No physical mechanisms predefines future events (or is there one ?).
So, I could state that the future does not exist yet and the past as ceased to exist.
in that statement I have a problem with the definition of existence. Does the definition of existence exist itself ? This is (is it ?) more a problem of terminology than philosophy or physics.
Thanks for your time and attention.
We have never observed anything in the universe just popping into existence from nothing (…)
if we did, that would be a major shift in physics. in this regards I heard of (or read of) two candidates :
.1 if universe’s expansion continues to accelerate, (it would mean) dark energy is increassing.
.2 an excess of hydrogen (clouds) outside of galaxies was observed that is difficult to explain with current cosmology.
I know these are not direct observation of something popping up, …but still.
I think there must be a mechanism behind the (stated) laws. This is what interest my reflection.
On a side note :
is there something in nature that prescribes the conservation of energy ?
(please, if you answer this, do so under my other comment (big bang…) …I don’t want to lose track of the main topic).
I am trying to find a loophole for the origin of the big Bang or whatever created the universe.
P.S. What I’m saying could be something like : “if a system is empty it doesn’t contain the first law”.
My misquotation was on purpose.
in the same thread of thoughts : if there was a system without the first law, anything could appear as if by magic !
…that is, until the 1st law appears.
Last i bought was $1.71 CAD / kg
(made in Canada www.italpasta.com )
@anotherlemmyuser 's is $1.06 us$ / 750g so … $1.41 us$ / kg … , so … $1.90 CAD / kg
The price has I’ve got in Canada, is about 10% lower than that one in Malaysia.
Humanity is so stupid when it comes to “territory” and we are not the only species that acts like beasts about it.
I believe in this community you have to write the word “rule” in the title, like so :
Banana? Banana rules !
(you can edit the title even after posting, that is, if you want so)
You can start where ever you want :
(Please excuse this joke : I could not resist)
Those black holes allow the Penrose process which is somewhat similar to what I am talking about here.
I often think about this in the shower
P.S. : Also, i just read the rules and I believe I follow them
The original Big Bang also violates conservation of energy.
For the moment this is just a shower thought. More work would have to be done along these lines.
Those mostly create magnetic and electomagnetic radiation. Some are also magnetars
There is already a link in my post for one big source of gravitational waves
Thanks 😊. This comes from a discussion at !askscience@lemmy.world
… from this discussion thread
Cosmological Microwave Background
This comes from this discussion thread
Cosmic microwave background (CMB) is very smooth ; if there was black holes in there I guess we would see (huge) unevenness.
Hummm, or at least, that stupid LCDM would lead to such an expectation. … that model also put CMB at :
400 000 to 500 000 years after the BBang.
and most distant visible galaxies (and black holes) at :
330 000 000 years after BB.
if we go by this number we have a few hundred million years to produce such big things out of something very smooth.
if we used a different model we could have much more time.
Anthropologically speaking this is the best answer. Our brain needs a certain span of time to establish perceived reality.