Re: Mike Turner in NY Times Science 11/11/03

"Joseph Lazio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>> "DL" == Denis Loubet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> DL> "Jack Sarfatti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> DL> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>  "I think we are so confused that we should keep an open mind to
> >> tinkering with gravity," said Dr. Michael Turner, a cosmologist at
> >> the University of Chicago.
> >>
> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/11/science/11GRAV.html
> >>  previously
> >>
> >> Q to Ed Witten: How can the cosmological constant be so close to
> >> zero but not zero?
>
> DL> "Close to zero"? WTF does "close" mean? Is there a "maximum value"
> DL> we can compare it to to see how "close" it is?
>
> The current estimates are that the energy density contributed by the
> cosmological constant (or dark energy) is 0.7, in units of the closure
> energy density.  There are various models of particle/high-energy
> physics that make predictions about the cosmological constant.  The
> typical value predicted is 10^50 or so.

Excellent! Thank you.  (I'm going to pretend to understand that.)  ;-)


--
Denis Loubet
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.io.com/~dloubet