StartsWithABang

https://astrodon.social/@startswithabang

The Universe is expanding, cooling, and dark. It started with a bang, and I'm here to bring it all to you!

Public Key

npub10lrmkc8f3n0weck6scz3eene9d38nvz6hefdmmm06ef40qsgv0jsfnnszn

NIP-05 Address

startswithabang_at_astrodon.social@momostr.pink

Profile Code

nprofile1qqs8l3amvr5cehhvutdgvpguueujkcnekpdtu5kaaahav56hsgyx8egpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ez6ur4vgh8wetvd3hhyer9wghxuet5n3hwh4

Publishing to

nostr-pub.wellorder.net

Author Public Key

npub10lrmkc8f3n0weck6scz3eene9d38nvz6hefdmmm06ef40qsgv0jsfnnszn

Show more details

Last Notes

2025-05-20 17:04:33 UTC

- reply

Energy is conserved in all GR solutions that possess a time-like Killing vector. (I.e., in static, non-expanding, non-contracting spacetimes.)
Schwarzschild and Kerr metrics have these vectors, and therefore there is global energy conservation in those spacetimes.
Also, there are still energy conditions (e.g., the null energy condition) that ought to hold even in non-energy-conserving spacetimes, which is why we can't just keep pulling things out of the quantum vacuum for free.
But John will understand these issues more deeply than I do, if what I've posted here isn't enough (or isn't rigorously true).

2025-05-20 15:21:19 UTC

Claims that “the Universe will end sooner than expected” are false
Did you hear that all objects emit Hawking radiation, and everything, even the Universe, will therefore decay?
It's a fun idea, but was proven impossible way back in 1975!
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/universe-end-sooner-expected-false/
(Big thanks to @npub1nf4…nqe4 for serving up the sources that settle the claim!)
https://media.astrodon.social/media_attachments/files/114/540/834/791/461/175/original/132a170efdc0a77f.jpg

2025-04-09 17:07:39 UTC

- reply

Another key test of Wiltshire's cosmological model comes from direct measurement of the time dilation effects that are actually observed within these cosmic void regions of space.
Wiltshire's model requires that they be of order ~1 or ~0.1 to have the needed effects to explain dark energy. Observationally, they're about one-millionth of that amount at maximum, which is woefully insufficient.
This is some very strong evidence that we shouldn't ignore.
It's okay to find ideas fascinating; I do, too. But when you want to put it to the test, you have no better recourse than to use nature's ultimate laboratory: the Universe itself. Whether you like the answer it gives you or not isn't as relevant as the answer the Universe tells us about itself.

2025-03-09 17:33:01 UTC

- reply

I would say that the big challenge in "converting" people away from their common line of thinking, from a communications perspective, is the longstanding connection to physical properties of:
solid: definite shape and volume (and fixed distance between atoms/molecules),
liquid: definite volume (up to compressibility) but no fixed shape or inter-particle distance,
gas: no definite volume and no definite shape or particle-particle distance.
So if you want to communicate "there's no difference between liquid and gas" except in certain materials (or under certain conditions) where a phase transition is observable, that's a big challenge right there.
How would you re-formulate the distinction between liquid and gas, or how would you encourage people to change their line of thought in thinking about liquids and gases, so that they can overcome this rigid way of thinking?

2025-03-08 17:12:01 UTC

- reply

You're asking why _I_ drew these lines where I drew them: about states of matter?
Because these are the general classes of states of matter that exist in the Universe.
We start with solid, liquid, and gas: the three familiar ones.
Then what happens if we turn up the temperature, or energy, of the system?
We get an ionized plasma (state 4) and then a quark-gluon plasma (state 5) at very very high energies. Nothing "new" appears, as far as we know, at still higher energies: it's a quark-gluon plasma primordial soup.
But under extreme conditions, which can either occur under great densities (like within a neutron star) or under cold conditions, you can create condensates: Bose-Einstein condensate (state 6) or Fermionic condensates (state 7), depending on the type/class of particle in question.
That's how we get to seven. Or, I suppose, I'll speak for myself: that's how I got to seven.
It's clear you don't think this way at all, and I assumed (before giving this answer) that you would strongly object to this classification.
So if that assumption is correct, how would you classify this in a digestible way for those of us who aren't condensed matter physicists?

2025-03-08 15:15:49 UTC

- reply

So, let's pretend we lived in a world where instead of me being an astrophysicist who became a science communicator, I (or someone like me) was a condensed matter physicist who became a science communicator.
How should I be communicating the notions of states of matter (and/or phases of matter) to the general public?
What don't they know; what should they know; how should they think about it?
How do you convey "there are X different phases of superfluidity in different isotopes of helium" or "Y different phases of water-ice in solid form" or "every phase transition yields a new state of matter" without rendering everyday concepts of what a "phase" or "state" of matter is untenable?
In biology, we have many different granularities of classification for organism, from superkingdom to subspecies. Do we need something like that for states of matter? And what would it look like?
I'm legitimately not enough of an expert to have a strong opinion. What's yours?

2025-03-07 18:15:26 UTC

- reply

If he had said "phase of matter" I wouldn't have objected.
It's sort of like when planetary geologists use the geophysical definition of a planet: sure, there's nothing wrong with it in their own field, but telling the general public that the moon is a planet, Jupiter's galilean moons are planets, Ceres is a planet, hundreds of Kuiper belt objects are planets, etc., really misleads the public in a way I don't support.
You're not talking solely to other condensed matter physicists here; you're talking to the world. What would you like them to understand, and how can you meet them where they are? (Remember, their starting point is likely to be: solid, liquid, and gas are the three states of matter.)

2025-03-06 16:08:03 UTC

There are 7 states of matter; “topoconductor” isn’t one of them
There truly are more states of matter than just solid, liquid, and gas: a total of 7 states, all told.
But no, Satya Nadella, "topoconductor" isn't one of them at all.
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/7-states-of-matter/
https://media.astrodon.social/media_attachments/files/114/116/342/846/323/076/original/abd7071bc4476e2d.jpg

2025-02-21 17:10:44 UTC

Could dark matter be “normal stuff” we can’t see?
#AskEthan
Why are we so certain that dark matter has to be something yet undiscovered?
Why can't it just be some type of "normal stuff" that's, well, dark in nature?
Here's why.
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/dark-matter-normal-stuff-cant-see/
https://media.astrodon.social/media_attachments/files/114/042/981/787/891/825/original/4653e7158a67b56c.jpg

2025-01-20 16:28:56 UTC

The Ring Nebula’s true structure revealed at last
For nearly 250 years, astronomers have marveled at the Ring Nebula.
At long last, we know its true shape, and while it does possess a ring, it truly is so much more.
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/ring-nebula-true-structure-revealed/
https://media.astrodon.social/media_attachments/files/113/861/621/868/073/726/original/212ba3c37ec8576f.jpg

2025-01-14 12:11:37 UTC

Cosmic first: supermassive black hole caught “turning on” in real-time
When active galaxies launch jets, those structures can persist for up to a billion years.
Remarkably, we just caught an active galaxy launching a jet in real-time.
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/supermassive-black-hole-caught-turning-on/
https://media.astrodon.social/media_attachments/files/113/826/636/875/591/849/original/24418ead00b98be0.jpg

2024-12-09 17:28:48 UTC

How large is the biggest galaxy in the Universe?
Back in 1920, most scientists thought that the Milky Way encompassed the entirety of the Universe.
Today, not only are there trillions of other galaxies, but some of them truly dwarf our own.
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/how-large-biggest-galaxy-universe/
https://media.astrodon.social/media_attachments/files/113/624/042/762/647/203/original/154b4b75ae9ab0de.jpg

2024-12-06 15:41:00 UTC

Will everything eventually succumb to Hawking Radiation?
#AskEthan
A year and a half ago, astrophysicists proposed that Hawking Radiation might emerge from all objects, not only black holes.
Here's what we think of that idea today.
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/everything-hawking-radiation/
https://media.astrodon.social/media_attachments/files/113/606/631/055/765/282/original/79e644e13b88bc3b.jpg

2024-11-20 18:51:14 UTC

- reply

Lovely! I am a big fan of creative cooking and this is the opposite of the turducken I made 16 years ago: reducing the turkey to its constituent parts instead of adding additional birds inside of it!

2024-11-20 18:13:22 UTC

What happens if you deep fry a frozen turkey?
It's that time of year once again: where 46 million turkeys are about to be cooked, and 1000+ home fires are anticipated.
Don't be one of them, and especially don't deep fry a frozen turkey!
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/what-happens-deep-fry-frozen-turkey/
https://media.astrodon.social/media_attachments/files/113/516/635/789/654/434/original/0df571a673c328f8.jpg

2024-11-15 17:14:38 UTC

How do scientists color the Universe?
#AskEthan
When you see those gorgeous false-color (or assigned-color) images of the Universe from Hubble, JWST, Chandra and more, what do those colors actually mean?
The answer depends on what you want to show!
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/how-scientists-color-universe/
https://media.astrodon.social/media_attachments/files/113/488/093/260/905/037/original/a28174646c53aa20.jpg

2024-11-13 16:34:30 UTC

A new origin story for supernovae after 94 years
Where do type Ia supernovae come from?
If you said "a white dwarf crossing over the Chandrasekhar mass limit," you're decades out of date.
Time to get on board with double detonation!
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/origin-supernova-94-years/
https://media.astrodon.social/media_attachments/files/113/476/610/707/980/443/original/e5177573d53d9ea1.mp4

2024-11-01 17:12:43 UTC

Why isn’t Richard Feynman your personal hero?
#AskEthan
Feynman made enormous contributions to a huge variety of areas in physics, and was beloved by oh so many.
But he isn't someone we should strive to be like. Here's why.
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/why-richard-feynman-hero/
https://media.astrodon.social/media_attachments/files/113/408/813/337/252/189/original/710d2b86d3283590.jpg

2024-10-30 14:38:59 UTC

Mars could have lived, even without a magnetic field
Mars initially had water and a thick atmosphere, then lost its magnetic field, its core dynamo froze, and its atmosphere was stripped away, right?
Here's what's wrong with that story.
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/mars-live-magnetic-field/
https://media.astrodon.social/media_attachments/files/113/396/882/543/325/769/original/cbd6f2bb437a4dac.jpg

2024-10-18 16:07:58 UTC

Why is the Big Bang shown as a tube?
#AskEthan
The Big Bang is our cosmic story, but shouldn't it show a spherical Universe, rather than a growing tube?
Here's what's behind the choices we make when showing illustrations of the expanding Universe.
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/ask-ethan-why-big-bang-tube/
https://cdn.masto.host/astrodonsocial/media_attachments/files/113/329/286/429/118/542/original/03f6df384fcfb848.jpg

2024-10-09 15:17:01 UTC

How ideas from physics drive AI: the 2024 Nobel Prize
Yeah yeah, "computer science isn't physics" and all.
I understand the sentiment, but AI, ML, and artificial neural networks in general really do have a physics foundation, like it or not.
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/physics-ai-2024-nobel-prize/
https://cdn.masto.host/astrodonsocial/media_attachments/files/113/278/125/306/065/926/original/59ceca18c7edd91c.jpg

2024-09-19 15:49:14 UTC

Hidden variable alternative to quantum spookiness fails
Hate the Copenhagen interpretation?
Hoping there's a hidden, observer-independent reality to nature?
Scientists tried the best non-spooky alternative, and it's now ruled out.
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/hidden-variable-quantum-spookiness/
https://cdn.masto.host/astrodonsocial/media_attachments/files/113/165/003/755/259/921/original/eb3f9adcef26ad56.jpg

2024-09-17 17:22:43 UTC

- reply

Consider the recent, "there is no dark matter and dark energy, but instead I invoke tired light plus evolving fundamental constants, and ignore a whole slew of lab constraints to conclude the Universe is 26.7 Gyr old."
Here was the debunker piece I wrote: https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/universe-13-8-or-26-7-billion-years/
Here was my follow-up when I got asked about it a year later: https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/new-study-disprove-dark-matter-dark-energy/
I think I did a great job, and it wasn't worth it. It feels like it was all a colossal waste of energy and time.

2024-09-17 17:10:49 UTC

- reply

It has many negatives for me.
It bores me. It saddens me. It angers and upsets me.
It not only sucks my energy away, but it often only serves to amplify the voice(s) that promoted the nonsense to begin with.
It requires enormous attention-to-detail and is like chasing a noxious fart with the goal of "vacuuming it out of the air."
Now why don't I tell you how I really feel.

2024-09-17 16:53:08 UTC

- reply

Do you not encounter tasks in your life that are easy to do, but that you loathe doing?
Let me assign you manual data entry of 1000 random email addresses into an Excel file, for instance.
It's easy! Would you have to steel yourself for it?

2024-09-17 16:43:03 UTC

To all of those asking me what I think of <insert wild, untrue assertion>, consider this.
It's easy to hate on stuff, but it's not my style.
I have to steel myself for every debunker piece I do.
I'd much rather be excited about what we're discovering and what's actually real.

2024-09-11 15:46:24 UTC

Why the electron’s mass is vital to life in the Universe
You could vary most of the fundamental constants of the Universe and still wind up with a life-friendly, very similar cosmos to ours.
But you better not mess with the mass of the electron!
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/electron-mass-vital-life-in-universe/
https://cdn.masto.host/astrodonsocial/media_attachments/files/113/119/693/801/172/990/original/147d86c57f2a8237.mp4