Comments on: Can anyone Tell me by what Percentage CERN Plans to still Increase its…

By: Otto E. Rossler

Otto E. Rossler — Sun, 10 Feb 2013 10:37:55 +0000

Please, speak your mind.

By: Meri

Meri — Sun, 10 Feb 2013 10:27:03 +0000

I’m not quite sure how to say this; you made it extmreley easy for me!

By: Otto E. Rossler

Otto E. Rossler — Fri, 04 Jan 2013 10:53:06 +0000

A misplaced comment is always better than none — have a good new year.

By: Dolores

Dolores — Fri, 04 Jan 2013 03:37:27 +0000

Gargamelle is the one to the left in your picture,I beveile. But I always liked the larger one to the right better, probably because it looks like a spaceship out of a 50s SF flick, maybe a precursor to the lunar landers. What’s that one called?

By: Otto E. Rossler

Otto E. Rossler — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 20:33:47 +0000

I agree absolutely.

By: Bjørn Fossmoen

Bjørn Fossmoen — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 20:11:46 +0000

Thank‘s. You to. Just a correction in the translation. That one particle of vacuum fluctuations are caught in the event horizon and the other escape, is in my opinion wrong.
I rest my case.

By: Otto E. Rossler

Otto E. Rossler — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 19:48:40 +0000

(Microsoft translation from Norwegian:)
“Well, Otto, I don’t think that you, or anyone else, had in particular benefit from the information. I believe you deserve respect for your opinions and for the courage to wear them. history has shown that an established truth does not last very long and that there are outsiders who finally change things. Physics is based on an empirical basis, admittedly, but the conclusion on the other end may be flawed. Uncertain variables are elements that can influence the end result. I know a bit about. Arrogance is the worst enemy of creative thoughts. We have a language called maths, but also it can to some extent be developed and adapted to support a conclusion that is taken in advance. So the question is, why is it like this, and the answer is that we are all human beings, with all that that implies.
Hawking radiation and vacuum fluktasjoner, where one particle gets caught by the event horizon is in my opinion. But my opinion doesn’t count, so then I can surely get have it in peace without being latterligjort. I had been a prominent legal capacity in physics so I had been slaughtered. Just like Otto. Another thing, is the desperate search for the dark mass in galaxies and elsewhere. We don’t need mass or dark energy to explain the universe’s expansion rate is increasing. Again in my opinion, we need a space dimension, in addition to the 3 we have to describe the universe curvature. Since we are 3 dimensional creatures, we are not able to understand it, but unverset can’t be krumt without it. The universe’s natural tillstand is not krumt, but the flat, in the sense that it aspires to 3 dimensions. Therefore, it is a rapidly accelerating expansion. Not that it increases in volume. but it loses its curvature. These are some simple explained, I can’t write a dissertation here.
We go back to the beginning of the curve unversets so was enormous. The problem is to understand why, but I’m working a bit on it. without necessarily going anywhere. But in each case, the fun.”
Dear Björn: Thank you very much. There are some new results in cosmology which my group obtained recently. Maybe there will be an occasion to share them with you.
Take care, Otto

By: Bjørn Fossmoen

Bjørn Fossmoen — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 18:57:22 +0000

Vel, Otto, Jeg tror ikke at du, eller noen andre, hadde særlig utbytte av den informasjonen. Jeg mener du fortjener respekt for dine meninger og for motet til å ha dem. Historien har vist at en etablert sannhet ikke varer særlig lenge og at det er outsidere som til slutt forandrer ting.
Fysikk bygger riktignok på et empirisk grunnlag, men konklusjonen i andre enden kan være feilaktig. Usikre variabler er momenter som kan påvirke sluttresultatet. Det vet jeg litt om.
Arroganse er den værste fienden til kreative tanker. Vi har et språk som kalles matematikk, men også det kan til en viss grad utvikles og tilpasses for å støtte en konklusjon som er tatt på forhånd. Så er spørsmålet, hvorfor er det slik, og svaret er vel at vi er alle mennesker, med alt hva det innebærer.
Hawking radiation og hans vakum fluktasjoner, hvor den ene partikkelen blir fanget av event horisonten er etter min mening feilaktig. Men min mening teller ikke, så da kan jeg vel få ha den i fred uten å bli latterligjort.
Hadde jeg vært en anerkjen kapasitet i fysikk så hadde jeg blitt slaktet. Akkurat som Otto.
En annen ting, er den desperate letingen etter mørk masse i galaksene og andre steder. Vi trenger ikke mørk masse eller energi for å forklare universets økende ekspansjonstakt. Igjen etter min mening, trenger vi en romdimensjon til, i tillegg til de 3 vi har for å beskrive universet krumning. Siden vi er 3 dimensjonale vesner er vi kke i stand til å oppfatte den, men unverset kan ikke være krumt uten. Universets naturlige tillstand er ikke krumt, men flatt, i den forstand at det tilstreber 3 dimensjoner. Derfor er det en akselrerende ekspansjon. Ikke at det øker i volum. men at det mister krumning. Dette blir litt enkelt forklart, jeg kan ikke skrive en avhandling her.
Går vi tilbake til unversets begynnelse så var krumningen enorm. Problemet er å forstå hvorfor, men jeg jobber litt med saken. uten at nødvendigvis kommer noen vei. Men det er i hver fall artig.

By: Otto E. Rossler

Otto E. Rossler — Wed, 28 Nov 2012 21:59:33 +0000

Dear Björn: Thank you very much for your most valuable information.

By: Bjørn Fossmoen

Bjørn Fossmoen — Wed, 28 Nov 2012 20:51:45 +0000

Sorry Otto, you asked for overall luminosity. That is even more difficult to find out.