent* entropic debt. Surely, the configuration
of our universe must follow the least action principle, so it can't be
that difficult.

I think that the real problem with this lies in the fact that modern
science doesn't generally view the universe as being finite, bounded and
closed, and it doesn't consider space to be a physically connected
entity, because the uniform expansion of the whole will necessarily
entail the most-even distribution of energy possible, **within the
constraints of inherent imperfection**... if the universe is causaly
bound and bounded.

Quantum mechanics depends very much on Hamiltonian mechanics, and so it
isn't inherently able to describe dissipative structuring. As I
understand it, this can be done, however, by way of the "Lindblad
equation", which derives that flatness acts as a natural damper that
keeps the imbalanced universe from evolving inhomogeneously, so this is
the most natural configuration... IF the universe is finite and
closed... given inherent asymmetry in the energy. This will necessarily
maximize the time that the expansion process takes, and that's what a
flat universe accomplishes via anthropic structuring.

I do believe that the AP is telling us that the universe is finite,
closed and bounded... only nobody listens.

Ads
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
naturalness, hierarchy, fine-tuning ptamirez@yahoo.co.uk Current Physics Research (Moderated) 1 October 17th 05 12:09 AM
Naturalness of the fine-tuning hierarchy ptamirez@yahoo.co.uk Current Physics Research (Moderated) 0 August 15th 05 10:24 PM
OT: Laugh Break mitch perkins Physics - General Discussion 0 March 30th 05 11:45 PM
Here's a good laugh! Brad Berry Physics - General Discussion 0 January 26th 04 09:39 AM
Here's a good laugh! Earle Jones Physics - General Discussion 3 January 26th 04 03:38 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright ©2004-2008 Physics Banter, part of the NewsgroupBanter project.
The comments are property of their posters.
Free Myspace Layouts - Personals - GIS Mapping - Remortgages - Mortgage Calculator