the universe

[fat_hobbit22]

I just made this topic to discuss general stuff about it. Add interesting things you know in physics and stuff that gets you thinking :-s basically post interesting things you know.

 

Il tell you what I know please add more info or correct my own, fell free to discuss what I know and add anything you want donÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t be stuck to the limited things I know :-k

 

 

 

universe:

 

Ok so we have evidence that the universe is expanding (red shifts) and some theories say that the expansion is happening faster than the speed of light. This in itself is mind melting, how can something happen quicker than pure energy moving, which makes you think what happens to time when you reach the speed of light, it cant stop because that would make it possible to live forever, from what I understand time just gets really slow but you experience the same time as usual just no one else does. Back to the expansion, when the universe is expanding, it is expanding into something, well sort of, what I heard is that stuff just appears, to fill what space I donÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t no, how can something appear from nothing, and whereÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s the edge of the universe, of course we wonÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t be able to see it because its moving faster than light so the new things that are just appearing are in complete darkness.

 

 

 

Black holes:

 

I know a fair amount about these they are in summary collapsed stars that are really big (I think its like 10x bigger than our sun :-k ) and all the matter condenses into this tiny space. I hear if you picked up about a tea spoon of a black hole the mass of it would be massive, a tennis ball size of a black hole is probably near the same mass as the Earth (could be way off donÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t know I know it massive though :wall: ) so the gravity this thing generates is massive, nothing obits it everything get sucked into it including light. The surface would probably be the smoothest thing known to man as well from the massive gravity smothering out any bumps. How can so many atoms fit into such a small space, just look at the most dense thing we have on Earth its nothing compared the a black hole.

 

 

 

Quantum Physics:

 

This is something I know very little about; I know that quantum physics is basically all just theory. A thing appearing sounds ridiculous doesn't it, but we can see it on an atom. The electrons orbiting an atom apparently just appear and disappear around there orbiting nucleus. how can something do that :ohnoes: I think they got an electron to disappear and repair, from new New York to London, how I have no idea, I know that it is disappearing and reappearing though because it was moving faster than the speed of light.

 

4 dimensions, can you imagine it. NO, but they do exist, apparently they have to for our universe to exist, but we just cant experience it, from what I understand if we travel across our universe we would end up where we started and have gone in a big loop, this has something to do with the 4 dimensions. DonÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t know much about this one though.

 

 

 

Time

 

interesting thing, its not constant, and we have no control over it if any of you watched the film dajevoo, you would know that some scientist got some mahusive telescope and saw around the universe and back on themselves, now this is kind of true, I think thereÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s something similar, its like a worm hole, like a hole in the fabric of our universe, and when you go into it, depending on the way it loops you can see back in time or forward in time. ThatÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s about all I know about it :uhh:

 

 

 

Matter:

 

Anti matter? dark matter? The big bang happening (presume it did) created matter after a few seconds, when i think radiation and matter split (thatÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s why we can hear the background radiation) now this created all the matter in our universe, people are trying to find the mass of all the matter in the universe to see if our universe will expand, stop or collapse. I hear that the matter we know and see is only 10% of the matter, thereÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s dark matter which light cant pass through and I think thereÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s anti matter, again a topic I know little about, but why is there no dark matter on Earth, and can we create some. What is it:|

 

 

 

well thatÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s about all I know that I find interesting, please post more, add to the stuff I know or post things that I havenÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t included. Thanks for reading! :thumbsup:

[Guest]

Staying alone the lines of the speed of light, I heard that if you throw and object at the speed of light it will shrink in size. I can't get my head around that and I sometimes question the truth of the statement. Though a lot of this stuff scientist would really only be able to have an educated guess at what would happen.

 

 

 

Me = perplexed. :?

[fat_hobbit22]

shrink :-s i supose if theres no friction (going through a vacum) then maybe but if in air then friction would make it get hot and expand... i think. hmm im guna google it :thumbsup:

[darkforaster]

Staying alone the lines of the speed of light, I heard that if you throw and object at the speed of light it will shrink in size. I can't get my head around that and I sometimes question the truth of the statement. Though a lot of this stuff scientist would really only be able to have an educated guess at what would happen.

 

 

 

Me = perplexed. :?

 

 

 

that's not what i heard. according to my source, when going at the speed of light your mass becomes infinite. And how that makes it look smaller, i'll never know.

 

 

 

However, things don't just appear. everything has a reason behind it. so there would be a reason for the electorns disappearing around the nucleus thier orbiting. or how suns and planets are created.

 

 

 

When space expands, it can hold more things. this does not neccessarily mean it is filled straight away. Just that it can be filled. like an empty box. it can be filled, but might not. :-k

[drokles]

Did I hear/read the word evidence?

 

Sorry to bring this to you guys, but when we talk big in these quantities, there's no such thing as evidence, this is why all I know about the universe is

 

 

 

That I know nothing about the universe.

 

 

 

However, we should pay attention to these theories and such to derive a little truth from them. We must remember though, most of these theories are based on other theories that have not been proven at all, and many attempts have been made to cover up holes in these theories with... yes other theories...

 

 

 

Anyway, as I see it, I lack the knowledge to talk about all these big theories (heck, I dont remotely understand them), but proof, they certainly aren't.

[fat_hobbit22]

Did I hear/read the word evidence?

 

Sorry to bring this to you guys, but when we talk big in these quantities, there's no such thing as evidence, this is why all I know about the universe is

 

 

 

That I know nothing about the universe.

 

 

 

However, we should pay attention to these theories and such to derive a little truth from them. We must remember though, most of these theories are based on other theories that have not been proven at all, and many attempts have been made to cover up holes in these theories with... yes other theories...

 

 

 

Anyway, as I see it, I lack the knowledge to talk about all these big theories (heck, I dont remotely understand them), but proof, they certainly aren't.

 

 

 

i think youll find that apart from quantum physics there is proof. Ther is evidence the big bang happened, there is background radiation from where the big bang happened, this radiation in tiny but is everywhere, all over the universe. this is where matter and radiation seperated. Also red shifts prove that the universe is expanding, i can explain how but i cant be bothered, it porves that the universe is expanding faster than the speed of light and that we are expanding from one point. So yes there is evidence, and everything i talk about assumes that the big bang did happen. Although we were not there to see it there is evidence that it did happen.

[drokles]

Actually I know about the red shifts. Its a theory based on the doppler effect you experience as a sound source passes you at an appropriate speed. Its what happens when an ambulance passes you, and the siren goes from high pitched to low pitched at the moment it passes. This is due to the varied frequency of the soundwaves. Its sorta the same with the light. If a star is moving away from us, it seems more red than it would otherwise. Again the frequency of the lightwaves appear to differ from what we normally expect, and thus we conclude the star is moving away from us.

 

This all fits nicely with the bb theory, but ultimately the idea of time being created in that very instant and all matter in the world goes against my human logic. Sure we can always rely on scientists and say they have greater insight than us, but I think we would be fooling ourselves.

 

Nothing comes from nothing.

 

And if we assume that the big crunch theory has taken place before the birth of this universe, then another problem arises; why doesn't our universe seize to expand?

 

And as far as the background radiation goes, it also teaches us another very important thing. The universe is eliptical sorta egg-shaped. Call me a fool for saying this, but wouldn't it turn out to be round?

[Barihawk]

Staying alone the lines of the speed of light, I heard that if you throw and object at the speed of light it will shrink in size. I can't get my head around that and I sometimes question the truth of the statement. Though a lot of this stuff scientist would really only be able to have an educated guess at what would happen.

 

 

 

Me = perplexed. :?

 

 

 

Well...not quite.

 

 

 

If the calculation for Relativity were able to be done inversely, that would make sense. But it only works one way.

 

 

 

Basically, your source is going along the lines that mass must be decreased in order for c to be breached. (c = speed of light)

 

 

 

This principle does not exist in the real world however. Althought creating an anti-gravity principle (like the inverse warp theory) would allow the speed of light to be crossed by lowering mass (or even removing it from the equation).

[The Dark Lord]

I've heard that if you got an object to 0 degrees Kelvin, it would disappear because as an object gets colder, it's molecules compress more and more. I'm not sure if this is true, especially when we never have quite got an object to 0 degrees Kelvin before, just a few degrees above it.

[justin_m23]

Actually I know about the red shifts. Its a theory based on the doppler effect you experience as a sound source passes you at an appropriate speed. Its what happens when an ambulance passes you, and the siren goes from high pitched to low pitched at the moment it passes. This is due to the varied frequency of the soundwaves. Its sorta the same with the light. If a star is moving away from us, it seems more red than it would otherwise. Again the frequency of the lightwaves appear to differ from what we normally expect, and thus we conclude the star is moving away from us.

 

This all fits nicely with the bb theory, but ultimately the idea of time being created in that very instant and all matter in the world goes against my human logic. Sure we can always rely on scientists and say they have greater insight than us, but I think we would be fooling ourselves.

 

Nothing comes from nothing.

 

And if we assume that the big crunch theory has taken place before the birth of this universe, then another problem arises; why doesn't our universe seize to expand?

 

And as far as the background radiation goes, it also teaches us another very important thing. The universe is eliptical sorta egg-shaped. Call me a fool for saying this, but wouldn't it turn out to be round?

 

 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think its the Big crunch theory that says gravity will eventually pull all matter back together. The big bang theory tells us the universe keeps expanding.

[fat_hobbit22]

but ultimately the idea of time being created in that very instant and all matter in the world goes against my human logic. Nothing comes from nothing.

 

And if we assume that the big crunch theory has taken place before the birth of this universe, then another problem arises; why doesn't our universe seize to expand?

 

And as far as the background radiation goes, it also teaches us another very important thing. The universe is eliptical sorta egg-shaped. Call me a fool for saying this, but wouldn't it turn out to be round?

 

 

 

:-s

 

 

 

something i cant get my head around as well. nothing comes from nothing, does anyone know what actually started the big bang? i thinks it something to do with two piecies of pure energy colideing, where did they come from? (dont say god - if god was just always there then so can the energy)

 

as for the universe collapseing in on itself, it could come to a big crunce and then just start again, in the same sequence, which means we may have had this conversation like 10,000 times already \ erm i dont get the expanding part, the iniverse isnt like a box, where everything expands and fills the box, i dont quite get it, there is no wall, and there isnt infinate space, bor is their an edge, because what would be beyond the edge, it cant be round because whats the sepeher in? it must be in 4 dimensions, something we cannot imagine. :-s

 

 

 

i just get more confused the more i think about it :anxious:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

'Correct me if I'm wrong but I think its the Big crunch theory that says gravity will eventually pull all matter back together. The big bang theory tells us the universe keeps expanding.'

 

 

 

 

 

only if their is not enough mass for the universe to continue expanding, then it will fall in on itself, otherwise it will continue to expand, but the big bang does not say which will happen, it depends on how much mass there is, something we can not work out becaise of black holes and dark matter

[assassin_696]

*breathes*

 

 

 

What does anyone want to know? Physics is pretty much my academic hobby, I've read about all sorts and although I'm nowhere near an expert in any area I can bring myself up to scratch with most theories pretty quickly.

 

 

 

Right, i'll get started.

 

 

 

_______________________________

 

 

 

but ultimately the idea of time being created in that very instant and all matter in the world goes against my human logic. Nothing comes from nothing.

 

And if we assume that the big crunch theory has taken place before the birth of this universe, then another problem arises; why doesn't our universe seize to expand?

 

And as far as the background radiation goes, it also teaches us another very important thing. The universe is eliptical sorta egg-shaped. Call me a fool for saying this, but wouldn't it turn out to be round?

 

 

 

something i cant get my head around as well. nothing comes from nothing, does anyone know what actually started the big bang? i thinks it something to do with two piecies of pure energy colideing, where did they come from? (dont say god - if god was just always there then so can the energy)

 

as for the universe collapseing in on itself, it could come to a big crunch and then just start again, in the same sequence, which means we may have had this conversation like 10,000 times already \ erm i dont get the expanding part, the iniverse isnt like a box, where everything expands and fills the box, i dont quite get it, there is no wall, and there isnt infinate space, bor is their an edge, because what would be beyond the edge, it cant be round because whats the sepeher in? it must be in 4 dimensions, something we cannot imagine. :-s

 

 

 

 

Thinking about the "cause" of the Universe is indeed baffling, but I believe that the Universe is itself uncaused. If you don't believe that it's possible for something to be uncaused, there are numerous examples in quantum mechanics of uncaused processes, and since the singularity from which the Big Bang expanded would be part quantum mechanical, it's perfectly plausible. For more details read this article on the uncaused beginning of the universe, it talks about two possibilities, and my bets would be on the latter (i.e. vacuum fluctuations).

 

 

 

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ ... aused.html

 

 

 

_________________________________________

 

 

 

I don't want to be pedantic but i'll just pick you up on a few things here and add my own thoughts.

 

 

 

Black holes:

 

I know a fair amount about these they are in summary collapsed stars that are really big (I think its like 10x bigger than our sun :-k ) and all the matter condenses into this tiny space. I hear if you picked up about a tea spoon of a black hole the mass of it would be massive, a tennis ball size of a black hole is probably near the same mass as the Earth (could be way off donÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t know I know it massive though :wall: ) so the gravity this thing generates is massive, nothing obits it everything get sucked into it including light. The surface would probably be the smoothest thing known to man as well from the massive gravity smothering out any bumps. How can so many atoms fit into such a small space, just look at the most dense thing we have on Earth its nothing compared the a black hole.

 

 

 

To think of a teaspoonful of black hole is incorrect, it's a singularity, so it's infinitely dense and infinitely small. You might be getting confused with neutron stars, a teaspoonful of which would be about as dense as the Earth. The surface is indeed very smooth, the black hole in fact radiates away any deformities on its surface when it collapses in the form of gravitational waves. You cannot tell anything about the star which the black hole collapsed from by observing it.

 

 

 

Quantum Physics:

 

This is something I know very little about; I know that quantum physics is basically all just theory. A thing appearing sounds ridiculous doesn't it, but we can see it on an atom. The electrons orbiting an atom apparently just appear and disappear around there orbiting nucleus. how can something do that :ohnoes: I think they got an electron to disappear and repair, from new New York to London, how I have no idea, I know that it is disappearing and reappearing though because it was moving faster than the speed of light.

 

4 dimensions, can you imagine it. NO, but they do exist, apparently they have to for our universe to exist, but we just cant experience it, from what I understand if we travel across our universe we would end up where we started and have gone in a big loop, this has something to do with the 4 dimensions. DonÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t know much about this one though.

 

 

 

To be honest, quantum mechanics is an incomplete theory (it's not perfect) but it has been proven by many, many experimental observations.

 

 

 

String Theory is something which has gained a lot of interest in the scientific community and to some extent the general public. However, i'm slightly skeptical of it and it's claims. Despite its promises, it falls down on a lot of the mathematics, there have been no great insights or breakthroughs for many years and the string community has become too elitist and cut off from the rest of the theoretical community as of late to the extent that it's become a cult that simply makes unfalsifiable claims.

 

 

 

It might be part of the truth, but I don't think it's the grand unified theory that we've been looking for, simply because it's not background independant. I.e. the nature and fabric and spacetime is taken as a constant for string theory to work, instead of evolving from the laws which is what we learned a grand unified theory must do to work. For more details read The Trouble With Physics, L. Smolin

[warri0r45]

I've heard that if you got an object to 0 degrees Kelvin, it would disappear because as an object gets colder, it's molecules compress more and more. I'm not sure if this is true, especially when we never have quite got an object to 0 degrees Kelvin before, just a few degrees above it.

 

 

 

To clarify a few things, the coldest we've got is a fraction of 1 Kelvin, as is my understanding. The reason an object would 'dissapear' at 0 K would be (as my best guess) that there would be no EM radiation exciting electrons of the object, thus making it effectively invisible. I doubt it would infinetely shrink; not all trends are constant.

[Pete_the_Viscous]

Things have been taken to nanoKelvin as far as I remember. Zero is (if you subscribe to the quantum way of looking at it) impossible: nothing can be at zero Kelvin.

[Rebdragon]

Actually I know about the red shifts. Its a theory based on the doppler effect you experience as a sound source passes you at an appropriate speed. Its what happens when an ambulance passes you, and the siren goes from high pitched to low pitched at the moment it passes. This is due to the varied frequency of the soundwaves. Its sorta the same with the light. If a star is moving away from us, it seems more red than it would otherwise. Again the frequency of the lightwaves appear to differ from what we normally expect, and thus we conclude the star is moving away from us.

 

This all fits nicely with the bb theory, but ultimately the idea of time being created in that very instant and all matter in the world goes against my human logic. Sure we can always rely on scientists and say they have greater insight than us, but I think we would be fooling ourselves.

 

Nothing comes from nothing.

 

And if we assume that the big crunch theory has taken place before the birth of this universe, then another problem arises; why doesn't our universe seize to expand?

 

And as far as the background radiation goes, it also teaches us another very important thing. The universe is eliptical sorta egg-shaped. Call me a fool for saying this, but wouldn't it turn out to be round?

 

It's supposed to do that :lol: .

 

 

 

Me, I'm reading a book right now on Superstring theory, but this stuffs all so confusing o_O. I mean, it took me a while to understand most of General Relativity... I'm screwed >_<.

[IGoddessI]

Quantum Physics:

 

This is something I know very little about; I know that quantum physics is basically all just theory. A thing appearing sounds ridiculous doesn't it, but we can see it on an atom. The electrons orbiting an atom apparently just appear and disappear around there orbiting nucleus. how can something do that I think they got an electron to disappear and repair, from new New York to London, how I have no idea, I know that it is disappearing and reappearing though because it was moving faster than the speed of light.

 

4 dimensions, can you imagine it. NO, but they do exist, apparently they have to for our universe to exist, but we just cant experience it, from what I understand if we travel across our universe we would end up where we started and have gone in a big loop, this has something to do with the 4 dimensions. DonÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t know much about this one though.

 

 

 

Quantum physics has always facinated me. I admire the people who dare to speak out and be different - Usually they're onto something. I have a lot of books and dvds on quantum physics - If you're interested on any titles and some links to some really good online videos give me a yell.

 

 

 

Me sitting here and explaining would be pointless - You'd benefit from it much more by reading and viewing it yourself.

 

 

 

(Not only that most of it is that complicated in my opinion and I wouldn't be able to briefly make sense of it for you in a post anyway)

[zaquierming]

I just think the whole concept of an expanding universe to be mind boggling. Like, if the universe is expanding, what is it expanding into? There needs to be space for the universe to expand into, right? And if so, what is that space, how much of it is there, and where does it end. And when it ends, what's past that?

[assassin_696]

I've heard that if you got an object to 0 degrees Kelvin, it would disappear because as an object gets colder, it's molecules compress more and more. I'm not sure if this is true, especially when we never have quite got an object to 0 degrees Kelvin before, just a few degrees above it.

 

 

 

To clarify a few things, the coldest we've got is a fraction of 1 Kelvin, as is my understanding. The reason an object would 'dissapear' at 0 K would be (as my best guess) that there would be no EM radiation exciting electrons of the object, thus making it effectively invisible. I doubt it would infinetely shrink; not all trends are constant.

 

 

 

Yeah that's right, and interestingly when we cool down certain particles to a fraction of a billionth of a degree above 0 Kelvin, they display curious properties, and all fall into the same energy state, showing superfluid properties. See Bose-Einstein Condensate.

[Biabf]

I hear if you picked up about a tea spoon of a black hole the mass of it would be massive, a tennis ball size of a black hole is probably near the same mass as the Earth (could be way off donÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t know I know it massive though :wall: )

 

Yeah it's a lot. But it's waaaaay bigger than the weight of earth. One teaspoon of black hole is roughly the weight of our galaxy.

 

 

 

And this was posted a while ago: http://atinyglimpse.ytmnd.com/

 

 

 

Another fact, if you hold up a grain of sand on the tip of your finger and hold it away. The area that tiny grain of sand blocks out will contain roughly 20,000 galaxies.

[warri0r45]

I've heard that if you got an object to 0 degrees Kelvin, it would disappear because as an object gets colder, it's molecules compress more and more. I'm not sure if this is true, especially when we never have quite got an object to 0 degrees Kelvin before, just a few degrees above it.

 

 

 

To clarify a few things, the coldest we've got is a fraction of 1 Kelvin, as is my understanding. The reason an object would 'dissapear' at 0 K would be (as my best guess) that there would be no EM radiation exciting electrons of the object, thus making it effectively invisible. I doubt it would infinetely shrink; not all trends are constant.

 

 

 

Yeah that's right, and interestingly when we cool down certain particles to a fraction of a billionth of a degree above 0 Kelvin, they display curious properties, and all fall into the same energy state, showing superfluid properties. See Bose-Einstein Condensate.

 

 

 

Way cool. :D :P

 

 

 

Good ol' Einstein had a hand in quite a few things early on last century didn't he. :)

[Will H]

Ah, antimatter, I can tell you about that.

 

 

 

Those of you who know basic chemistry can imagine the subatomic particles of the bog standard atom.

 

This is a basic diagram of a helium atom.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The red particles are protons, which have a positive charge.

 

The green particles are neutrons, which have no charge.

 

The blue particles are electrons, which have a negative charge, and orbit the nucleus of portons and neutrons due to the opposite charges (opposites attract).

 

 

 

Now, onto antimatter. Here is a diagram of an antihelium atom:

 

 

 

 

 

 

As you can see, it is basically identical to the normal helium atom. But there is a difference, it is composed of different sub atomic particles:

 

 

 

The Dark red particles are antiprotons, and they have a negative charge. The Dark green particles are antineutrons, and have no charge. The lighter blue particles are antielectrons, aka positrons. They have a positive charge. Notice a pattern? They are polar opposites.

 

 

 

So, what happens if an antihelium and a helium atom collide? Ahnihilation occurs. This means that both atoms cancel each other out and are broken down into pure energy, at the rate of E=mc2

 

 

 

Now, when the big bang occured, both antimatter and matter were created from the energy released. The atoms would repeatedly cause ahnihilation, and more atoms would be created from the energy produced. This seemingly endless cycle then splits into two theories.

 

 

 

1. The antiuniverse:

 

This theory states that the antimatter and matter have flown apart in opposite directions, matter creating our known universe, and antimatter creating a mirror world antiuniverse. Perhaps there may be antipeople, antiearth, antisolar system...

 

 

 

2. The imbalance:

 

This theory states that due to a random imbalance, slightly more matter was created than antimatter, and so the antimatter eventually was wiped out of existence. Matter then went forward to create our universe as we know it today.

 

 

 

Now you know! :wink:

[assassin_696]

I've heard that if you got an object to 0 degrees Kelvin, it would disappear because as an object gets colder, it's molecules compress more and more. I'm not sure if this is true, especially when we never have quite got an object to 0 degrees Kelvin before, just a few degrees above it.

 

 

 

To clarify a few things, the coldest we've got is a fraction of 1 Kelvin, as is my understanding. The reason an object would 'dissapear' at 0 K would be (as my best guess) that there would be no EM radiation exciting electrons of the object, thus making it effectively invisible. I doubt it would infinetely shrink; not all trends are constant.

 

 

 

Yeah that's right, and interestingly when we cool down certain particles to a fraction of a billionth of a degree above 0 Kelvin, they display curious properties, and all fall into the same energy state, showing superfluid properties. See Bose-Einstein Condensate.

 

 

 

Way cool. :D :P

 

 

 

Good ol' Einstein had a hand in quite a few things early on last century didn't he. :)

 

 

 

I think it's incredible the amount that he gave to the world. Not bad for someone who couldn't get an academic job at first :P

[Guest]

Staying alone the lines of the speed of light, I heard that if you throw and object at the speed of light it will shrink in size. I can't get my head around that and I sometimes question the truth of the statement. Though a lot of this stuff scientist would really only be able to have an educated guess at what would happen.

 

 

 

Me = perplexed. :?

 

 

 

Well...not quite.

 

 

 

If the calculation for Relativity were able to be done inversely, that would make sense. But it only works one way.

 

 

 

Basically, your source is going along the lines that mass must be decreased in order for c to be breached. (c = speed of light)

 

 

 

This principle does not exist in the real world however. Althought creating an anti-gravity principle (like the inverse warp theory) would allow the speed of light to be crossed by lowering mass (or even removing it from the equation).

 

 

 

Yeah Exactly what I was thinking! :anxious:

[fat_hobbit22]

I just think the whole concept of an expanding universe to be mind boggling. Like, if the universe is expanding, what is it expanding into? There needs to be space for the universe to expand into, right? And if so, what is that space, how much of it is there, and where does it end. And when it ends, what's past that?

 

 

 

=P~

 

 

 

whats it expanding into? well apparently nothing. there is nothing and it just appears. something i cant grasp... how can there be nothing? is it like a wall and then the wall gets extended? how can something just appear, its got to appear into something, i just dont get it. imagine theres a box, stuff expanding into it, its like the box just keeps growing, ok we get that, but what we cant get is that there is nothing outside the box. The box has to be in a room or something and the box is filling up the room, but its not like that. I really dont get it lol :-k

 

i think the corect way to explain it is like at the start of the matrix (third one) where neo walks from one end of the train tracks and appears at the other end, that or its 4 dimensional, and our brain cant work out 4 dimension, and that because we cannot think of anything bigger than volume. :wall:

[anonimu]

I'm going to answer/correct everything on this page... Too lazy to answer/correct the first page. Use wikipedia. And I am still stunned by the huge number of people that are so ignorant...

 

 

 

Ah, antimatter, I can tell you about that.

 

 

 

Those of you who know basic chemistry can imagine the subatomic particles of the bog standard atom.

 

This is a basic diagram of a helium atom.

 

 

 

... stuff ...

 

... more stuff ...

 

 

 

 

Most scientists currently believe that there is more anti-matter than matter.

 

 

 

---------

 

 

 

I just think the whole concept of an expanding universe to be mind boggling. Like, if the universe is expanding, what is it expanding into? There needs to be space for the universe to expand into, right? And if so, what is that space, how much of it is there, and where does it end. And when it ends, what's past that?

 

 

 

=P~

 

 

 

whats it expanding into? well apparently nothing. there is nothing and it just appears. something i cant grasp... how can there be nothing? is it like a wall and then the wall gets extended? how can something just appear, its got to appear into something, i just dont get it. imagine theres a box, stuff expanding into it, its like the box just keeps growing, ok we get that, but what we cant get is that there is nothing outside the box. The box has to be in a room or something and the box is filling up the room, but its not like that. I really dont get it lol :-k

 

i think the corect way to explain it is like at the start of the matrix (third one) where neo walks from one end of the train tracks and appears at the other end, that or its 4 dimensional, and our brain cant work out 4 dimension, and that because we cannot think of anything bigger than volume. :wall:

 

... The 4th dimension is time... It's not some weird thing that lets you teleport from one end of the universe to the other (well it can do that, but so can the other dimensions...).

 

"The box" is everything. It's not inside of anything. The "walls" of the "box" supposedly keep growing.

 

 

 

---------

 

 

 

You know, the universe can both continue to expand and "fall back on itself" at the same time. We're not sure yet that the universe is Euclidean.

 

 

 

---------

 

 

 

 

Black holes:

 

I know a fair amount about these they are in summary collapsed stars that are really big (I think its like 10x bigger than our sun :-k ) and all the matter condenses into this tiny space. I hear if you picked up about a tea spoon of a black hole the mass of it would be massive, a tennis ball size of a black hole is probably near the same mass as the Earth (could be way off donÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t know I know it massive though :wall: ) so the gravity this thing generates is massive, nothing obits it everything get sucked into it including light.

 

 

 

To think of a teaspoonful of black hole is incorrect, it's a singularity, so it's infinitely dense and infinitely small. You might be getting confused with neutron stars, a teaspoonful of which would be about as dense as the Earth.

 

That's exactly what I was going to say Assassin...

 

 

 

[hide]

 

(... You can't even freaking spell "deja vu...")

 

 

 

(What grade are you in?)

 

 

 

(Seriously, if you use wikipedia, you won't get as many wrong answers, and you won't make some off-topic-ers start thinking about buying a gun, killing all the stupid people they can find, and committing suicide.)

 

[/hide]