Are We missing the Elephant in the Room?

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Is it just me or is it becoming increasingly obvious that space has mass, and that our current understanding of the universe is semantically and axiomatically flawed at the very least?

The latest from the LHC is that "the bump" was a phantasm.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Is it just me or is it becoming increasingly obvious that space has mass, and that our current understanding of the universe is semantically and axiomatically flawed at the very least?

The latest from the LHC is that "the bump" was a phantasm.

"our current understanding of the universe" is a very broad thing, covering many fields/subfields of physics and astrophysics and to question whether it is "axiomatically flawed" requires more specificity.

 

[untermensche]

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4D6qY2c0Z8[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Valjean]

It's just you.

 

[bigfield]

Is it just me or is it becoming increasingly obvious that space has mass, and that our current understanding of the universe is semantically and axiomatically flawed at the very least?

The latest from the LHC is that "the bump" was a phantasm.

The bump was an experimental anomaly that has turned out to be nothing, and true to form, the media got hyped up over nothing before the results passed scrutiny.

There is no reasonable way to conclude from this outcome that "our current understanding of the universe is semantically and axiomatically flawed".

 

[fast]

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4D6qY2c0Z8[/YOUTUBE]

The post I'm quoting is for technical reasons ... so I can see it.

ETA: not that I was successful

Eta again: ok, I guess I was

Eta yet again: well crap, where does it keep going

Interesting video

 

[Wiploc]

Is it just me or is it becoming increasingly obvious that space has mass, and that our current understanding of the universe is semantically and axiomatically flawed at the very least?

The latest from the LHC is that "the bump" was a phantasm.

I don't know what to make of "space has mass." On the other hand, I think it's clear that mass has space.

ETA: I might try to introduce the term spacemass if that didn't suggest deflecting altar boys in zero gravity.

ETA: Bertrand Russel suggested that we should define electrons as being the electrical field around the hypothetical particle. That way, if the particle turned out not to be there, we wouldn't be wrong. And if the field did turn out to have a particle in the middle, we still wouldn't be wrong.

 

[untermensche]

I don't know what to make of "space has mass."

Click on the Lawrence Krauss video.

He tells you what it means.

It is not on the fringe of science.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I don't know what to make of "space has mass." On the other hand, I think it's clear that mass has space.

Spacemass. Makes a lot of sense as it seems we can't have one without the other.

 

[none]

Interesting if mass is resistance to acceleration

 

[Malintent]

I don't know what to make of "space has mass." On the other hand, I think it's clear that mass has space.

Spacemass. Makes a lot of sense as it seems we can't have one without the other.

No, that's Love and Marriage.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Interesting if mass is resistance to acceleration

That's the drag on light that limits its velocity to c. No one asked what prevents it from going faster. Space does. Space is a substance, "vacuuminium."

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Is it just me or is it becoming increasingly obvious that space has mass, and that our current understanding of the universe is semantically and axiomatically flawed at the very least?

The latest from the LHC is that "the bump" was a phantasm.

At the beginning, which is mistaken for the Big Bang, there was an eruption from an outside universe. The substance coming in created space, light, matter, and energy. Its velocity was c squared (a light year in three minutes). The Big Bang couldn't have happened, because it would have to have been preceded by an impossible concentration of matter.

 

[Underseer]

Is it just me or is it becoming increasingly obvious that space has mass, and that our current understanding of the universe is semantically and axiomatically flawed at the very least?

The latest from the LHC is that "the bump" was a phantasm.

If the bump was real, that would have required a reworking of our current understanding of physics. The bump turned out to be an anomaly, and physicists are disappointed to find out they were right.