powers of ten demo

[NikFu S.]

nobody cares eh?
man do i ever feel like lone wolf.
with nerdy coke bottle specs and a bow tie.

8^P

[lee]

Originally posted by CigarJohnny
Exactly what I was thinking when you were stating that the big bang theory ruled out the universe within a universe theory. I love the universe within a universe theory and I hope that one day we will discover it is true. If they find that it is not true then I hope they do so after I die. I like to think of them as parallel universes where every possible occurance that could possibly occur does occur when taken as a collective whole.

In one of them the SVX is a knockout seller and Fuji Heavy produced millions of them and parts are easy to find and there are tons of modifications available for pennies. Not that you would need them since in that universe version they came with 859 hp from the factory and hit 60mph is less than 2 seconds while topping out at 250mph. Their trannies never overheat and have never been known to break.

A couple of things, first I'm kinda glad they didn't sell a lot of the SVX, not that 859hp wouldn't be a bad thing. I understand they can they also generate something like 2 G's on a skidpad or braking

Second, there is an aspect of string theory wherein there are multiple universes and in which time doesn't exist except as a human perception thing - our perception of time is because we simply move from one "time slice" to another.

Third, I don't think Big Bang ruled out, or didn't either, universe within a universe. However, there is no credible scientific theory supporting it that I'm aware of.

Fourth, I WANT ONE OF THOSE TRANNYS !

[lee]

I haven't read much on this in recent times, but still I'll throw in my $0.02.

Originally posted by NikFu S.
this is true because the actual mass hasnt changed. it still exerts/accepts the same gravity as if it were a mountain. provided all the atoms would hold together it would proceed to drill into the earth until it reached the plates below china provided it were 'dropped' from the U.S., whereupon it would oscillate until coming to a stop at the center of the earth.

as far as black holes are concerned, the mass required is that of a red giant minimum, with the majority of black hole type singularities being formed from supergiants. if you consider the difference in the amount of matter to vaporize/radiate, it would take less than a microsecond for mount everest.
EDIT: whoops. should note the estimated time is if relative forces were that of a full "size" event horizon. on relative scale it might take a very long time.

Agree on the mass to start a new black hole; however, not to argue the point too much, but we were given the condition that Everest had already somehow been collapsed into a singularity. So as soon as any matter came within the event horizon it would get sucked it. Hawking proposed small black holes which would evaporate. Not sure I remember it all, but I think he suggested they might have been formed earlier on in the big bang, and should all be gone now via black hole evaporation. The evaporation has to do with the high energies found at the horizon and particle creation under those conditions.

Originally posted by NikFu S.
edit2: supposing those are actual shots of a carbon atom, the simplest building block, and we are actually seeing the elusive 'quark', which was purely hypothetical last i recall (and its been some time), then theres even more space between atoms than originally thought.
on that note id like to put on everyones plate that if the subatomic universe idea were true, everytime a superdense star collapsed into a singularity, the multiple universe's directly below it would not survive.
i hate to bring everyone to my world but i hope we are not someone elses subatomic universe.

They aren't actual shots, but an artistic representation. The quark is generally considered to be proven - in the sense that most all of sub-atomic physics is "proven". It works, QED.

Originally posted by NikFu S.
edit3!: perhaps i just answered my own question. the matter ejected from black holes must expand at an incredible rate. big bang states that all matter in out universe was compressed at some point (like a huge molecule, the ONE element), then expanded in a great explosion of matter.
it is possible that if multiple subatomic unverse theory were true, the universes (universi?) would be compressed to an infinite point upon when everything within would be destroyed, and later ejected in a similar instance to our "big bang".
any thoughts?

Near as I remember, matter isn't ever ejected from a black hole. Also as I remember, the big bang only goes back as far as 10 to the minus 34 power seconds or so. Before that is pure speculation (whereas after that it's just plain speculation ) At any rate, I think most astrophysicists hypothesize the vacuum energy was so high an unknown type of super-duper massive particle was spontaneously created and this is what formed the beginnings of the bang.

[lee]

Originally posted by NikFu S.


there was a point in time when i completely disagreed with Al. mostly i still dont like his space time theories.
if theres one thing i do like, its the fact everything is relative. i use that one a lot. dont confuse that with the theory of relativity though. thats the space-time one.
i mean seriously. how can space (void) and time (a mere idea) bend?
i also have srtong beliefs about light speed travel.

Ah, a flat Earth believer (J/K)

If there is an aspect of modern physics that's anywhere near proven, it's relativity (special and general). I mean it could get overwritten by a new theory like Al did to Sir Issac, but since we have to make clock corrections for GPS orbits do to speed and gravity, particle half-lives extended while in an accelerator, light bending as it passes a star, etc., it's pretty much accepted. You're much better off doubting quantum mechanics or the new string theories

You should consider a course on quantum mechanics if you think space is void. Most QM advocates think "empty" space is virtually frothing with energy and particles are created annihilated all the time.

Of course for really weird theories you should try the one that says the universe (including "empty" space) is filled up with matter (dark matter?), but we can only perceive it when its above a certain energy level. According to this school of thought, when one of these hidden pieces of matter somehow jumps up in energy so we can see it, then the "hole" left behind is what we currently perceive as anti-matter - so that anti-matter doesn't really exist.

Then there's this one where there's only one electron in the whole universe - I'd say that's one really busy little fella huh?

Anybody but me seen the preliminary finds from CERN? Some group claims they have tele/transported an electron from one side of a room to another - won't be long now until we hear Kirk calling for Scotty.

[NikFu S.]

14 to 16 billion years in layman time. not very long in universe time.

i thought massive amounts of radiation were ejected from the axi ("north" and "south" poles) of black holes? maybe i saw this on Nova and ingrained it in memory. who knows.

so how far down does it go before being artist renditions? the molecule? last pic i saw of a carbon atom was in 10th grade (1998) and it was supposedly real. real blurry and small but real nonetheless. youd think we could advance some in 15 years.

speculation or not, something happened/existed. be it God or a random leakage from another dimension or a rip in the fabric of space-time or the condensed remains of the 'existence' before it.
...

i just randomly understood how the fountain theory works just now. just popped into my head.... if something were to be leaking matter/antimatter/darkmatter into the 'center' of the universe at an incredible rate, would it not push all other matter outwards like a puddle of water under a leaky faucet?
assume its been proven all galaxies relative to ours are moving away from us (which they are). if we are not at the center, which is true because matter does not spill forth at incredible rates, then this theory is ruled out. galaxies in "front" of ours move away from us faster than those "behind". this was proven using the light spectrum.

way i see it, nothing cant be a possibilty. that is to say something 'had' to happen. if there wasn't anything to create a something, what would there be? nothing, which is impossible. you cant have a nothing. prove me wrong and ill pay double its value. which is limitless, at least to the scientific community. but since that would be double of everythng, which is also impossible, i dont see that happening.

and this is how some came to believe we are merely someone elses dream. it sucks to live in an incomprehensible world.

im just having random thoughts. this is the only stuff i used to think about sans 11th grade.

nikfu-
- we having fun yet?

[NikFu S.]

Originally posted by lee


You should consider a course on quantum mechanics if you think space is void. Most QM advocates think "empty" space is virtually frothing with energy and particles are created annihilated all the time.
...
Then there's this one where there's only one electron in the whole universe - I'd say that's one really busy little fella huh?

Anybody but me seen the preliminary finds from CERN? Some group claims they have tele/transported an electron from one side of a room to another - won't be long now until we hear Kirk calling for Scotty.

when i said void i didnt mean its empty. its not all filled up either thats for certain. but when he says bending space-time, that should translate into the forces involved in changing the physics of an object, but it doesnt. it eludes to something that doesnt actually exist. perhaps i read it wrong?

whomever thinks there is only one electron in the universe must be expelled from the scientific community for all eternity or til the end of existence, which is first.

ive heard of what CERN has done. it was in the paper not too long ago. ridiculous. it just moved too fast to detect.

something to think about: if you were to be teleported, successful or not, you will die. for your molecules to be ripped apart and put back together (even in the right order) will be like building a lego something, then destroying it and building it again. unless we prove memories are stored physically in something thats not a form of electricity you would lose them all. youd also need a good jolt to bring you back to the land of the conscious.
do i tend to bring up morbid scary things?
heres another:
why light speed travel is impossible. well not impossible, but impossible to be a form of transportation.
data, light and communication wavelengths, all travel at certain determined speeds. most at less than light speed. therefore traveling at light speed would make use of sensors impossible because the data could not either catch up to or get in front of the vehicle. this means that the auto-pilot could not make adjustments to avoid all the particles it will ram into. at that speed there are enough particle in space to rip a ship to shreds unless it is protected by some kind of force barrier, which will need to be powered by nuclear or cold fusion, which would create a beautiful fireworks show when it slams into something big and dense.
teleportation would be nice but there has to be a recieving device and a clear pathway or else you wont be put back together correctly.
welcome to my impossible world.

[lee]

Originally posted by NikFu S.
i thought massive amounts of radiation were ejected from the axi ("north" and "south" poles) of black holes? maybe i saw this on Nova and ingrained it in memory. who knows.

I "think" you're thinking of quasars or pulsars (I forget which one). The only radiation I've heard about for black holes is the evaporative radiation Hawking proposed, i.e., matter/anti-matter creation from energy at/near the event horizon - in which case one particle goes in and is "lost" to this universe, the other out, and becomes are part of what we see. But I haven't studied this for over 20 years, just pick up the occasional Scientific American or whatever.

[NikFu S.]

thats what i was talking about. what we see is the radiation.

Ed: heres something intersting i found. simple gif movies of falling into a blackhole. they dont make much sense except for the third one but the page has lots of info.
http://casa.colorado.edu/~ajsh/schw.shtml

[NikFu S.]

found a pic. its those 'jets' on the top and bottom.

Ed: on second thought dont read that site. it says retarded things about relative time dilation, which is laughable theory at best.
its all very optimistic and just a way to say what you want to be real. prove it with more than words then get back to me, you so-called geniuses of astronomy and physics. (i direct that at noone)
man i hate being such a skeptic.

heres a GOOD site.
http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/blackhole.html

forgot about cosmic background radiation. supports big bang only. werd.