Ahad's Universe

I have selected three objects/entities that I will use as evidence to answer the following question (courtesy of the International Baccalaureate Organization for creating this question for the Theory of Knowledge class). Can new knowledge change established values or beliefs? -  Object 1: Image of the cosmic microwave background radiation  This is an image of the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR), the electromagnetic radiation which is remnant from the earliest stage of the universe; the image has also been my go-to computer background. The CMBR’s discovery in 1965 effectively confirmed the Big Bang theory of the universe’s origins, which is why it interests me as someone who passions cosmology. However, before its discovery, it was the established belief both in the realm of science as well as in religion that the universe had been in existence for eternity. The Big Bang theory simply was not compatible with the beliefs of the larger portion of religious sects; for instance

A mathematical exploration into the physics of spinning balls and the properties of the moment of inertia, seeking to answer the following question. What can be spun more easily, a cricket ball or a tennis ball? Link to PDF of paper

A physics lab in which I conducted my own experiment, seeking to answer the following question. How does sugar concentration in water affect the refractive index of the solution?   Link to PDF of paper

A write up of a lab in which I researched and conducted an experiment to answer the following question, in order to reveal the implications of how temperature can affect batteries. How does temperature exposure affect the electric power of a Ni-Cd battery? Link to PDF of paper    

The following essay is my response to the International Baccalaureate's Theory of Knowledge question title option for 2021-2022: " Is there solid justification for regarding knowledge in the natural sciences more highly than another area of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge. " I chose history as the additional area of knowledge, as there is often debate concerning whether science or history is more important. All rights go to IB for this prompt and the subsequent triggering of my thoughts and opinion. - Is there solid justification for regarding knowledge in the natural sciences more highly than another area of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge. It was the intellectual Arthur Schlesinger Jr. who once declared that “science and technology revolutionize our lives, but memory, tradition and myth frame our response.” He compares two areas of human knowledge that sh

I have made a poem that reflects on the famous poem 'I'm Nobody! Who are you?' by Emily Dickinson into a completely different topic but still does follow the structure and idea: The poem by Emily Dickinson: I’m Nobody! Who are you? I'm Nobody! Who are you? Are you - Nobody - too? Then there's a pair of us! Don’t tell! they'd advertise - you know! How dreary - to be - Somebody! How public - like a Frog - To tell one's name - the livelong June - To an admiring Bog! My interpretation of the above: I am curious! Are you? I am Curious! Are you? Are you Curious too? A pair of us, there is! Dare tell a lad – and he’ll make an ad! How astounding – being – Curious. How open – like a monkey’s cries – To ask a question – until answered – To the Curious! 

Singularities: An answer to a theory of everything Edwin Hubble (along with others) discovered that the universe is expanding. He absorbed that the majority of galaxies where moving away from us from its spectrum. Its spectrum appeared to be redshifted: when the light wave expands when the source of light moves away, thus moving the wavelength of light towards the red end of the spectrum. We know that if the universe expands, if we reverse time, the universe must have been smaller. And some long ago, the universe would have been the size of a dot. It would have infinite mass and density and would be extremely hot enough pull apart not just atoms nor nucleuses, but elementary particles and quarks of which we don’t know its components. This singularity would live in a single dimension, just a point in ‘space’ (in fact this point is space). We learn that this singularity might lead us a key of the universe. However, this isn’t the only singularity we can find in space or in time.