Can a New Topology Explain the Complexity of the Universe?

[Mad_Morlock]

If someone comes up with a novel topology for the Universe that would take into account all the variables we're currently experiencing, why should that person not be permitted to post such information?

 

[chroot]

Because this site is used for discussion of mainstream, accepted topics in science. This is clearly noted in the site's guidelines, which you agreed to upon registering.

There are a million other places where you can discuss non-mainstream science.

Mod. note: Moving to Feedback Forum.

- Warren

 

[Danger]

Besides, there is no topology to the Universe. It's all bottomology, or in some rare cases leftsideology.

 

[SpaceTiger]

Besides, there is no topology to the Universe. It's all bottomology, or in some rare cases leftsideology.

Danger, you're such a crank yanker.

 

[arildno]

If someone comes up with a novel topology for the Universe that would take into account all the variables we're currently experiencing, why should that person not be permitted to post such information?

Ask yourself instead:
Why should the OWNER of PF accept to set aside a bit of his band-width to the discussion of random speculations?
It is his site, not yours.

 

[Danger]

Danger, you're such a crank yanker.

Are you insinuating that I work in a massage parlour?

 

[Gokul43201]

It's all bottomology, or in some rare cases leftsideology.

Incidentaly, most of the lefts' ideology is concentrated in the Latinus Americanis and Westeuropa sectors.

 

[Danger]

Too true. Whilst the rightmost are concentrated in the areas of greatest density. ie: black holes.

 

[Mad_Morlock]

Not random speculations but logical conclusions derived from topological analysis of a 4 dimensional construct like a hypersphere.

If someone came up with a satisfactory topology that fit well with all experimental data to date, should they be permitted to share this information online? Or should the requirement of extensive peer review be the inital requirement?

 

[ZapperZ]

Not random speculations but logical conclusions derived from topological analysis of a 4 dimensional construct like a hypersphere.

If someone came up with a satisfactory topology that fit well with all experimental data to date, should they be permitted to share this information online? Or should the requirement of extensive peer review be the inital requirement?

The latter to post in the main physics forum. If not, the only place this is allowed is in the IR forum.

Zz.

 

[Mad_Morlock]

The IR forum... now I can't see that? (Nevermind. Sub-sub forum. Gotcha.)

And I posted in the cosmology section because I figured that if I'm posing a thought regarding a topology for cosmology it should be there that I post it.

 

[ZapperZ]

If you post something speculative with no peer-reviewed basis, then there's a good chance that the Mentor will remove it and do what I just did, point you to the IR forum.

Zz.

 

[Mad_Morlock]

Already been done.

My analysis of topology is based on three questions.

1. Why is the Virgo cluster blue-shifted?
2. Why is the Draco cluster massively red-shifted?
3. Does metric expansion imply implosion across a temporal dimension?

 

[SimplePie]

Already been done.

My analysis of topology is based on three questions.

1. Why is the Virgo cluster blue-shifted?
2. Why is the Draco cluster massively red-shifted?
3. Does metric expansion imply implosion across a temporal dimension?

Just out of curiosity in point #2, do you mean to say: a quasar in the draco constellation is massively red-shifted (because I don't think I've ever seen or heard any references to an astronomical entity named the "Draco cluster") ?

 

[SimplePie]

Besides, there is no topology to the Universe. It's all bottomology, or in some rare cases leftsideology.

Umm, I believe you still left out the other 7 or 8 sides to our "M"ysterious universe :)

 

[SimplePie]

The IR forum... now I can't see that?

Hmm, perhaps one needs to put on IR goggles to view that particular subform? :)