Hold on, GUT is what created Big Bang, not vice versa (GUT is a description of what is going on on the Plank scale and shortly after: from 10^-43 to 10^-35 sec), and the BB is a description of what happens after 10^-35 sec, when forces separated.

And the misbalance of matte/antimatter was not 236/237, but rather 10^10/(10^10+1), only one "extra" particle per ten billion perfectly balanced by ten billion antiparticles. That is why we have so little matter in the Universe - it is mostly empty.

Then you say that: "Actually the universe is full of light in the form of electromagnetic waves which are invisible unless they go directly into your eye and collapse into a photon there."

This is not correct. Invisible e/magnetic radiation can not become visible by "collapsing into a photon in the eye". E/magnetic waves are invisible by eyes. Only very narrow specific wavelengths of e/m radiation, namely in (0.4-0.7)x10^-6 m range, create chemical reactions in the eye which then sends pulses to brain which are interpreted as light, and that is why we call this range of e/m radiation a "visible light".

Relic radiation the Universe is filled with have wavelength in the cm range and is in no way visible by eye.

And, by the way, mass of this radiation is way less than mass of the rest of matter in the Universe.

• Re: Re: Re: Gravity doesn't exist? - yanniru - January 24, 2001 - 23:09 UTC
  • Re: Re: Re: Re: Gravity doesn't exist? - alexander - January 25, 2001 - 03:14 UTC
    • Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Gravity doesn't exist? - yanniru - January 25, 2001 - 13:38 UTC
      • Coherency and other. - alexander - January 25, 2001 - 17:04 UTC
        • Re: Coherency and other. - yanniru - January 25, 2001 - 22:54 UTC
          • Re: Re: Coherency and other. - alexander - January 26, 2001 - 01:07 UTC
            • Re: Re: Re: Coherency and other. - yanniru - January 26, 2001 - 12:59 UTC
              • Re: Re: Re: Re: Coherency and other. - alexander - February 1, 2001 - 19:02 UTC
• Re: Re: Re: Gravity doesn't exist? - skintless - January 25, 2001 - 02:49 UTC
• It is kind of intresting that we seem to all agree that our eyes - philosofir - January 25, 2001 - 02:50 UTC
• It is kind of intresting that we seem to all agree that our eyes - philosofir - January 25, 2001 - 02:50 UTC
  • Re: It is kind of intresting that we seem to all agree that our eyes - alexander - January 25, 2001 - 21:41 UTC
    • Re: Re: It is kind of intresting that we seem to all agree that our eyes - philosofir - January 26, 2001 - 04:25 UTC
      • Nope, color variation is based on wave frequency. - richard - January 26, 2001 - 13:11 UTC
        • Re: Nope, color variation is based on wave frequency. - alexander - February 1, 2001 - 18:49 UTC