Universe

I was reading about the cyclic theory of cosmology.

Theory that big bangs are produced every trillion years or so by the collision of "branes".

Sounds plausible, but is this gaining any acceptance among the main cosmologists?

The Big Bang is widely accepted by cosmologists in the world, but while this does seem plausible, as showed by irregularities in space continuum, (probably sudden waves of pressure and other energies) I don’t think cosomologists welcome to accept this theory as of now. This is, I think a new and unheard theory. This is definitely worth discussing about though.

Lecture 2 of Leonard Susskind’s Modern Physics concentrating on Cosmology. Recorded January 19, 2009 at Stanford University.

This Stanford Continuing Studies course is the fifth of a six-quarter sequence of classes exploring the essential theoretical foundations of modern physics. The topics covered in this course focus on classical mechanics. Leonard Susskind is the Felix Bloch Professor of Physics at Stanford University.

Stanford University:

http://www.stanford.edu

Stanford Continuing Studies:

http://continuingstudies.stanford.edu/

About Leonard Susskind:

http://www.stanford.edu/dept/physics/people/faculty/susskind_leonard.html

Stanford University Channel on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/stanford

Duration : 1:57:11

Read the rest of this entry »

ancient hindu cosmology
by carl sagens

Duration : 0:6:25

Read the rest of this entry »

what is the difference between the teleology, ontology and cosmology proofs? please give a little summary of them.
i have to write which one I prefer best, based on their definitions.
thank you!

"Teleology" is the study of ends… explaining things by their purpose.

"Ontology" is the branch of philosophy dealing with the nature of "being." Closely related to "Metaphysics."

"Cosmology" is the study of WHAT and HOW things (or more generally, the whole universe) exists. "Cosmologists" as a term refers to Pre-Socratic philosophers who were preoccupied with this subject.

"Teleological Proof" tries to prove the existence of God as a "Final Cause" and ultimate goal of the universe. This proof comes from observing the "purposeful" nature of things.

"Ontological Proof" tries to prove the existence of God merely by its being, its ontological definition. That God by definition necessarily exists. This is called an "a priori" proof because it tries to show God just by thinking about God, no need to observe the exterior world.

"Cosmological Proof" tries to prove the existence of God as the creator of the universe, the "original cause" or "unmoved mover." Basically, every things that moves is moved by something, which in turn was moved by something. There must be something at a beginning who had the power to move itself – God. This proof comes from observing the nature of causality in the exterior world.

Which proof you prefer usually coincides with your own philosophy of knowledge and being. Dualists and rationalists, who think knowledge comes from the mind/soul, favor the ontological proof like Augustine, Anselm, and Descartes. Empiricists, who think knowledge comes from observing the exterior world, favor the cosmological proof like Aristotle and Aquinas. If you are a structuralist or determinist you might prefer the teleological.

Okay, so i’m really interested in cosmology and astronomy. What is the best college/ university* that majors in these two subjects?

No accredited university will teach that…

Cosmology in Crisis Part 1

The emerging plasma universe paradigm

http://www.plasmacosmology.net

http://www.thunderbolts.info

Plasma Cosmology Electric Universe Astronomy Astrophysics Big Bang Black Holes Plasma Focus Electricity Electrodynamics Electric Comets

Wal Thornhill David Talbott Don Scott Anthony Peratt Nikola Tesla Hannes Alfven Kristian Birkeland Phil Plait Bad Astronomy Bad Astronomer

Music by Nine Inch Nails – A Warm Place, Tangerine Dream – Love on a Real Train

Duration : 0:10:0

Read the rest of this entry »

Im in high school right now and i want to pursue a career involving Astrophysics and Physical Cosmology.
What would some good high school classes to take be for these?
To follow through, what would some good college courses to take be? Many thanks.

My husband is an astronomer who went to Caltech and Berkley. In high school he took classes with a lot of math and science. He took physics, trigonometry, calculus, and all the higher-level science classes you can take. Before him, I had never met an astronomer.

What is the difference between astronomy and cosmology? Are they the same thing? Also what is astrophysics?

Cosmology is the study of the universe taken as a whole. At the current size of the universe, cosmology deals with structures no smaller than superclusters of galaxies. Astronomy deals with structures smaller than the universe as a whole, such as galaxy clusters, galaxies, stars, black holes, supernovae, planets and so forth. Cosmology is more theoretical than astronomy, and astronomy is more observational than cosmology.

Does Dark Matter theory really help scientists discover more about space? Meet one of the world’s biggest sceptics and hear his views on why he thinks dark matter doesn’t exist. Great clip from BBC show ‘Most of Our Universe is Missing’.

Duration : 0:2:48

Read the rest of this entry »

Lecture 1 of Leonard Susskind’s Modern Physics concentrating on Cosmology. Recorded January 13, 2009 at Stanford University.

This Stanford Continuing Studies course is the fifth of a six-quarter sequence of classes exploring the essential theoretical foundations of modern physics. The topics covered in this course focus on classical mechanics. Leonard Susskind is the Felix Bloch Professor of Physics at Stanford University.

Stanford University:

http://www.stanford.edu

Stanford Continuing Studies:

http://continuingstudies.stanford.edu/

About Leonard Susskind:

http://www.stanford.edu/dept/physics/people/faculty/susskind_leonard.html

Stanford University Channel on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/stanford

Duration : 1:43:3

Read the rest of this entry »