Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: THE UNIVERSE
  • Subject: THE UNIVERSE
Subject: THE UNIVERSE

Posted by: Doom Chicken
Thats impossible you can only move mass not create it.


Not necessarily. Quantum fluctuations mean that in every place in the universe matter, energy, anti-matter and anti-energy is constantly being created and destroyed.

And people, do not be blinded by String Theorists' zeal. String theory is not the only candidate for quantum gravity. Loop Quantum Gravity is just as intriguing, and does not require the existence of multi-dimensional Calabi-Yau spaces. By the way, Obbi, all string theories require at least 10 spacetime dimensions, otherwise the Standard Model can not be retrieved. M-Theory requires 11 dimensions. I think one of the bosonic string theories requires 26 dimensions! LQG only needs the 4 familiar spacetime dimensions, but it quantises spacetime itself, leading to more problems.

Posted by: Vella
Well, essentially without gravity, you have no cohesion. Subatomic particles move. That's very, very bad. I'm not going to say anything about evaporation into nothingness, but I guess technically all "matter as we would see it would be ripped apart. It wouldn't be nothing, but invisible and impossible to see.

--If you were to pack all of the particles of your body in you would occupy the head of a pin.


Actually, gravity is not why subatomic particles do not fly apart. Molecules are held together by the Electromagnetic force. The nuclei of atoms are held together by the strong nuclear force, not gravity. Gravity is the weakest of the four fundamental forces, but acts on the largest scales.

Oh, and I'm also the centre of the universe. The red shift proves it.

- Reiginko

[Edited on 9/17/2004 11:53:58 PM]

  • 09.17.2004 11:49 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Ahh...A glaring mistake. Damn.
*Looks bashful at his mistake in simple physics...*

Since you obviously know your stuff, I'd like to hear your view on Stanfields? Ekpyrotic Theory...It's Superstring theory, and a fairly crazy idea.

I personally agree with you on a lot of the new string theory. Dimensions and universes are often quickly used to satisfy explantations, as I've said before. A lot of the new theories seperate completely from the original theory by adding a nearly impossible number of dimensions.

It's good to see a moderator who knows his stuff, but whoever thought we would be discussing this in The Flood?

--Still like to point out that for for the 'big rip' to work you would have to use the cosmological constant.

[Edited on 9/18/2004 12:21:48 AM]

  • 09.18.2004 12:08 AM PDT

I think the idea of an ekpyrotic universe is very interesting. However, I still think that either a Big Bang, or more likely a Big Bounce scenario is more probable, since I never have been a fan of multi-universal theories. The problem I have is that until something like that is proven, we can simply allow ourselves to step back into the complacency of the Anthropic principle, which I don't particularly like. Still, it's an intriguing idea which I hope continues to be developed.

A good critique of String Theory's flaws, by Carlo Rovelli (he's one of the developers of Loop Quantum Gravity) can be found if you're interested here - it's a good analysis of String Theory's flaws (but remember that he has a natural bias for LQG, so of course it's rather damning).

- Reiginko

  • 09.18.2004 12:28 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Thanks, that was a good read. Google's algorithms often make looking for quantum physics discussions difficult.

Ugh, a blinding whitepaper...
Ah, the Pippo dimension :)

I had to read up a bit more on loops to get the most out of it, but it's a good read. I'll agree that more work has to be done on loops, String theory could be a major waste of time, and the only way to really prove it wrong is by proving another theory right.

I'd like to stick to the big bang, with it's coziness in general relativity, but current Inflation theory is tricky, and is given few alternatives. That's why I am looking at ekpyrotic theory. The faster than the speed of light creation is murky though, and a bit underexplained.



[Edited on 9/18/2004 12:57:40 AM]

  • 09.18.2004 12:56 AM PDT

I had to read up a bit more on loops to get the most out of it, but it's a good read. I'll agree that more work has to be done on loops, String theory could be a major waste of time, and the only way to really prove it wrong is by proving another theory right.
I actually take the view that some people (especially Lee Smolin, a loop theorist, and Brian Greene - the Elegant Universe guy - agreed with it in a recent Scientific American article) take, that Strings and Loops could be both developing towards a final theory that combines the two - a string theory could possibly exist in a loop spacetime, since the flaws of one seem to be the strengths of the other.

- Reiginko

  • 09.18.2004 1:01 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: finalwaltz
The universe is a giant hypersphere. It's not infinite, but it's impossible to ever leave. If you where to travel in one direction out from earth, you would eventually come back to earth from the opposite direction. We can also only see 3 dimensions of our universe, therefore limiting our veiw from the true 11 dimensional reality.


that seems like the most logical explanation because the universe can go on forever and it cant have some sort of shell, because then their would be something on the other side.

But then again the simplest theory to understand is not neccesarily right. like when the greeks thought zues threw lighting. That was the most logical explanation they could come up with and support, but it wasnt exactly accurate...

i figure, that no matter the true explanation it will break the common sense explanations we have no matter what. It can go on forever, it can be encompased, the outside universe might lead to the loss of all matter and soul, or like final waltz said it could go on in circles kind of. and that is the only one that i could logically comprehend and fully understand.

  • 09.18.2004 1:20 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Finalwaltz was actually a pretty broad stroke of String Theory.

Which is having a few problems, though apart from the 11 dimensions his other views are covered in numerous theories.

[Edited on 9/18/2004 1:23:16 AM]

  • 09.18.2004 1:23 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: ShinomoriX2
kind of off subject but my grandfather used to tell boy scouts that at the edge of the universe it was a solid wall. If you went through the wall, there was an old man on the other side that yelled at you to go back.


i think that only happens in video games. :D and its more like an error message with a turning around animation... but yea

  • 09.18.2004 1:27 AM PDT

Actually, just because the hypersphere theory is easy to understand doesn't mean it's wrong. There is a lot of compelling evidence for it. When we analysed the red shift of stars, it was found that it appeared that Earth was at the centre of the Universe, which was great for religious types, but not what scientists expected. But in an expanding 3-sphere, it was realised, it looks like you are at the centre of the universe at every single point in the universe. This is easy to think of if you think of the surface of a balloon, which is a 2-sphere. If you draw dots on a balloon, then inflate the balloon, every dot will move away from every other dot at the same rate. If we chose any dot at random, all the other dots appear to be moving away from it. No point on the balloon can be said to be the "centre". The universe is just like an expanding balloon, except it has one extra spatial dimension.

- Reiginko

  • 09.18.2004 1:28 AM PDT

What was it like before the universe, endless amounts of white?

  • 09.18.2004 7:06 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

you know whats weird, particles at the subatomic level behave much like tiny solar systems. electrons rotate around a nucleus, at much the same ratios that planets orbit stars. While to us atoms seem clase enough together to form visible molecules, at the subatomic level their nuclei never even touch. Much like the immense amount of distance between solar systems. Mabye the universe is a collection of atoms forming a molecule in a (much) larger universe.

  • 09.18.2004 7:43 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

something about string theories all including multiple dimensions

Really? I was under the impression that not all had many dimensions. I don't think what I've read has ever said that specifically, but rather I just inferred it since it never actually told me, "All string theories include more than four dimensions."

My bad.

  • 09.18.2004 10:33 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Holy crap I have no idea what any of you are saying. But hey i'm from the south, it's to be expected.

  • 09.18.2004 10:38 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

lol they spent an hour last night trying to explain some of theis stuff 2 me

  • 09.18.2004 10:39 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: pudgypenquin
lol they spent an hour last night trying to explain some of theis stuff 2 me


I wasn't. I was mostly discussing with Vella, and rebuking the comments I identified as false.

  • 09.18.2004 10:59 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: ObbiQuiet
One thing about all these uncomprehensible things - the trick to 'getting' it is to not try to get it. Don't try to think of something you know is ununderstandable.

Example: I know what 'infinite' means. However, I don't understand infinite - I realize that I can only grasp so much. When I think of infinity I don't strain my mind since my mind already accepts I can't understand it.


Is this something that happened over time? Or did you just sit down one day and convince yourself that you can not comprehend it?

  • 09.18.2004 11:51 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: ShinomoriX2
Posted by: ObbiQuiet
One thing about all these uncomprehensible things - the trick to 'getting' it is to not try to get it. Don't try to think of something you know is ununderstandable.

Example: I know what 'infinite' means. However, I don't understand infinite - I realize that I can only grasp so much. When I think of infinity I don't strain my mind since my mind already accepts I can't understand it.


Is this something that happened over time? Or did you just sit down one day and convince yourself that you can not comprehend it?


I did it in a visual meditation. I thought of a red line that went on forever. I tried walking down it at first, then running - it stretched in front and behind me forever. I couldn't fathom it because my mind wanted to find an end to it.

I realized then that if I get used to the idea there is no end I can understand it.

  • 09.18.2004 11:54 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

The universe could be in a soccer ball shape. Scientists say that it has a way of wrapping around itself and so that would mean that if you started at one point and went on for a long time then you would end up in the same spot.

The universe is as what reminds me of a term in Geometry...

Point - Something that has no length, width, or height.

Line - An infinite number of points that are touching and extend to infinity in two directions.

Plain - An infinite number of lines going to infinity on a flat surface.

Space - An infinite number of plains extending to infinity in all directions.

  • 09.18.2004 12:41 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I'm taking geometry right now....that's what inspired me to make the topic.

  • 09.18.2004 2:33 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Well, the wonders of the universe are for our children and their prosperity to discover and explore.

  • 09.18.2004 3:53 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

What do you think about the Holographic theory I find it very interesting, and I like the fact that it may possibly bring the word GOD into mainstream science.

  • 09.19.2004 3:41 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Who heres heard of the Philidelphia Project?

  • 09.19.2004 3:52 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

That's right. My plumage is brighter than yours.

I took this out of my post from the What are you scared of" thread. Read down some:

another thing: Living a long, long time, then just dying, and then nothing happens. Like, ill be watching a movie one day, and a i die on my couch, wife comes in, screams, i try to tell her that its ok, but i cant talk, then im put in casket, try to get out, but cant walk, then im burried, and i have a maggot in my eye, but cant move to get it out. I can FEEL it there too. And even after im all rotten and -blam!-, ill still be able to tell whats going on around me, which would be nice if there were people to listen to, but instead im stuck in a filthy graveyard a mile away from the big city. And then it dawns on me: what if all humanity came to an end? Everyone would be like this. And it dawns on me again, what if the Universe wasnt even...there? Like everything was just black and white, but, it wasnt black and wight, because there was nothing there. It would be so complicated and so scary if it was like that, but, then again, if it were like that, i wouldnt even be there to have those feelings.

  • 09.19.2004 3:59 PM PDT