Virtual Retinal Display

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"> <div style="text-align: justify;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #073763;">Information displays are the primary medium through which text and images generated by computer and other electronic systems are delivered to end-users. While early computer systems were designed and used for tasks that involved little interactions between theuser and the computer, today's graphical and multimedia information and computing environments require information displays that have higher performance, smaller size and lower cost. The market for display technologies also has been stimulated by the increasing popularity of hand-held computers, personal digital assistants and cellular phones; interest in simulated environments and augmentedreality systems; and the recognition that an improved means of connecting people and machines can increase productivity and enhance theenjoyment of electronic entertainment and learning experiences. For decades, the cathode raytube has been the dominant display device. The cathode ray tube creates an image byscanning a beam of electronsacross a phosphor-coated screen, causing the phosphors to emit visible light. The beam is generated by an electron gun and is passed through a deflection system that scans the beam rapidly left to right and top tobottom, a process called Rastering. A magnetic lens focuses the beam to create asmall moving dot on the phosphor screen. It is these rapidly moving spots of light ("pixels") that raster or"paint"the image on the surface of the viewing screen. Flat panel displays are enjoying widespread usein portable computers, calculators and other personal electronics devices.Flat panel displays can consist of hundreds of thousands of pixels, each of which is formed by one or more transistors acting on a crystalline material. In recent years, as the computer and electronics industries have made substantial advances in miniaturization, manufacturers have sought lighter weight, lower power and more cost-effective displays to enable the development of smaller portable computers and other electronic devices. Flat panel technologies have made meaningful advances in theseareas. Both cathode ray tubes and flat panel display technologies, however, pose difficult engineering and fabrication problems for morehighly miniaturized, high-resolution displays because of inherent constraints in size, weight, cost and power consumption. In addition, both cathode ray tubes and flat panel display are difficult to see outdoors or in other setting where the ambient light is brighter than the light emitted from the screen. Display mobility is also limited by size, brightness and power consumption. As display technologies attempt to keep pace with miniaturization and other advances in information delivery systems, conventional cathode ray tube and flat panel technologies will no longer beable to provide an acceptablerange of performance characteristics, particularly the combination of high resolution, high level of brightness and low power consumption, required for state-of-the-art mobile computing or personal electronic devices.</span></div> <div style="text-align: justify;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #073763;"><br /></span></div> <div style="text-align: justify;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #073763;"><br /></span></div> <div style="text-align: justify;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #073763;"><br /></span></div> </div>

Virtual Retinal Display

Information displays are the primary medium through which text and images generated by computer and other electronic systems are delivered...

Read more »

HART Communication

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"> <div style="text-align: justify;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #073763;">The milliamp current signal varies within a range of 4-2OmA in proportion to the process variable being represented. Li typical applications a signal of 4mA will correspond to the lower limit (0%) of the calibrated range and 2OmA will correspond to the upper limit (100%) of the calibrated range. Virtually all installed systems use this international standard for communicating process variable information between process automation equipment. HART Field Communications Protocol extends this 4- 2OmA standard to enhance communication with smart fieldinstruments. The HART protocol was designed specifically for use with intelligent measurement and control instruments which traditionally communicate using 4-2OmA analog signals.HART preserves the 4- signal and enables two way digital communications to occur without disturbing the integrity of the 4-2OmA signal. Unlike other digital communication technologies, the HART protocol maintains compatibility with existing 4-2OmA systems, and in doing so, provides users with a uniquely backward compatible solution. HART Communication Protocol is well-established as the existing industry standard for digitally enhanced 4- 2OmA field communication. THE HART PROTOCOL - AN OVERVIEW HART is an acronym for"Highway Addressable Remote Transducer". The HART protocol makes use of the Bell 202 Frequency Shift Keying (FSK) standard to superimpose digital communication signals at a low level on top of the 4-2OmA. This enables two-way field communication to take place and makes it possible for additional information beyond just the normal process variable to be communicated to/from a smart field instrument. The HART protocol communicates at 1200 bps without interrupting the 4-2OmA signal and allows a host application (master) to get two or more digital updates per second from a field device. As the digital FSK signal is phase continuous, there is no interference with the 4- 2OrnA signal. HART is a master/slave protocol which means that a field (slave) device only speaks when spoken to by a master. The HART protocol can be used in various modes for communicating information to/from smart field in3truments and central control or monitor systems. HART provides for up to two masters (primary and secondary). This allows secondary masters such as handheld communicators to be used without interfering with communications to/from the primary master, i.e. control/monitoring system. The most commonly employedHART communication mode is master/slave communication of digital information simultaneous with transmission of the 4-2OmA signal. The HART protocol permits all digital communication with field devices in either point-to-point or multidrop networkconfiguration. There is an optional"burst"communication mode where single slave device can continuously broadcast a standard HART reply message. HART COMMUNICATION LAYERS The HART protocol utilizes the OSI reference model. As is the case for most of the communication systems on the field level, the HART protocol implements only the Layers 1, 2 and 7 of the OSI model. The layers 3 to 6 remain empty since their services are either not required or provided by the application layer 7</span></div> <div style="text-align: justify;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #073763;"><br /></span></div> <div style="text-align: justify;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #073763;"><br /></span></div> </div>

HART Communication

The milliamp current signal varies within a range of 4-2OmA in proportion to the process variable being represented. Li typical applicatio...

Read more »

Micro Electronic PILL

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"> <div style="text-align: justify;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #073763;">The invention of transistor enabled the first use of radiometry capsules, which used simple circuits for the internal study of the gastro-intestinal (GI) [1] tract. They couldn't be used as they could transmit only from a single channel and also due to the size of the components. They also suffered from poor reliability,low sensitivity and short lifetimes of the devices. This led to the application of single-channel telemetry capsules for the detection of disease and abnormalities in the GI tract where restricted area prevented the use of traditional endoscopy. They were later modified as they had the disadvantage of using laboratory type sensors such as the glass pH electrodes, resistance thermometers, etc. They were also of very large size.The later modification is similar to the above instrument but is smaller in size due to the application of existing semiconductor fabrication technologies. These technologies led to the formation of"MICROELECTRONIC PILL". Microelectronic pill is basically a multichannel sensor used for remote biomedical measurements using micro technology. This is used for the real-time measurement parameters such as temperature, pH, conductivityand dissolved oxygen. The sensors are fabricated using electron beam and photolithographic pattern integration and were controlled by an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC). Microelectronic pill consists of4 sensors (2) which are mounted on two silicon chips (Chip 1&2), a control chip (5), a radio transmitter (STD-type 1-7, type2-crystal type-10)&silver oxide batteries (8). 1-access channel, 3-capsule,4- rubber ring, 6-PCB chip carrier.</span></span></div> <div style="text-align: justify;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #073763;"><br /></span></span></div> <div style="text-align: justify;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #073763;"><br /></span></span></div> <div style="text-align: justify;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div> </div>

Micro Electronic PILL

The invention of transistor enabled the first use of radiometry capsules, which used simple circuits for the internal study of the gastro-...

Read more »

Nuclear Battery

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"> <div style="text-align: justify;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #073763;">Nuclear batteries use the incredible amount of energy released naturally by tiny bits of radio active material without any fission or fusion taking place inside the battery. These devices use thin radioactive films that pack in energy at densities thousands of times greater than those of lithium-ion batteries. Because of the high energy density nuclear batteries are extremely small in size. Considering the small size and shape of the battery the scientists who developed that battery fancifully call it as"DAINTIESTDYNAMO". The word 'dainty' means pretty. Scientists have developed two types of micro nuclear batteries. One is junction type battery and the other is self-reciprocating cantilever. The operations of both are explained below one by one. JUNCTION TYPE BATTERY: The kind of nuclear batteries directly converts the high-energy particles emitted by a radioactive source into an electric current. The device consists of a small quantity of Ni-63 placed nearan ordinary silicon p-n junction - a diode, basically. WORKING: As the Ni-63 decays it emits beta particles, which are high-energy electrons that spontaneously fly out of the radioisotope's unstable nucleus. The emitted beta particles ionized the diode's atoms, exciting unpaired electrons and holes that are separated at the vicinity of the p-n interface. These separated electrons and holes streamed away form the junction, producing current.</span></span></div> </div>

Nuclear Battery

Nuclear batteries use the incredible amount of energy released naturally by tiny bits of radio active material without any fission or fusi...

Read more »

Invisible Imaging

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"> <div style="text-align: justify;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #073763;">Near infrared light consists of light just beyond visible red light (wavelengths greater than 780nm). Contrary to popular thought, near infrared photography does not allow the recording of thermal radiation (heat). Far-infrared thermal imaging requires more specialized equipment. Infrared images exhibit a few distinct effects that give them an exotic, antique look. Plant life looks completely white because it reflects almost all infrared light (because of this effect, infrared photography is commonly used in aerial photography to analyze crop yields, pest control, etc.) Thesky is a stark black because no infrared light is scattered.Human skin looks pale and ghostly. Dark sun glasses all but disappear in infrared because they don't block any infrared light, and it's said that you can capture the near infrared emissions of a common iron. Infrared photography has been around for at least 70 years, but until recently has not been easily accessible to those not versed in traditional photographic processes. Since the charge-coupled devices (CCDs) used in digital cameras and camcorders are sensitive to near-infrared light, they can be used to capture infrared photos. With a filter that blocks out all visible light (also frequently called a"coldmirror"filter), most modern digital cameras and camcorders can capture photographs in infrared. In addition, they have LCD screens, which can be used to preview the resulting image in real-time, a tool unavailable in traditional photography without using filters that allow some visible(red) light through. Almost all infrared light (because of this effect, infrared photography is commonly used in aerial photography to analyze crop yields, pest control, etc.) Thesky is a stark black because no infrared light is scattered.Human skin looks pale and ghostly. Dark sunglasses all but disappear in infrared because they don't block anyinfrared light, and it's said that you can capture the near infrared emissions of a common iron Near-infrared (1000 - 3000 nm) spectrometry, which employs an external light source for determination of chemical composition, has been previously utilized for industrial determination of the fat content of commercial meat products, for in vivo determination of body fat, and in our laboratories for determination of lipoprotein composition in carotid artery atherosclerotic plaques. Near-infrared (IR) spectrometry has been used industrially for several yearsto determine saturation of unsaturated fatty acid esters(1). Near-IR spectrometry uses an tunable light source external to the experimental subject to determine its chemical composition. Industrial utilization of near-IR will allow for the in vivo measurement of the tissue-specific rate of oxygen utilization as an indirect estimate of energy expenditure. However, assessment of regional oxygen consumption by these methods is complex, requiring a high level of surgical skill for implantation of indwelling catheters to isolate the organ under study.</span></div> </div>

Invisible Imaging

Near infrared light consists of light just beyond visible red light (wavelengths greater than 780nm). Contrary to popular thought, near in...

Read more »

Nano Technology

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"> <div style="text-align: justify;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #073763;">Nanotechnology is defined as fabrication of devices with atomic or molecular scale precision. Devices with minimum feature sizes less than 100 nanometers (nm) are considered to be products of nanotechnology. A nanometer is one billionth of a meter (10-9 m) and is the unit of length that is generally most appropriate for describing the size of single molecules. The nanoscale marks the nebulous boundary between the classical and quantum mechanical worlds; thus, realization of nanotechnologypromises to bring revolutionary capabilities. Fabrication of nanomachines, nanoelectronics and other nanodevices will undoubtedlysolve an enormous amount ofthe problems faced by mankind today. Nanotechnology is currently in a very infantile stage. However, we now have the ability to organize matter on the atomic scale and there are already numerous products available as a direct result of our rapidly increasing ability to fabricate and characterize feature sizes less than 100 nm. Mirrors that don't fog, biomimetic paint with a contactangle near 180°, gene chips and fat soluble vitamins in aqueous beverages are some of the first manifestations of nanotechnology. However, immenant breakthroughs in computer science and medicine will be where the real potential of nanotechnology will first be achieved. Nanoscience is an interdisciplinary field that seeks to bring about mature nanotechnology. Focusing on the nanoscale intersection of fields such as physics, biology, engineering, chemistry, computer science and more, nanoscience is rapidly expanding. Nanotechnology centers are popping up around the world as more funding is provided and nanotechnology market share increases. The rapid progress is apparent by the increasing appearance of theprefix"nano"in scientific journals and the news. Thus,as we increase our ability to fabricate computer chips with smaller features and improveour ability to cure disease at the molecular level, nanotechnology is here. History of Nanotechnology The amount of space available to us for information storage (or otheruses) is enormous. As first described in a lecture titled, 'There's Plenty of Room at the Bottom' in 1959 by Richard P. Feynman, there is nothing besides our clumsy size that keeps us from using this space. In his time, it was not possible for us to manipulate single atoms or molecules because they werefar too small for our tools. Thus, his speech was completely theoretical and seemingly fantastic. He described how the laws of physics do not limit our ability to manipulate single atoms and molecules. Instead, it was our lack of the appropriate methods for doing so. However, he correctly predicted that the time would come in which atomically precise manipulation of matter would inevitably arrive. Prof. Feynman described such atomic scale fabrication as a bottom-up approach, asopposed to the top-down approach that we are accustomed to. The current top-down method for manufacturing involves the construction of parts throughmethods such as cutting, carving and molding.</span></div> </div>

Nano Technology

Nanotechnology is defined as fabrication of devices with atomic or molecular scale precision. Devices with minimum feature sizes less than...

Read more »

Artificial Eye

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"> <div style="text-align: justify;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #073763;">The retina is a thin layer of neural tissue that lines the back wall inside the eye. Some of these cells act to receive light, while others interpret the information and send messages to the brain through the optic nerve. Thisis part of the process that enables us to see. In damaged or dysfunctional retina, the photoreceptors stop working, causing blindness. By some estimates, there are more than 10 million people worldwide affected by retinal diseases that lead to loss of vision. The absence of effective therapeutic remedies for retinitis pigmentosa (RP) and age-related macular degeneration (AMD) has motivated the development ofexperimental strategies to restore some degree of visual function to affected patients. Because the remaining retinal layers are anatomically spared, several approaches have been designed to artificially activate this residual retina and thereby the visual system. At present, two general strategies have been pursued. The"Epiretinal"approach involves a semiconductor-based device placed above the retina, close to or in contact with thenerve fiber layer retinal ganglion cells. The information in this approach must be captured by a camera system before transmitting data and energy to the implant. The"Sub retinal"approach involves the electrical stimulation of the inner retina from the sub retinal space by implantation of a semiconductor-based micro photodiode array (MPA)into this location. The conceptof the sub retinal approach isthat electrical charge generated by the MPA in response to a light stimulus may be used to artificially alter the membrane potential of neurons in the remaining retinal layers in a manner to produce formed images. Some researchers have developed an implant system where a video camera captures images, a chip processes the images, and an electrode array transmits the images to the brain. It's called Cortical Implants. The Visual System The human visual system is remarkable instrument. It features two mobile acquisition units each has formidable preprocessing circuitry placed at a remote location from the central processing system (brain). Itsprimary task include transmitting images with a viewing angle of at least 140deg and resolution of 1 arc min over a limited capacity carrier, the million orso fibers in each optic nerve through these fibers the signals are passed to the so called higher visual cortex ofthe brain The nerve system can achieve this type of high volume data transfer by confining such capability to just part of the retina surface, whereas the center of the retina has a 1:1 ration between the photoreceptors and the transmitting elements, the far periphery has a ratio of 300:1. This results in gradual shift in resolution and other system parameters. At the brain's highest level the visual cortex an impressive array of feature extraction mechanisms can rapidly adjust the eye's position to sudden movements in the peripheralsfiled of objects too small to se when stationary. The visual system can resolve spatial depth differences by combining signals from both eyes with a precision less than one tenth the size of a single photoreceptor.</span></div> </div>

Artificial Eye

The retina is a thin layer of neural tissue that lines the back wall inside the eye. Some of these cells act to receive light, while other...

Read more »

DOES OUR UNIVERSE BORN INSIDE A BLACK HOLE?

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; line-height: 22px;"></span><br /> <div> <div> <div style="text-align: center;"> Cosmology, physics, nature, space, general theory of relativity.</div> </div> </div> <div> <div style="text-align: center;"> <img alt="DOES OUR UNIVERSE BORN INSIDE A BLACK HOLE? - px bh lmc" hspace="0" src="http://f0.pepst.com/c/72282F/421282/ssc3/home/039/physics.subha/300px_bh_lmc.png_480_480_0_64000_0_1_0.png" vspace="0" /></div> </div> <div> <div class="space2" style="padding-bottom: 0.5em; padding-top: 0.5em;"> <div class="hr" style="border-top-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); border-top-style: solid; border-top-width: 1px; color: #aaaaaa;"> </div> </div> </div> <div> Lee Smolin is a physicist, he is a cosmologist known for his complicated theory of Space Geometry. In his book "The Life of the Cosmos" (the book link:<a href="http://peperonity.com/go/external?act=0-5351984-1355895408_17cdb03" style="color: blue; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; text-decoration: underline;">http://bit.ly/ctnoUN</a> ) he theorizes a radical possibility in the theory of origin of our Universe. He is one of the foremost proponents of the theory of Universe born inside of Black Holes. He goes even further to emphasize the hypothesis of a natural selection like drive to create black hole more efficiently. In a nutshell his theory proposes a picture of universe as a giant machinery whose sole purpose is to create black holes more smoothly as well as efficiently.<br /> <br /> Recently, a physicist fron Indiana University, Mr. Nikodem Poplawski modified the general theory of relativity to incorporates the intrinsic spin of Fermions, and is known as Einstein-Cartan-Kibble-Sciama theory of Gravity.<br /> <br /> This theory predicts a repulsive force known as "Torsion", which may act as the Repulsive Force in the theory of Inflation, incorporated within the "Big Bang Theory" of the creation of our Universe.<br /> <br /> So what is the relation of Black holes and this Torsion? One of the prediction of this theory is that the energy density inside a black hole, and the torsion that results from it, actually prevents a black hole singularity from forming. Instead, the region inside the black hole would begin expanding as its own universe, just as the "science fiction" theories of Smolin and others have predicted in the past. </div> </div>

DOES OUR UNIVERSE BORN INSIDE A BLACK HOLE?

Cosmology, physics, nature, space, general theory of relativity. Lee Smolin is a physicist, he is a cosmologist known for...

Read more »

STEPHEN HAWKING : Warp of Space-time

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; color: silver; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; line-height: 22px;"></span><br /> <div> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><img alt="STEPHEN HAWKING : Warp of Space-time - hawkings" hspace="0" src="http://f1.pepst.com/c/A88CC3/584771/ssc3/home/032/blog.subha/hawkings.gif_480_480_0_64000_0_1_0.gif" vspace="0" /></span></div> <div> <div class="space2" style="padding-bottom: 0.5em; padding-top: 0.5em;"> <div class="hr" style="border-top-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); border-top-style: solid; border-top-width: 1px;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"></span></div> </div> </div> <div> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;">||| THE BEGINNING OF TIME |||<br /><br />In this article, we would like to discuss whether TIME itself has a beginning, and whether it will have an end....<br />| ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| |<br />All the evidence seems to indicate, that the universe has not existed forever, but that it had a beginning, about 15 billion years ago. This is probably the most remarkable discovery of modern cosmology. Yet it is now taken for granted. We are not yet certain whether our Universe will have an end!<br />| ||||||||||| | |||||||||||| | ||||||||||| | |||||||||||| |<br />The time scale of the universe is very long compared to that for human life. It was therefore not surprising that until recently, the universe was thought to be essentially static, and unchanging in time. On the other hand, it must have been obvious, that society is evolving in culture and technology. This indicates that the present phase of human history can not have been going for more than a few thousand years. Otherwise, we would be more advanced than we are. It was therefore natural to believe that the human race, and maybe the whole universe, had a beginning in the fairly recent past. However, many people were unhappy with the idea that the universe had a beginning, because it seemed to imply the existence of a supernatural being who created the universe. They preferred to believe that the universe, and the human race, had existed forever. Their explanation for human progress was that there had been periodic floods, or other natural disasters, which repeatedly set back the human race to a primitive state.<br /><br />This argument about whether or not the universe had a beginning, persisted into the 19th and 20th centuries. It was conducted mainly on the basis of theology and philosophy, with little consideration of observational evidence. This may have been reasonable, given the notoriously unreliable character of cosmological observations, until fairly recently. The cosmologist, Sir Arthur Eddington, once said, 'Don't worry if your theory doesn't agree with the observations, because they are probably wrong.' But if your theory disagrees with the Second Law of Thermodynamics, it is in bad trouble. In fact, the theory that the universe has existed forever is in serious difficulty with the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The Second Law, states that disorder always increases with time. Like the argument about human progress, it indicates that there must have been a beginning. Otherwise, the universe would be in a state of complete disorder by now, and everything would be at the same temperature. In an infinite and everlasting universe, every line of sight would end on the surface of a star. This would mean that the night sky would have been as bright as the surface of the Sun. The only way of avoiding this problem would be if, for some reason, the stars did not shine before a certain time.<br /><br />In a universe that was essentially static, there would not have been any dynamical reason,why the stars should have suddenly turned on, at some Time. Any such "lighting up time" would have to be imposed by an intervention from outside the universe. The situation was different,however, when it was realized that the universe is not static, but expanding. Galaxies are moving steadily apart from each other. This means that they were closer together in the past. One can plot the separation of two galaxies, as a function of time. If there were no acceleration due to gravity, the graph would be a straight line. It would go down to zero separation, about twenty billion years ago. One would expect gravity, to cause the galaxies to accelerate towards each other. This will mean that the graph of the separation of two galaxies will bend downwards, below the straight line. So the time of zero separation, would have been less than twenty billion years ago.<br />At this time, the Big Bang, all the matter in the universe, would have been on top of itself. The density would have been infinite. It would have been what is called, a singularity. At a singularity, all the laws of physics would have broken down. This means that the state of the universe, after the Big Bang, will not depend on anything that may have happened before, because the deterministic laws that govern the universe will break down in the Big Bang. The universe will evolve from the Big Bang, completely independently of what it was like before. Even the amount of matter in the universe, can be different to what it was before the Big Bang, as the Law of Conservation of Matter, will break down at the Big Bang.<br />Since events before the Big Bang have no observational consequences, one may as well cut<br />them out of the theory, and say that time began at the Big Bang. Events before the Big Bang, are simply not defined, because there's no way one could measure what happened at them. This kind of beginning to the universe, and of time itself, is very different to the beginnings that had been considered earlier. These had to be imposed on the universe by some external agency. There is no dynamical reason why the motion of bodies in the solar system can not be extrapolated back in time, far beyond four thousand and four BC, the date for the creation of the universe, according to the book of Genesis. Thus it would require the direct intervention of God, if the universe began at that date. By contrast, the Big Bang is a beginning that is required by the dynamical laws that govern the universe. It is therefore intrinsic to the<br />universe, and is not imposed on it from outside.<br />Although the laws of science seemed to predict the universe had a beginning, they also seemed to predict that they could not determine how the universe would have begun. This was obviously very unsatisfactory. So there were a number of attempts to get round the conclusion, that there was a singularity of infinite density in the past. One suggestion was to modify the law of gravity, so that it became repulsive. This could lead to the graph ofhe separation between two galaxies, being a curve that approached zero, but didn't actually pass through it, at any finite time in the past. Instead, the idea was that, as the galaxies moved apart, new galaxies were formed in between, from matter that was supposed to be continually created. This was the Steady State theory, proposed by Bondi, Gold, and Hoyle. </span></div> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; line-height: 22px;"><br />The Steady State theory, was what Karl Popper would call, a good scientific theory: it made<br />definite predictions, which could be tested by observation, and possibly falsified. Unfortunately<br />for the theory, they were falsified. The first trouble came with the Cambridge observations, of<br />the number of radio sources of different Strengths. On average, one would expect that the<br />fainter sources would also be the more distant. One would therefore expect them to be more numerous than bright sources, which would tend to be near to us. However, the graph of the number of radio sources, against there strength, went up much more sharply at low source strengths, than the Steady State theory predicted.<br />There were attempts to explain away this number count graph, by claiming that some of the faint radio sources, were within our own galaxy, and so did not tell us anything about cosmology. This argument didn't really stand up to further observations. But the final nail in the coffin of the Steady State theory came with the discovery of the microwave background radiation, in 1965. This radiation is the same in all directions. It has the spectrum of radiation in thermal equilibrium at a temperature of 2 point 7 degrees above the Absolute Zero of temperature. There doesn't seem any way to explain this radiation in the Steady State theory.<br />Another attempt to avoid a beginning to time, was the suggestion, that maybe all the galaxies<br />didn't meet up at a single point in the past. Although on average, the galaxies are moving<br />apart from each other at a steady rate, they also have small additional velocities, relative to<br />the uniform expansion. These so-called "peculiar velocities" of the galaxies, may be directed<br />sideways to the main expansion. It was argued, that as you plotted the position of the galaxies<br />back in time, the sideways peculiar velocities, would have meant that the galaxies wouldn't<br />have all met up. Instead, there could have been a previous contracting phase of the universe,<br />in which galaxies were moving towards each other. The sideways velocities could have meant that the galaxies didn't collide, but rushed past each other, and then started to move apart.There wouldn't have been any singularity of infinite density, or any breakdown of the laws of physics. Thus there would be no necessity for the universe, and time itself, to have a beginning. Indeed, one might suppose that the universe had oscillated, though that still wouldn't solve the problem with the Second Law of Thermodynamics: one would expect that the universe would become more disordered each oscillation. It is therefore difficult to see how the universe could have been oscillating for an infinite time. This possibility, that the galaxies would have missed each other, was supported by a paper by two Russians. They claimed that there would be no singularities in a solution of the field equations of general relativity, which was fully general, in the sense that it didn't have any exact symmetry. However, their claim was proved wrong. These showed that general relativity predicted singularities, whenever more than a certain amount of mass was present in a region. The first theorems were designed to show that time came to an end, inside a black hole, formed by the collapse of a star. However, the expansion of the universe, is like the time reverse of the collapse of a star.I therefore want to show you, that observational evidence indicates the universe contains sufficient matter, that it is like the time reverse of a black hole, and so contains a singularity.In order to discuss observations in cosmology, it is helpful to draw a diagram of events in space and time, with time going upward, and the space directions horizontal. To show this diagram properly, I would really need a four dimensional screen.As we look out at the universe, we are looking back in time, because light had to leave distant objects a long time ago, to reach us at the present time. This means that the events we observe lie on what is called our past light cone. The point of the cone is at our position, at the present time. As one goes back in time on the diagram, the light cone spreads out to greater distances, and its area increases. However, if there is sufficient matter on our past light cone, it will bend the rays of light towards each other. This will mean that, as one goes back into the past, the area of our past light cone will reach a maximum, and then start to decrease. It is this focusing of our past light cone, by the gravitational effect of the matter in the universe,that is the signal that the universe is within its horizon, like the time reverse of a black hole. If one can determine that there is enough matter in the universe, to focus our past light cone, One can then apply the singularity theorems, to show that time must have a beginning.<br />How can we tell from the observations, whether there is enough matter on our past light cone,<br />to focus it? We observe a number of galaxies, but we can not measure directly how much<br />matter they contain. Nor can we be sure that every line of sight from us will pass through a<br />galaxy. So I will give a different argument, to show that the universe contains enough matter,<br />to focus our past light cone. The argument is based on the spectrum of the microwave<br />background radiation. This is characteristic of radiation that has been in thermal equilibrium,<br />with matter at the same temperature. To achieve such an equilibrium, it is necessary for the<br />radiation to be scattered by matter, many times. For example, the light that we receive from<br />the Sun has a characteristically thermal spectrum. This is not because the nuclear reactions,<br />which go on in the centre of the Sun, produce radiation with a thermal spectrum. Rather, it is<br />because the radiation has been scattered, by the</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; line-height: 22px;">matter in the Sun, many times on its way </span><br /> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; line-height: 22px;">from the centre.<br /><br />In the case of the universe, the fact that the microwave background has such an exactly<br />thermal spectrum indicates that it must have been scattered many times. The universe must<br />therefore contain enough matter, to make it opaque in every direction we look, because the<br />microwave background is the same, in every direction we look. Moreover, this opacity must<br />occur a long way away from us, because we can see galaxies and quasars, at great distances.<br />Thus there must be a lot of matter at a great distance from us. The greatest opacity over a<br />broad wave band, for a given density, comes from ionised hydrogen. It then follows that if<br />there is enough matter to make the universe opaque, there is also enough matter to focus our<br />past light cone. One can then apply the theorem of Penrose and myself, to show that time<br />must have a beginning.<br /><br />The focussing of our past light cone implied that time must have a beginning, if the General<br />Theory of relativity is correct. But one might raise the question, of whether General Relativity<br />really is correct. It certainly agrees with all the observational tests that have been carried out.<br />However these test General Relativity, only over fairly large distances. We know that General<br />Relativity can not be quite correct on very small distances, because it is a classical theory. This<br />means, it doesn't take into account, the Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Mechanics, which<br />says that an object can not have both a well defined position, and a well defined speed: the<br />more accurately one measures the position, the less accurately one can measure the speed,<br />and vice versa. Therefore, to understand the very high-density stage, when the universe was<br />very small, one needs a quantum theory of gravity, which will combine General Relativity with<br />the Uncertainty Principle.<br /><br />Many people hoped that quantum effects, would somehow smooth out the singularity of infinite<br />density, and allow the universe to bounce, and continue back to a previous contracting phase.<br />This would be rather like the earlier idea of galaxies missing each other, but the bounce would<br />occur at a much higher density. However, I think that this is not what happens: quantum<br />effects do not remove the singularity, and allow time to be continued back indefinitely. But it<br />seems that quantum effects can remove the most objectionable feature, of singularities in<br />classical General Relativity. This is that the classical theory, does not enable one to calculate<br />what would come out of a singularity, because all the Laws of Physics would break down there.<br />This would mean that science could not predict how the universe would have begun. Instead,<br />one would have to appeal to an agency outside the universe. This may be why many religious<br />leaders, were ready to accept the Big Bang, and the singularity theorems.<br /><br />It seems that Quantum theory, on the other hand, can predict how the universe will begin.<br />Quantum theory introduces a new idea, that of imaginary time. Imaginary time may sound like<br />science fiction, and it has been brought into Doctor Who. But nevertheless, it is a genuine<br />scientific concept. One can picture it in the following way. One can think of ordinary, real, time<br />as a horizontal line. On the left, one has the past, and on the right, the future. But there's<br />another kind of time in the vertical direction. This is called imaginary time, because it is not the<br />kind of time we normally experience. But in a sense, it is just as real, as what we call real<br />time.<br /><br />The three directions in space, and the one direction of imaginary time, make up what is called<br />a Euclidean space-time. I don't think anyone can picture a four dimensional curve space. But it<br />is not too difficult to visualise a two dimensional surface, like a saddle, or the surface of a<br />football.<br /><br />In fact, James Hartle of the University of California Santa Barbara, and I have proposed that<br />space and imaginary time together, are indeed finite in extent, but without boundary. They<br />would be like the surface of the Earth, but with two more dimensions. The surface of the Earth<br />is finite in extent, but it doesn't have any boundaries or edges. I have been round the world,<br />and I didn't fall off.<br /><br />If space and imaginary time are indeed like the surface of the Earth, there wouldn't be any<br />singularities in the imaginary time direction, at which the laws of physics would break down.<br /><br />And there wouldn't be any boundaries, to the imaginary time space-time, just as there aren't<br />any boundaries to the surface of the Earth. This absence of boundaries means that the laws of<br />physics would determine the state of the universe uniquely, in imaginary time. But if one<br />knows the state of the universe in imaginary time, one can calculate the state of the universe<br />in real time. One would still expect some sort of Big Bang singularity in real time. So real time<br />would still have a beginning. But one wouldn't have to appeal to something outside the<br />universe, to determine how the universe began. Instead, the way the universe started out at<br />the Big Bang would be determined by the state of the universe in imaginary time. Thus, the<br />universe would be a completely self-contained system. It would not be determined by anything<br />outside the physical universe, that we observe.<br /><br />The no boundary condition, is the statement that the laws of physics hold everywhere. Clearly,<br />this is something that one would like to believe, but it is a hypothesis. One has to test it, by<br />comparing the state of the universe that it would predict, with observations of what the<br />universe is actually like. If the observations disagreed with the predictions of the no boundary<br />hypothesis, we would have to conclude the hypothesis was false. There would have to be<br />something outside the universe, to wind up the clockwork, and set the universe going. Of<br />course, even if the observations do agree with the</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; line-height: 22px;">redictions, that does not prove that the no<br />boundary proposal is correct. But one's confidence in it would be increased, particularly<br />because there doesn't seem to be any other natural proposal, for the quantum state of the<br />universe.<br /><br />The no boundary proposal, predicts that the universe would start at a single point, like the<br />North Pole of the Earth. But this point wouldn't be a singularity, like the Big Bang. Instead, it<br />would be an ordinary point of space and time, like the North Pole is an ordinary point on the<br />Earth, or so I'm told. I have not been there myself.<br /><br />According to the no boundary proposal, the universe would have expanded in a smooth way<br />from a single point. As it expanded, it would have borrowed energy from the gravitational field,<br />to create matter. As any economist could have predicted, the result of all that borrowing, was<br />inflation. The universe expanded and borrowed at an ever-increasing rate. Fortunately, the<br />debt of gravitational energy will not have to be repaid until the end of the universe.<br /><br />Eventually, the period of inflation would have ended, and the universe would have settled down<br />to a stage of more moderate growth or expansion. However, inflation would have left its mark<br />on the universe. The universe would have been almost completely smooth, but with very slight<br />irregularities. These irregularities are so little, only one part in a hundred thousand, that for<br />years people looked for them in vain. But in 1992, the Cosmic Background Explorer satellite,<br />COBE, found these irregularities in the microwave background radiation. It was an historic<br />moment. We saw back to the origin of the universe. The form of the fluctuations in the<br />microwave background agree closely with the predictions of the no boundary proposal. These<br />very slight irregularities in the universe would have caused some regions to have expanded<br />less fast than others. Eventually, they would have stopped expanding, and would have<br />collapsed in on themselves, to form stars and galaxies. Thus the no boundary proposal can<br />explain all the rich and varied structure, of the world we live in. What does the no boundary<br />proposal predict for the future of the universe? Because it requires that the universe is finite in<br />space, as well as in imaginary time, it implies that the universe will re-collapse eventually.<br />However, it will not re-collapse for a very long time, much longer than the 15 billion years it<br />has already been expanding. So, you will have time to sell your government bonds, before the<br />end of the universe is nigh. Quite what you invest in then, I don't know.<br /><br />Originally, I thought that the collapse, would be the time reverse of the expansion. This would<br />have meant that the arrow of time would have pointed the other way in the contracting phase.<br />People would have gotten younger, as the universe got smaller. Eventually, they would have<br />disappeared back into the womb.<br /><br />However, I now realise I was wrong, as these solutions show. The collapse is not the time<br />reverse of the expansion. The expansion will start with an inflationary phase, but the collapse<br />will not in general end with an anti inflationary phase. Moreover, the small departures from<br />uniform density will continue to grow in the contracting phase. The universe will get more and<br />more lumpy and irregular, as it gets smaller, and disorder will increase. This means that the<br />arrow of time will not reverse. People will continue to get older, even after the universe has<br />begun to contract. So it is no good waiting until the universe re-collapses, to return to your<br />youth. You would be a bit past it, anyway, by then.<br /><br />The conclusion of this lecture is that the universe has not existed forever. Rather, the universe,<br />and time itself, had a beginning in the Big Bang, about 15 billion years ago. The beginning of<br />real time, would have been a singularity, at which the laws of physics would have broken<br />down. Nevertheless, the way the universe began would have been determined by the laws of<br />physics, if the universe satisfied the no boundary condition. This says that in the imaginary<br />time direction, space-time is finite in extent, but doesn't have any boundary or edge. The<br />predictions of the no boundary proposal seem to agree with observation. The no boundary<br />hypothesis also predicts that the universe will eventually collapse again. However, the contracting phase, will not have the opposite arrow of time, to the expanding phase. So we will<br />keep on getting older, and we won't return to our youth. Because time is not going to go<br />backwards, I think I better stop now</span></div>

STEPHEN HAWKING : Warp of Space-time

||| THE BEGINNING OF TIME ||| In this article, we would like to discuss whether TIME itself has a beginning, and whether it will ...

Read more »

OCCAM'S RAZOR : The Simplest Theory of Science.

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; line-height: 22px;"></span><br /> <div> <div> What is the most Simple Science Theory for describing Reality?</div> </div> <div> <img alt="OCCAM'S RAZOR : The Simplest Theory of Science. - scan" hspace="0" src="http://f1.pepst.com/c/C138D9/561868/ssc3/home/039/physics.subha/scan0008.jpg_480_480_0_64000_0_1_0.jpg" vspace="0" /></div> <div> <div class="space2" style="padding-bottom: 0.5em; padding-top: 0.5em;"> <div class="hr" style="border-top-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); border-top-style: solid; border-top-width: 1px; color: #aaaaaa;"> </div> </div> </div> <div> Introduction to Simple Science & Occam's Razor<br /> <br /> Occam's Razor (also Ockham's Razor or any of several other spellings), is a principle attributed to the 14th century English logician and Franciscan friar, William of Ockham that forms the basis of methodological reductionism, also called the principle of parsimony. In its simplest form, Occam's Razor states that one should not make more assumptions than needed. When multiple explanations are available for a phenomenon, the simplest version is preferred.<br /> <br /> A charred tree on the ground could be caused by a landing alien ship or a lightning strike. According to Occam's Razor, the lightning strike is the preferred explanation as it requires the fewest assumptions. The principle is most often expressed as Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem, or 'Entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity', but this sentence was written by later authors and is not found in Ockham's surviving writings. William wrote, in Latin, Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate, which translates literally into English as 'Plurality should not be posited without necessity'.<br /> <br /> Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) lived after Ockham's time and has a variant of Occam's razor. His variant short-circuits the need for sophistication by equating it to simplicity.<br /> <br /> 'Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication'. (Leonardo da Vinci)<br /> <br /> Occam's Razor is now usually stated as follows:<br /> <br /> Of two equivalent theories or explanations, all other things being equal, the simpler one is to be preferred.<br /> <br /> As this is ambiguous, Isaac Newton's version may be better:<br /> <br /> We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances. (Sir Isaac Newton, Principia: The system of the world)<br /> <br /> Occam's Razor is known by several different names including the Principle of Parsimony, The Principle of Simplicity, and The Principle of Economy. The reason for these alternate names can be explained by the association of simplicity and parsimony with Occam's Razor. Prior to the 20th century it was believed that the metaphysical justification for Occam's Razor was simplicity. It was thought that nature was in some sense simple and that our theories about nature should reflect that simplicity. With such a metaphysical justification came the implication that Occam's Razor is a metaphysical principle. From the beginning of the 20th century, these views fell out of favor as scientists presented an increasingly complex world view. In response, philosophers turned away from metaphysical justifications for Occam's Razor to epistemological ones including inductive, pragmatic, likelihood and probabilistic justifications, which is where things stand today. Thus, Occam's Razor is currently conceived of as a methodological principle. Elliott Sober has expressed dissatisfaction with epistemological justifications for Occam's Razor. He thinks that there must be a metaphysical presupposition for Occam's Razor, but offers no possibilities (Sober, 1990).<br /> READ MORE :<br /> <a href="http://peperonity.com/go/external?act=0-5351576-1355893977_10cdb03" style="color: blue; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; text-decoration: underline;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam</a>'s_Razor</div> </div>

OCCAM'S RAZOR : The Simplest Theory of Science.

What is the most Simple Science Theory for describing Reality? Introduction to Simple Science & Occam's Razor Occam...

Read more »

STEPHEN HAWKING : ALIENS EXIST !

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"> <div style="text-align: center;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; line-height: 22px;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><br /></span></strong></span></div> <div style="text-align: center;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; line-height: 22px;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">STEPHEN HAWKING : ALIENS EXIST !</span></strong></span></div> <div style="text-align: center;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; line-height: 22px;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><br /></span></strong></span></div> <div style="text-align: center;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; line-height: 22px;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><br /></span></strong></span></div> <div style="text-align: center;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; line-height: 22px;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"></span></span></strong></span></div> <strong></strong><br /> <strong><div> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><img alt="STEPHEN HAWKING : ALIENS EXIST !" hspace="0" src="http://f1.pepst.com/c/B7E06F/306401/ssc3/home/032/blog.subha/2010042661472001.jpg_480_480_0_64000_0_1_0.jpg" vspace="0" /></span></div> <div> <div class="space2" style="padding-bottom: 0.5em; padding-top: 0.5em;"> <div class="hr" style="border-top-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); border-top-style: solid; border-top-width: 1px;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"></span></div> </div> </div> <div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"></span></span></strong></span><br /> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"><div style="display: inline !important;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;">London: Do aliens exist? They do, but humans should try to avoid any contact with them — at least, that's what one of the world's leading physicists, Stephen Hawking, claims. </span></div> </span></span></strong></span></div> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"></span><br /> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><div style="text-align: left;"> <br /></div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"></span></span></strong></span><br /> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"><div style="display: inline !important;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;">The suggestions, that the extraterrestrials are almost certain to exist, come in a new documentary series for the Discovery channel, in which Dr. Hawking will set out his latest thinking on some of the universe's greatest mysteries. </span></div> </span></span></strong></span></div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <br /></div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"></span></span></strong></span><br /> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"><div style="display: inline !important;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;">Alien life, he will suggest, is almost certain to exist in many other parts of the universe — not just in planets, but perhaps in the centre of stars or even floating in interplanetary space, T he Sunday Times reported. </span></div> </span></span></strong></span></div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <br /></div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"></span></span></strong></span><br /> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"><div style="display: inline !important;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;">His logic on aliens is unusually simple. The universe, he points out, has 100 billion galaxies, each containing hundreds of millions of stars. In such a big place, Earth is unlikely to be the only planet where life has evolved. </span></div> </span></span></strong></span></div> </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><div style="text-align: left;"> <br /></div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"></span></span></strong></span><br /> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"><div style="display: inline !important;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;">“To my mathematical brain, the numbers alone make thinking about aliens perfectly rational. The real challenge is to work out what aliens might actually be like,” the 68-year-old was quoted as saying. </span></div> </span></span></strong></span></div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <br /></div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"></span></span></strong></span><br /> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"><div style="display: inline !important;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;">The answer, Dr. Hawking suggests, is that most of it will be the equivalent of microbes or simple animals — the sort of life that has dominated Earth for most of its history. </span></div> </span></span></strong></span></div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <br /></div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"></span></span></strong></span><br /> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"><div style="display: inline !important;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;">One scene in his documentary shows shoals of fluorescent animals living under thick ice on Europa, one of Jupiter's moons, while another shows flying yellow predators prey on two-legged herbivores. </span></div> </span></span></strong></span></div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <br /></div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"></span></span></strong></span><br /> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"><div style="display: inline !important;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;">Such scenes are speculative, but Dr. Hawking uses them to lead on to a serious point — that a few life forms could be intelligent and pose a threat. </span></div> </span></span></strong></span></div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <br /></div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"></span></span></strong></span><br /> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"><div style="display: inline !important;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;">He believes that contact with such a species could be devastating for humanity, and suggests that aliens might raid Earth for its resources and then move on: “We only have to look at ourselves to see how intelligent life might develop into something we wouldn't want to meet. </span></div> </span></span></strong></span></div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <br /></div> <div style="text-align: left;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"></span></span></strong></span><br /> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: silver; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;"><div style="display: inline !important;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;">“I imagine they might exist in massive ships, having used up all the resources from their home planet. Such advanced aliens would perhaps become nomads, looking to conquer and colonise whatever planets they can reach.”</span></div> </span></span></strong></span></div> </span></div> </strong></div>

STEPHEN HAWKING : ALIENS EXIST !

STEPHEN HAWKING : ALIENS EXIST ! London: Do aliens exist? They do, but humans should try to avoid any contact with t...

Read more »

ON TRUTH AND REALITY

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; line-height: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: #f3f3f3;"><br /></span></span> <div style="text-align: center;"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; line-height: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: #f3f3f3;"><img alt="ON TRUTH AND REALITY :" hspace="0" src="http://f1.pepst.com/c/0BC02C/675672/ssc3/home/032/blog.subha/114.jpg_480_480_0_64000_0_1_0.jpg" vspace="0" /></span></span></div> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; line-height: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: #f3f3f3;">What is the relation between truth and reality?<br /><br />Is there any link between truth and reality? What is reality<br />TRUTH STATEMENTS : PHYSICAL REALITY<br /><br />Reality cannot be found except in One single source, because of the interconnection of all things with one another. ... I maintain also that substances, whether material or immaterial, cannot be conceived in their bare essence without any activity, activity being of the essence of substance in general. (Gottfried Leibniz, 1670)<br /><br />(Bradley, 1846-1924) We may agree, perhaps, to understand by Metaphysics an attempt to know reality as against mere appearance, or the study of first principles or ultimate truths, or again the effort to comprehend the universe, not simply piecemeal or by fragments, but somehow as a whole.<br /><br />"The Truth is far more powerful than any weapon of mass destruction."<br />('Mahatma' Mohandas Gandhi)<br /><br />I think, hence I am, was so certain and of such evidence, that no ground of doubt, however extravagant, could be alleged by the sceptics capable of shaking it, I concluded that I might, without scruple, accept it as the first principle of the philosophy of which I was in search. (Rene Descartes)<br /><br />TRUTH STATEMENTS : PHILOSOPHY, METAPHYSICS and SCIENCE.<br /><br />1. We think therefore thinking things (minds) exist.<br /><br />2. We all experience having a body.<br /><br />3. We all experience our mind and body moving about in space.<br /><br />4. We all experience many other minds and bodies (other humans) and many other material objects - but always interconnected in one common space.<br /><br />5. To unite Science with Metaphysics we must describe Reality in terms of One thing we all commonly experience - Space.<br /><br />6. Space (one substance) has properties.<br /><br />7. Space (one substance) must be infinite (not bounded by another substance), eternal (not created by another substance), continuous (not contain another substance).<br /><br />8. Light and matter have a particle / wave duality.<br /><br />9. We cannot add particles to space.<br /><br />10. We can add waves to space.<br /><br />11. Space is a continuous wave medium that propagates waves.<br /><br />12. Matter is spherical.<br /><br />13. A spherical wave forms a 'point like / particle effect' at its wave center.<br /><br />14. The electron is a spherical standing wave.<br /><br />15. The wave center forms the 'particle' effect of matter.<br /><br />16. The spherical in and out waves explain matter's dynamic activity and interconnection.<br /><br />TRUTH STATEMENTS : QUANTUM PHYSICS and PHILOSOPHY<br /><br />1. Matter has a particle wave / duality - the wave center forms the 'particle'.<br /><br />2. Light has a particle / wave duality - standing wave interactions (resonance) are discrete thus like a 'particle'.<br /><br />3. Schrodinger's wave equations determine the discrete energy states of bound electrons due to discrete standing wave patterns.<br /><br />4. Matter moves through space in discrete 'steps' due to the formation of each successive in wave.<br /><br />5. Antimatter is the opposite phase standing wave (positrons have opposite phase to electrons).<br /><br />6. In phase standing waves repel (like charges repel).<br /><br />7. Opposite phase standing waves attract (opposite charges attract).<br /><br />8. Destructive interference of opposite phase standing waves causes matter / antimatter annihilation.<br /><br />9. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is deduced from wave equations.<br /><br />10. Probability waves are mathematical constructs caused by lack of knowledge of an interconnected system of spherical standing waves within infinite space.<br /><br />11. When two spherical standing waves (electrons) are in relative motion you get Doppler shifts of the in and out waves that deduce both the de Broglie wave of quantum physics and the relativistic mass (frequency) increase of Einstein's special relativity.<br /><br />12. The de Broglie phase wave is non-local where its velocity = c2 / relative velocity.<br /><br />13. David Bohm's Non-Local Pilot Wave is the de Broglie phase wave.<br /><br />14. Matter interactions (energy exchanges between wave centers) are local due to the velocity of the spherical in and out waves which is the velocity of light c.<br /><br />15. The allowed energy states of matter (wave patterns of electrons in atoms / molecules) are non-local due to the de Broglie phase wave.<br /><br />16. The ray diagrams in Feynman's quantum electrodynamics are mathematical constructs based upon spherical waves.<br /><br />17. Interference for both light and matter in the two slit experiment occurs because both light and matter are made of waves.<br /><br />18. Space has waves flowing through it from 10^80 other spherical wave structures. These background wave oscillations explain quantum field theory.<br /><br />TRUTH STATEMENTS : Albert Einstein's Theory of Relativity<br /><br />1. A wave is an oscillation between two energy states of the wave medium.<br /><br />2. As matter is made of waves, thus matter and energy are equivalent.<br /><br />3. Wave Equations in an Elastic Medium Space deduce E = mc2, E= hf, F=ma.<br /><br />4. Principle of Relativity - Because both light and matter are made of waves any change in wave velocity has a corresponding change in wavelength such that the wave velocity is always measured to be the same.<br /><br />5. Lorentz Transformation - When matter is in motion it has an ellipsoidal shape.<br /><br />6. Matter (wave centers) can never move faster than the velocity of their spherical in and out waves which create them - the velocity of light c.<br /><br />7. Einstein's Special Relativity - When two spherical standing waves (electrons) are in relative motion you get Doppler shifts of the in and out waves that deduce both the relativistic mass (frequency) increase AND the de Broglie wave of quantum physics.<br /><br />8. A spherical wave is 4 dimensional (Einstein's 4D space-time continuum).<br /><br />9. Any change</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; line-height: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: #f3f3f3;">n the velocity of the spherical in waves (from one direction) causes a change in the position of the wave center when this spherical in wave meets at the wave center. (A 'force' accelerating a 'particle'.) </span></span><br /> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; line-height: 22px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: #f3f3f3;"><br />10. Einstein's general relativity - This change in wave velocity causes a change in the ellipsoidal shape of the 'spherical' in wave, thus there is a relationship between ellipsoidal geometry and acceleration.<br /><br />11. Gravity is simply the slowing of waves in higher mass / energy density space.<br /><br />12. Gravitational and inertial mass are equivalent because both are related to changing the velocity of the spherical / ellipsoidal in waves (force) which causes the re-positioning of the wave center (acceleration).<br /><br />TRUTH STATEMENTS : COSMOLOGY<br /><br />1. The electron (wave center) is a finite spherical wave structure of the observable universe within infinite space.<br /><br />2. The electron's in waves are formed from the out waves of other matter in their observable universe.<br /><br />3. Mach's principle is true - the mass (wave energy) of an electron is determined by all other matter in their observable universe.<br /><br />4. Every electron sees itself at the center of its observable universe in infinite space.<br /><br />5. The equation of the cosmos deduces the size of the observable universe.<br /><br />6. There are an infinite number of finite spherical universes within infinite space.<br /><br />7. Redshift with distance occurs as there is less common overlap of each electron's finite spherical universe with distance that causes decreasing wave interactions with distance and thus decreasing energy exchanges (redshift).<br /><br />8. Redshift with distance is quantised because wave interactions are quantised.<br /><br />9. Our observable universe is not expanding.<br /><br />10. The evolution of complexity occurs because the second law of thermodynamics only applies to closed systems (not infinite space).<br /><br />11. We have limited freedom and limited determinism in a necessarily connected universe within Infinite Space.<br /><br />12. Black holes and worm holes are mathematical constructs - infinite energy densities do not exist - time travel does not exist - faster than light travel does not exist.<br /><br />13. The motion of galaxies at the edge of our observable universe is determined by matter outside our observable universe (they will be at the center of their observable universe within Infinite Space).<br /><br />Truth Statements: Mind<br /><br />1. Our mind (and body) did not always exist - we are born, we age, we die.<br /><br />2. Our mind (and body) display traits that can only be understood with Darwinian Evolution.<br /><br />3. Our mind is always in motion because reality is in motion (the wave motion of space).<br /><br />4. Our mind has logical knowledge because interconnected repeating wave motions behave logically.<br /><br />5. Our mind has empirical knowledge because of the spherical in-waves.<br /><br />6. Our mind (and body) has limited freedom, limited determinism in a necessarily connected universe.<br /><br />7. Our mind has a creative imagination.<br /><br />8. Our mind can imagine physical reality - the wave structure of matter in space.<br /><br />9. Our mind can deduce absolute truths from physical reality that correspond to empirical truths that we all commonly experience (Science).<br /><br />10. While words may be metaphors, the word space does correspond to a real substance that we all experience existing in - this space around us.<br /><br />10. Our mind and body are wave structures of the observable universe within infinite space.</span></span></div>

ON TRUTH AND REALITY

What is the relation between truth and reality? Is there any link between truth and reality? What is reality TRUTH STATEMENTS : PHYSICAL...

Read more »

PHILOSOPHY v/s SCIENCE

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"> Please read carefully and write comment on this topic: ;-> Long be­fore the birth of Aris­to­tleor Plato, a Greek philoso­pher called Her­a­cli­tus came up with the strange idea that the en­tire cos­mos was made of fire. Whilst Her­a­cli­tus’ claims were ac­tu­al­ly a se­ries of metaphors draw­ing up a con­cep­tion of theworld gov­erned by un­chang­ingnat­ur­al laws, it is tempt­ing to dis­miss Her­a­cli­tus’ phi­los­o­phy as the kind of non­sense that flour­ish­es in the ab­sence of sci­en­tif­ic en­quiry. It seems that today, the idea that sci­ence is the guardian of human knowl­edge, pe­ri­od­i­cal­ly in­ter­ven­ing when­ev­er phi­los­o­phy gets car­ried away, isall too com­mon. Indeed, it is easy to see why mostpeople have much a higher opinion of science than of philosophy. After all, science’s impact on our day to day life is huge, having brought us intercontinental flight, vaccination, electric light and four-bladed razors. By contrast, two of the phenomena most commonly attributed to philosophy are doubt and – if Nietzsche mis-interpreters are to be believed – Nazism. It is often forgotten that the relation between philosophy and science is reciprocal: just as science has the right to intervene with philosophy every time a philosophical theory radically contradicts empirical evidence, philosophy has an important role in criticising the practices and assumptions upon which scientificenquiry depends. At the vanguard science’s attack onphilosophy is Stephen Hawking, who recently claimed that religion and philosophy are superfluous to human understanding. Hawking’s dismissal of religion as a genuine source of human knowledge – though stupendously banal - is fairenough. Hawking’s dismissal of philosophy, however, seems quite odd. For a start, it is simply false that, as Hawking claims, philosophers havefailed to keep up to date with developments in physics andbiology. An excellent example of how scientific enquiry has changed the terms of philosophicaldiscussion is the ongoing debate on the consequences of advances in evolutionary psychology for ethics. Moreover, if philosophers do not always take heed of scientific advances, it is more oftendue to (quite reasonable) scepticism regarding the relevanceof empirical findings rather than ignorance of them. Hawking’s distain for philosophy isalso spectacularly hypocritical given the status of his own discipline: theoretical physics. Much like metaphysics, theoreticalphysics is characterised by competition between theories that are equally compatible with empirical findings and, much like metaphysics, theoretical..physics would be dismissed as meaningless by the philosophical school of Logical Positivism. Though physicists might here mention the fact that that their theories are backed up by maths, metaphysics is equally substantiated by formal logic. To give an idea of how, like philosophy, theoretical physics attempts to answer questions far beyond the remit of empirical enquiry, one need only to refer toHawking’s own book ‘The Grand Design’. Here, Hawking attempts to answer three questions: ‘Why is there something instead of nothing?’, ‘Why do we exist?’ and,‘Why does this particular set oflaws govern the universe?’ Not only is the subject matter of Hawking’s book no different to that of the philosophy he so criticises, but a few minutes of philosophical consideration revealsthe futility of his project. ‘Why is there something instead of nothing’ is, as Parmenedes observed round about the same time as Heraclitus, a logical absurdity. ‘Why do we exist?’ or rather, I suspect, ‘How is it that we exist?’ is answerable by science but not by theoretical physics. And because science, as Hawking himself observes, is dependent on the idea of unchanging natural laws, the question, ‘Why does this particular set of laws govern the universe?’, cannot be answered by it without appealing to some, morefundamental set of natural laws and thus leading into an infinite regress. In ‘An Essay Concerning Human Understanding’, John Locke describes himself as an under labourer, tasked with clearing away the logical and linguistic confusion obstructing the path ofthe natural sciences. What scientists such as Hawking fail to realise is that the task of the philosophical under labourer an ongoing one. Whereas the matterof whether philosophy itself can provide new knowledge is hotly contested, what is unequivocal is that all fields of human enquiry - and particularly science – are dependent on the philosophical drudgery that keeps the path of human progress clear. Perhaps though, the sight of Hawking’s unconsidered scientific triumphalism makes thecause for the utility of philosophy better thanphilosophers themselves ever could. Whats ur mind? Comment please:</div>

PHILOSOPHY v/s SCIENCE

Please read carefully and write comment on this topic: ;-> Long be­fore the birth of Aris­to­tleor Plato, a Greek philoso­pher called He...

Read more »

MY WORLD OF SCIENCE AND FANTASY

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; line-height: 22px;"></span><br /> <div> <a href="http://peperonity.com/go/media/13048690%213" style="color: blue; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;"><img alt="MY WORLD OF SCIENCE AND FANTASY" hspace="0" src="http://f1.pepst.com/c/FF4351/510779/ssc3/home/039/physics.subha/06032010408_002.jpg_480_480_0_64000_0_1_0.jpg" vspace="0" /></a></div> <div> <div class="space2" style="padding-bottom: 0.5em; padding-top: 0.5em;"> <div class="hr" style="border-top-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); border-top-style: solid; border-top-width: 1px; color: #aaaaaa;"> <span></span></div> </div> </div> <div> WEAK ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE<br /><br />One may wonder but it is a certified fact that if the basic laws of Universe were just slightly different, like the change in value of the fundamental constants of the basic physical constants then it was not possible for life to grow in. As if the Universe has already know that life is coming into existence and for that purpose he fine tuned the basic laws of the universe. This theme about Universe is known as Anthropic Principle. It is true that science can not explain the cause of our existence and the existence of our Universe? Are we some special purpose machine? Is there any Grand Design behind the creation of this Universe.<br /><br />The question that arise here is also very fundamental. So, why is the universe just right for life. Since the beginning of human civilisations the great question that haunts human being forever is the question about our Existence, our entity. Why do we exist? And why does the universe exist? From where our universe has been created or what is mass of any matter that exist in this physical world.<br /><br />When I was a school student I used to think that everything has an answer. Some one or other must know the answer. We don't know the answer of a certain comment, solely because we didn't study enough, and when we got physics for the first time in class VIII, believe me I thought now I come to know what is matter itself. But, alas, while studying Physics I amazingly find that not only matter, also we could not define what is time and length(space) even.<br /><br />KANAI SIR AND PHYSICS :<br /><br />I was completely indebted to the great teacher, kanai sir, who had infused a sense of scientific curiosity inside my little mind. He introduced physics as a law of nature and still now, when I am an university teacher, I honestly try to infuse the zeal once he had injected in me. Particular one incident I still remember, at that time I was in class VII, and for the first time we come to know about Rutherford model of atomic nucleas. Well, at first he introduced charge as a fundamental property of matter and next he told them the nucleus is made of several protons and around which electrons are orbitting, like planets are revolving around Sun, and both electrons and protons are charged particles, but their charges are opposite to each other.</div> </div>

MY WORLD OF SCIENCE AND FANTASY

WEAK ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE One may wonder but it is a certified fact that if the basic laws of Universe were just slightly differen...

Read more »

HUMAN BODY : A QUANTUM MECHANICAL DEVICE

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; color: #020202; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; line-height: 22px;"></span><br /> <div> <a href="http://peperonity.com/go/media/13320362%213" style="color: blue; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; text-decoration: underline;"><img alt="HUMAN BODY : A QUANTUM MECHANICAL DEVICE. - l" hspace="0" src="http://f1.pepst.com/c/BF439D/389710/ssc3/home/048/i.subha/4078257_l.jpg_480_480_0_64000_0_1_0.jpg" vspace="0" /></a></div> <div> <div class="space2" style="padding-bottom: 0.5em; padding-top: 0.5em;"> <div class="hr" style="border-top-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); border-top-style: solid; border-top-width: 1px; color: #aaaaaa;"> <span></span></div> </div> </div> <div> The human body is a summation of all quantum states defined by individual subatomic particles. Through quantum possibilities, at any time the individuated subatomic particle has the choice to manifest in any form. It may be chosen to manifest as illness in any part of the body, or as pure wholeness, i.e. perfect health.<br /><br />Essentially what happens in the body is that the individuated particles determine the form of the cumulative sum. This means that consciousness at even the minutest level, i.e. at the subatomic level, associates with all probabilities. This consciousness then accumulates and transfers into individual collective consciousness within the entire body, maintaining the original consciousness developed at the individual subatomic level.<br /><br />We can view this as the body being the collective consciousness of the consciousness of its individual parts.<br /><br />We should be aware, though, that even as the body is a sum of its individuated parts, i.e. individuated, in the parlance of quantum mechanics this does not mean “separated.” So even those things that are external to the body also collectively contribute to and make up a greater collective consciousness.<br /><br />The greater collective consciousness of the external environment is then progressively connected to greater consciousness, combining to form the greatest collective, which is all inclusive.*<br /><br />Clearly from this perspective we should see that the human body is not separate from its environment. So, the environment and all that appears to be external to the body are in fact connected through consciousness. The body is therefore always in continuous and ongoing contact with that which is external to it and can be influenced.<br /><br />In this context, we can see that the overall health of the body is affected by this exchange with its external environment.<br />The continuous contact of the body with the entire environment creates a continuous whole. In this setting the actions of the body, whether in conscious or unconscious awareness, still take place in overall consciousness.<br /><br />Genes function within our body cells as carriers of information from the environment then act as processors of this information for epigenetic expression. All of these actions take place in unconscious awareness. The interaction between the body and what is external can be then seen as a system-wide event: the body and its actions are never really separate from each other or the whole.<br /><br />Consciousness, whether in conscious or unconscious awareness, still creates outcomes that consist of the cumulative states of subatomic particles. These cumulative states result either in form, or the precursors of form, such as thought and emotion. These express as electromagnetic energy within the body.<br /><br />The interaction between what is within and outside the body defines the overall bodily experience. This should be viewed as an exchange and integration of information that then translates into experience for a person.<br /><br />Consciousness of the body essentially views a set of probabilities about potential experiences in “probability space”, called “imagination space” as it relates to the body.<br />These probabilities then condense into actual experience for a person, which we then perceive as reality.<br /><br />We should see then that the body truly is a quantum mechanical machine, capable of generating experiences in perceived “real-space,” from the probabilities perceived in the “imagination-space” of thought.<br /><br />Experiences in perceived “real-space” can be resonated at either a Level Zero understanding, a Level One understanding or Level Two understanding of connectivity. Depending on the level, there are different interactions with the “environment” or the portion external to the body. In this way, the same person can have very different experiences from the same set-up events.</div> </div>

HUMAN BODY : A QUANTUM MECHANICAL DEVICE

The human body is a summation of all quantum states defined by individual subatomic particles. Through quantum possibilities, at ...

Read more »