SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
I found this fascinating story The Fundamental Constants Behind Our Universe at medium.com's "Starts with a Bang" column. Ethan Siegel posits:
But the Universe itself experiences continual growth, constant change, and new experiences all the time, and it does so spontaneously.
And yet, the better we understand our Universe — what the laws are that govern it, what particles inhabit it, and what it looked/behaved like farther and farther back in the distant past — the more inevitable it appears that it would look just as it appears.
[...] We’d like to describe our Universe as simply as possible; one of the goals of science is to describe nature in the simplest terms possible, but no simpler. How many of these does it take, as far as we understand our Universe today, to completely describe the particles, interactions, and laws of our Universe?
The answer? "Quite a few, surprisingly: 26, at the very least." He then goes on to explore what these are and how they are computed.
Sadly, we don't know enough to be able to predict everything. As the article notes, there remain problems with explaining CP violations, matter-antimatter asymmetry in our Universe, cosmic inflation, and what dark matter actually is.
Separately, but related: many years ago I came upon a site that provided interactive exploration of the scale of things in the universe from Planck length on up to the the visible universe. (And, no, it was not powersof10.com) I have a niece who is curious about such things and I would love to share such a site with her. Sadly, I can no longer locate a link. Any suggestions?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 08 2015, @10:45PM
How does that refute the point? The original quote stated that we do not have a first principle. One was shown. By stating that everything has not yet been derived from it does not refute the point. It is like because you do not know everything you have clearly not ever been born.
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Monday February 09 2015, @06:40AM
No, it didn't. You should urgently improve your reading comprehension. Start with the meaning of the word "such".
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 09 2015, @03:16PM
Just because a thing does not do everything you want it to do, does not mean that it does not exist. Ad hominem on your part while believing you are on the intellectual high ground belies your insecurities.