Somebody said this to me

[Zen Badger]

I'm sure that when I said "an otherwise empty universe" I was speaking of a hypothetical situation to illustrate that gravity would eventually bring those two particles together.

So I think you've misapprehended my point, which was that gravity has an infinite reach.

In the real universe the galactic mass blackholes I'm postulating will only by separated by millions of light years and won't have time to evaporate before gravity brings them together.

[KichigaiNeko]

Phil don't you DARE get all uppity and impatient on me!!

No one is saying ANYTHING is "gospel"

Based on what is currently understood is what is being presented here in this thread.....

IF you have any thoughts or information (peer reviewed papers) please present them!!

Otherwise please be tolerant of my limited understanding of the Milky Way Galaxy and how it works according to the models I currently understand! I am very happy to assimilate NEW information and if you have this then please present it!! Give me links so as I can read and hopefully understand.

Huh? I'm talking to Zen or are you posting from his account?

You gave me a serve Phil and I was replying to that. No I am NOT posting from Zen's account...again slanderous actions implied by you? I would not do that Phil.

Now IF you have any information I am glad (read hungry) to look at it. So please post As I have stated, my knowledge is limited and I am curious!

[Zen Badger]

It's 9.50pm here and as I have to get up at 4am for work tomorrow, I will bid you adieu for the moment and we will continue this discussion tomorrow.

Goodnight.

[Phil]

In case anyone is really interested, the maths that Zen linked to is from a guy named Mike Adams and he claims to be a cell biologist. It doesn't really matter what one is since the math is clear but the problem comes when he doesn't take anything other than his limited knowledge influence him. By limited i am not "dissing" cell biology. I just mean he is ignoring entropy. For two widely separated particles (a high entropy state) he is claiming that they will be attracted into a low entropy state due to gravity. That isn't entirely true though. First off let me say that the reason a high entropy state (particles separated from one another) is much more probable than a low entropy state (particles touching) is simply that there are just many more ways for the particles to be apart than together. Next mistake is his failure to take quantum effects into consideration. Let us for arguments sake claim that the two particles are locked in a course that will cause them to meet when suddenly (as is wont to happen due to quantum fluctuations), a pair of virtual particles forms very close to one of the particles. One or possibly both of the virtual particles "bumps" into the particle and knocks it off of it's collision course. Not too probable but much more probable than what our cell biologist claims. Then there is the natural repulsion of electrons that occurs when electrons get close to one another. Pretty much in an expanding universe none of this will matter anyway since it is mostly a fantasy that two particles would ever meet.

[KichigaiNeko]

And your peer reviewed papers supporting this are??

[Phil]

You gave me a serve Phil and I was replying to that. No I am NOT posting from Zen's account...again slanderous actions implied by you? I would not do that Phil.

Now IF you have any information I am glad (read hungry) to look at it. So please post As I have stated, my knowledge is limited and I am curious!

Kichi,

My only post to you was me saying I didn't understand your question. You said it wasn't a question and I never replied to you since. How did I serve you? You are responding to what I told Zen about "gospel."

---

And your peer reviewed papers supporting this are??

Supporting what exactly?

edit: Supporting an expanding universe or that entropy will increase because there are more microstates in a system with high entropy than low entropy?

[KichigaiNeko]

Phil, understand that I am seriously curious as to the conversation here and ANY information you have via links is most welcome.

The reference to Zen's post is that you seemed to think that both our posts were linked and they were not. Texting has such limitations does it not??

As I have saidregarding

In case anyone is really interested, the maths that Zen linked to is from a guy named Mike Adams and he claims to be a cell biologist. It doesn't really matter what one is since the math is clear but the problem comes when he doesn't take anything other than his limited knowledge influence him. By limited i am not "dissing" cell biology. I just mean he is ignoring entropy. For two widely separated particles (a high entropy state) he is claiming that they will be attracted into a low entropy state due to gravity. That isn't entirely true though. First off let me say that the reason a high entropy state (particles separated from one another) is much more probable than a low entropy state (particles touching) is simply that there are just many more ways for the particles to be apart than together. Next mistake is his failure to take quantum effects into consideration. Let us for arguments sake claim that the two particles are locked in a course that will cause them to meet when suddenly (as is wont to happen due to quantum fluctuations), a pair of virtual particles forms very close to one of the particles. One or possibly both of the virtual particles "bumps" into the particle and knocks it off of it's collision course. Not too probable but much more probable than what our cell biologist claims. Then there is the natural repulsion of electrons that occurs when electrons get close to one another. Pretty much in an expanding universe none of this will matter anyway since it is mostly a fantasy that two particles would ever meet.

IF you have any information that can direct me to any peer reviewed papers on the above topics I am very happy to read them. Don't get impatient with me because I am not as informed as you on this topic.

[Phil]

IF you have any information that can direct me to any peer reviewed papers on the above topics I am very happy to read them. Don't get impatient with me because I am not as informed as you on this topic.

Papers?! There are full texts written about Entropy, General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. Are those what your asking for? The book I recommended to Zen is a good start as well as most anything by Brian Cox. If you want black hole info, you can't go wrong with Kip Thorne or John Wheeler.

[KichigaiNeko]

But Brian Cox is what has lead me to think that the galactic Black hole is a potentiality for the Milky Way galaxy.. you are saying I am wrong?

---

Thankyou for the references I will certainly look them up!

[Phil]

But Brian Cox is what has lead me to think that the galactic Black hole is a potentiality for the Milky Way galaxy.. you are saying I am wrong?

---

Thankyou for the references I will certainly look them up!

I didn't address that so I couldn't have said you were wrong but I will ask what do you mean by potentiality? Are you claiming Brian Cox said the Milky Way came into being from a black hole. If he actually said that, he must have been mocking William Lane Craig.