Thanks albeit some concerns. The picture that accompanied this lacks explanation.The origin of matter remains a puzzle. There are many things we are still grappling with. We just do not know. As to whether the new CERN projec ... read full comment
Thanks albeit some concerns. The picture that accompanied this lacks explanation.The origin of matter remains a puzzle. There are many things we are still grappling with. We just do not know. As to whether the new CERN project will reveal at least the effects of particles like Gravitons is highly doubtful.I submit that they got the new setup dimensionally wrong.We can visualize 10 dimensions in a way. To some of us, our conjecture is that we have 10 dimensions and not 11 that String/ membrane theorists are jumping upon.
My contention, as a contribution to your researched piece is that particle collider designs for Femi lab to Cern are defective. They must not be planar. They must be 3-D so that we have 3 particles colliding orthogonally at high speed.
Think about it.
Keep up the good works , Seshie.
J. J Kofi Ameko.
Gordon 8 years ago
Thank, Seshie for this first part which came after the second. Typical for ghanaweb to overcompensate for its faults. This article appeared yesterday with few takers probably because those interested had already read the seco ... read full comment
Thank, Seshie for this first part which came after the second. Typical for ghanaweb to overcompensate for its faults. This article appeared yesterday with few takers probably because those interested had already read the second part.
But this first part is a good introduction and I am looking forward to the third and concluding part. I was just wondering if you cannot continue on the series and break down some of these difficult concepts to our "common" levels.
You're doing a great job and I hope you do really become ghanaweb's Carl Sagan or, better still, our own Neil deGrasse Tyson...
To Kofi Ameko, I think your concerns are interesting and it's obvious you're knowledgeable about the details. I was just wondering if your present concerns are relevant to the first part of Seshie's series. He is not yet talking of colliders, gravitons and many dimensions. Perhaps you have had the chance to read all the three part series. I hope you'll come again when the subsequent parts are posted. There are many of us who are interested in informed discussions on the issue which you seem to possess.
Thank you both.
Kofi Ameko 8 years ago
Gordon,
Mine was a brief response to parts 1 and 11. Pieces like this from Seshie raise ones hope for some advancement on Ghana and the Worlds STEM front.
I would like to engage many from Ghana on these issues. I would ... read full comment
Gordon,
Mine was a brief response to parts 1 and 11. Pieces like this from Seshie raise ones hope for some advancement on Ghana and the Worlds STEM front.
I would like to engage many from Ghana on these issues. I would gladly have informal discussions with African peers and exchange my views and recommendations for future
explorations. I get sad when I attend conferences only to see insignificant number of blacks. When I present, it will be a joy to see my people there to lift me up. Results from looking around the presentation rooms are always depressing.
Thanks.
Seshie 8 years ago
Thanks Kofi.
Have you read part 2? Unfortunately part 2 was published last sunday, 10/04/16. Try and read it as we wait for Part 3 to be published.
Or you can email or whatsapp me for Part 2&3 .
Email: seshiehanku@gma ... read full comment
Thanks Kofi.
Have you read part 2? Unfortunately part 2 was published last sunday, 10/04/16. Try and read it as we wait for Part 3 to be published.
Or you can email or whatsapp me for Part 2&3 .
Email: seshiehanku@gmail.com
Whatsapp: 0248412308
FB: Seshie Stanley
Kofi Ameko 8 years ago
Have all.
Heard of you at Dzolali.
Will call one weekend.
J.J. Kofi Ameko.
Have all.
Heard of you at Dzolali.
Will call one weekend.
J.J. Kofi Ameko.
Tekonline.org 8 years ago
Kofi,
Your idea about three particles colliding orthogonally is very, very interesting !!!
I've already engaged the minds of my astrophysicist friends. Please stay tuned.
Kofi,
Your idea about three particles colliding orthogonally is very, very interesting !!!
I've already engaged the minds of my astrophysicist friends. Please stay tuned.
Kofi Ameko 8 years ago
Thanks.
I can give you more details on it.
Take care.
Thanks.
I can give you more details on it.
Take care.
Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law 8 years ago
The assumption that something that is expanding must necessarily have been small indeed challenges well-founded commonsense; for something could expand starting from some quantifiable size or shape.
Therefore the cornersto ... read full comment
The assumption that something that is expanding must necessarily have been small indeed challenges well-founded commonsense; for something could expand starting from some quantifiable size or shape.
Therefore the cornerstone of the Big Bang Theory must be questioned further. I think the known quantity here is that the universe is expanding, nothing else, and that could be scientifically proven by mere observation and measurement.
But to assert the inverse that an expanding body must have started as very small indeed is no science. That is why I find the Big Bang Theory quite problematic.
Having said this, the theory of science does trump any mythology of creation, and any inquiry in science is a continuing search for the ultimate truth, whereas myths assert imaginary truths and command belief in their acolytes without question.......
This author elevates Ghanaweb discourse to a higher form of epistemology, and hence the rapid escape of the known goons from this hallowed page.
However we still don't expect him not to know the difference between "being" and "been".
A small tip...Whenever you use the item has/have and its ancillary tenses, the following item must be "been". But when you use the auxiliary "is/was" and its derivatives, the following item must be "being"....
Hence: He has/had been very rude.
Or: He is/was being very rude.
Meek 8 years ago
Wow I never knew we had some smart folks like you guys around. Thanks for dispelling my ignorant views. Please let's hear more from you, even if on Obinim type issues.
Wow I never knew we had some smart folks like you guys around. Thanks for dispelling my ignorant views. Please let's hear more from you, even if on Obinim type issues.
Gordon 8 years ago
I think Seshie's missing the difference between "being" and "been" may have been an oversight rather than a display of his not knowing. There were some other grammatical misses too but they can easily be overlooked given that ... read full comment
I think Seshie's missing the difference between "being" and "been" may have been an oversight rather than a display of his not knowing. There were some other grammatical misses too but they can easily be overlooked given that the language, generally, is quite good. The misses do not detract from the meaning of the sentences.
I think it's a bit petty to draw attention to them. You could have kept your teacher's instincts under wraps...
It is true that anything that is expanding need not necessarily have started as a very small entity but I think the assumption underlying the Big Bang theory is based on the nature of the observed expansion rather than just on the fact that it is expanding. So there may be a decent logic behind the assumption. If this assumption is discarded, there will be virtually nothing left of the theory. At least nothing of value to our search for the beginning of things. And, as you have also admitted, it's just a theory, one that is good enough to work with until something better comes around. And, thank goodness, it is not myth or religious belief which will never admit that it is wrong...
Tekonline.org 8 years ago
"...The assumption that something that is expanding must necessarily have been small indeed challenges well-founded commonsense; for something could expand starting from some quantifiable size or shape..."
That would be qu ... read full comment
"...The assumption that something that is expanding must necessarily have been small indeed challenges well-founded commonsense; for something could expand starting from some quantifiable size or shape..."
That would be quite true based on "commonsense", whatever that means.
Unfortunately commonsense and the laws of Physics don't mix too well. And that is hardly surprising -- "commonsense" is a byproduct of the human brain and may not have anything to do with the physical universe outside the skull.
One common puzzle to the lay person is: if the universe is expanding, then it is expanding into what? Similarly, any concept of "the boundaries of the universe" would inevitable lead to the question: "what do you call the outside of that boundary?"
The human brain, with its biases developed during infancy, is mostly to blame for such hard-to-imagine scenarios.
The fact of the matter is, an expanding universe is CREATING space and expanding into TIME. The concept of a singularity then becomes comprehensible. And rather than visualizing an infinitely "small point", singularity is a moment of infinite DENSITY, which mathematically makes sense if you plot the time-based process 13.8 billions years back.
Gordon 8 years ago
Tekonline.org, I think I like your response. Plotting the time-based process 13.8 billion years back (the age of the universe) makes sense mathematically. So there is a logic in the assumption.
Kofi Ameko has still his dou ... read full comment
Tekonline.org, I think I like your response. Plotting the time-based process 13.8 billion years back (the age of the universe) makes sense mathematically. So there is a logic in the assumption.
Kofi Ameko has still his doubts, though...
Kofi Ameko 8 years ago
Are you talking about space expanding into time?
Please clarify , if I got you right.
Excellent exchanges.
I wish for more.
Are you talking about space expanding into time?
Please clarify , if I got you right.
Excellent exchanges.
I wish for more.
Tekonline.org 8 years ago
Good question, Kofi.
I prefer to stick with Einstein's General Theory of Relativity and not even use the word "expanding" but rather "stretching". Either stretching into space infinite to begin with, or "creating" space to f ... read full comment
Good question, Kofi.
I prefer to stick with Einstein's General Theory of Relativity and not even use the word "expanding" but rather "stretching". Either stretching into space infinite to begin with, or "creating" space to fill.
No simple concepts for our jelly-like processor inside the skull!
What is your take?
Kofi Ameko 8 years ago
Dr. Sad
We all share your concerns. I am concerned about the origin of matter it self. There are many things we do not know. We must continue to be inquisitive. The universe expanding is one issue. If you drop a pebble in ... read full comment
Dr. Sad
We all share your concerns. I am concerned about the origin of matter it self. There are many things we do not know. We must continue to be inquisitive. The universe expanding is one issue. If you drop a pebble into a p ond, look at what happens to the waveform. It spreads away from the originating source. This does not answer your concern though.
Take care. Your input is appreciated highly.
J. J Kofi Ameko
Kofi Ameko 8 years ago
I apologize.
It is Dr. SAS.
I apologize.
It is Dr. SAS.
BOY KOFI 8 years ago
From scientific point of view,I disagree with the word "creation" used in this context.I do agree in principle that the world started from somewhere,it could be an Atom or a Spirit.Somebody might take if from religious point, ... read full comment
From scientific point of view,I disagree with the word "creation" used in this context.I do agree in principle that the world started from somewhere,it could be an Atom or a Spirit.Somebody might take if from religious point,another person will take it from biological point like what Charles Darwin did with his Theory of Evolution.Let me make it clear here,the Big Bang theory is about the Universe but not about the site of creation.I am saying this because the universe theory and creation theory are 2 different things together.You will be surprised to know that the Theory of Atom came from a French Catholic priest,Georges Lemaitre in 1920 long before Albert Einstien developed the Theory of Relativity.Thank you.
Meek 8 years ago
I just retracted my earlier statement. It was said in haste
I just retracted my earlier statement. It was said in haste
Tekonline.org 8 years ago
A small correction: Democritus was the first to propose the concept of the atom as the smallest indivisible part of matter. He developed that thought in about 400 BC.
Also, as I have pointed out before, the concept of "a ... read full comment
A small correction: Democritus was the first to propose the concept of the atom as the smallest indivisible part of matter. He developed that thought in about 400 BC.
Also, as I have pointed out before, the concept of "a beginning" and "an end" is a human brain construct. We do develop all kinds of biases during early development. Einstein was smart in abandoning such biases in developing most of his theories, which were mostly based on mathematics.
The brain is also notorious for taking things for granted. We all seem to "understand" what time means, yet it is a rather complex concept. Einstein was very bothered by the whole notion of "time" at a very early age and was considered "retarded" at school.
BOY KOFI 8 years ago
Accepted,I didn't pay much attention here.As a matter of fact,Georges Lemaitre is a Belgian,he suggested the theory of the Big Bang.I am talking about the origin of this theory but not the atom itself.Thank you.
Accepted,I didn't pay much attention here.As a matter of fact,Georges Lemaitre is a Belgian,he suggested the theory of the Big Bang.I am talking about the origin of this theory but not the atom itself.Thank you.
Thanks albeit some concerns. The picture that accompanied this lacks explanation.The origin of matter remains a puzzle. There are many things we are still grappling with. We just do not know. As to whether the new CERN projec ...
read full comment
Thank, Seshie for this first part which came after the second. Typical for ghanaweb to overcompensate for its faults. This article appeared yesterday with few takers probably because those interested had already read the seco ...
read full comment
Gordon,
Mine was a brief response to parts 1 and 11. Pieces like this from Seshie raise ones hope for some advancement on Ghana and the Worlds STEM front.
I would like to engage many from Ghana on these issues. I would ...
read full comment
Thanks Kofi.
Have you read part 2? Unfortunately part 2 was published last sunday, 10/04/16. Try and read it as we wait for Part 3 to be published.
Or you can email or whatsapp me for Part 2&3 .
Email: seshiehanku@gma ...
read full comment
Have all.
Heard of you at Dzolali.
Will call one weekend.
J.J. Kofi Ameko.
Kofi,
Your idea about three particles colliding orthogonally is very, very interesting !!!
I've already engaged the minds of my astrophysicist friends. Please stay tuned.
Thanks.
I can give you more details on it.
Take care.
The assumption that something that is expanding must necessarily have been small indeed challenges well-founded commonsense; for something could expand starting from some quantifiable size or shape.
Therefore the cornersto ...
read full comment
Wow I never knew we had some smart folks like you guys around. Thanks for dispelling my ignorant views. Please let's hear more from you, even if on Obinim type issues.
I think Seshie's missing the difference between "being" and "been" may have been an oversight rather than a display of his not knowing. There were some other grammatical misses too but they can easily be overlooked given that ...
read full comment
"...The assumption that something that is expanding must necessarily have been small indeed challenges well-founded commonsense; for something could expand starting from some quantifiable size or shape..."
That would be qu ...
read full comment
Tekonline.org, I think I like your response. Plotting the time-based process 13.8 billion years back (the age of the universe) makes sense mathematically. So there is a logic in the assumption.
Kofi Ameko has still his dou ...
read full comment
Are you talking about space expanding into time?
Please clarify , if I got you right.
Excellent exchanges.
I wish for more.
Good question, Kofi.
I prefer to stick with Einstein's General Theory of Relativity and not even use the word "expanding" but rather "stretching". Either stretching into space infinite to begin with, or "creating" space to f ...
read full comment
Dr. Sad
We all share your concerns. I am concerned about the origin of matter it self. There are many things we do not know. We must continue to be inquisitive. The universe expanding is one issue. If you drop a pebble in ...
read full comment
I apologize.
It is Dr. SAS.
From scientific point of view,I disagree with the word "creation" used in this context.I do agree in principle that the world started from somewhere,it could be an Atom or a Spirit.Somebody might take if from religious point, ...
read full comment
I just retracted my earlier statement. It was said in haste
A small correction: Democritus was the first to propose the concept of the atom as the smallest indivisible part of matter. He developed that thought in about 400 BC.
Also, as I have pointed out before, the concept of "a ...
read full comment
Accepted,I didn't pay much attention here.As a matter of fact,Georges Lemaitre is a Belgian,he suggested the theory of the Big Bang.I am talking about the origin of this theory but not the atom itself.Thank you.
www.racked.com/2016/4/12/11414640/willow-smith-teen-vogue
NONSENSE, NONSENSE, NONSENSE!