I dont understand the universe

[patsopinion]

so i watched this thing on history channel
the way i understand the big bang is there was a highly dense ball that exploded
and we are still in the after affects (the out ward expansion of the universe)
eventually everything will stop moving out and come back together and reform the ball

did atoms themselfs get wider during this?
do atoms hold the same physical prinsipals of the universe (nucli-suns planets electrons)?
what is radio carbon dating?
is big bang creationism on a larger scale to account for a god?
arg

[MrPink]

I love that series on HC. I have a lot of trouble understanding that shit, but I just smile and try not think aboot it.

[FUNKMAN]

after every explosion there should be an implosion... this could be a serious issue if all that matter starts to turn the other way

[Furtherman]

The Big Bang was NOT a single point of light that exploded... it was an expansion that happened everywhere at the same time. In all likelyhood we are the result of a former universe collapsing on itself or the result of a collision between two other universes.

And get this, in an infinite universe, the odds are better that our universe is the result of a creation of someone else. I'm not talking god, I'm talking The Matrix style.

The shows you see on History Channel and Discovery are good, but water down explanations.

I highly recommend you read this book: The Elegant Universe by Prof. Brian Greene (http://www.amazon.com/ELegant-Universe-Brian-Greene/dp/009928992X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-9909797-9878455?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1189014747&sr=8-1)

It breaks down all the hard physics of undering the universe into easy laymans terms.

[JPMNICK]

The Big Bang was NOT a single point of light that exploded... it was an expansion that happened everywhere at the same time. In all likelyhood we are the result of a former universe collapsing on itself or the result of a collision between two other universes.

And get this, in an infinite universe, the odds are better that our universe is the result of a creation of someone else. I'm not talking god, I'm talking The Matrix style.

The shows you see on History Channel and Discovery are good, but water down explanations.

I highly recommend you read this book: The Elegant Universe by Prof. Brian Greene (http://www.amazon.com/ELegant-Universe-Brian-Greene/dp/009928992X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-9909797-9878455?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1189014747&sr=8-1)

It breaks down all the hard physics of undering the universe into easy laymans terms.

Furtherman and I read a lot of the same books!

Watching science shows on TV is like trying to learn to read by watching sesame street. they shows on TV are at such a basic level, with no math behind it, that in my opinion sometimes it is harder to understand and put everything into place.

[AJDELAWARE]

Apparently they are building a telescope in Europe (I dont know what stage its at) named the O.W.L. (OverWhelmingly Large) that will be able to look into space so far that it will see the beginning of time. What that means, I have no idea.

[FUNKMAN]

Apparently they are building a telescope in Europe (I dont know what stage its at) named the O.W.L. (OverWhelmingly Large) that will be able to look into space so far that it will see the beginning of time. What that means, I have no idea.

it will catch god's feet running backwards like trying to avoid a wave comin in onto the shore

[AJDELAWARE]

it will catch god's feet running backwards like trying to avoid a wave comin in onto the shore

I figured it would just be a guy playing solitaire while chain smoking non-filtered lucky strikes.

[FUNKMAN]

it will catch god's feet running backwards like trying to avoid a wave comin in onto the shore

I figured it would just be a guy playing solitaire while chain smoking non-filtered lucky strikes.

that would be jesus

[Furtherman]

Apparently they are building a telescope in Europe (I dont know what stage its at) named the O.W.L. (OverWhelmingly Large) that will be able to look into space so far that it will see the beginning of time. What that means, I have no idea.

What that means is the farther you look out into space, the farther back in time you look.

All the stars we see in the night sky? What we're seeing is their light from thousands, millions even billions of years ago. Many of them have burned out, but we'll never know because the light from them will continue to reach our planet for thousands of years. There is still light from other new born stars that haven't reached us yet.

Even when you look at the moon, you're seeing what it's surface looked like seconds ago - I think it's a seven second delay.

[AJDELAWARE]

What that means is the farther you look out into space, the farther back in time you look.

All the stars we see in the night sky? What we're seeing is their light found thousands, millions even billions of years ago. Many of them have burned out, but we'll never know because the light from them will continue to reach our planet for thousands of years. There is still light from other new born stars that haven't reached us yet.

Even when you look at the moon, you're seeing what it's surface looked like seconds ago - I think it's a seven second delay.

No, I understand that much (and the moon to earth delay is 1.5 seconds), but what im wondering is what are they going to see.

[Furtherman]

No, I understand that much (and the moon to earth delay is 1.5 seconds), but what im wondering is what are they going to see.

Well, that will be an interesting day won't it?

[AJDELAWARE]

Well, that will be an interesting day won't it?

I just learned all this shit last night, college is great!

[AJDELAWARE]

For more info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overwhelmingly_Large_Telescope

[JPMNICK]

they are going to be able to see how basic elements started to form what we know see when we look up into space.

[AJDELAWARE]

Im really stoked for this astronomy class cause that is all insane stuff.

Plus the professor said he rather take the job of cleaning bathrooms on the Enterprise over being President of the USA.

[Furtherman]

Plus the professor said he rather take the job of cleaning bathrooms on the Enterprise over being President of the USA.

I'd imagine those toilets would clean themselves! Or your shit is just transported into space.

[AJDELAWARE]

Or Scotty takes it and tries to pass it off as haggis.

[patsopinion]

Apparently they are building a telescope in Europe (I dont know what stage its at) named the O.W.L. (OverWhelmingly Large) that will be able to look into space so far that it will see the beginning of time. What that means, I have no idea.

if thats true that how is it possible that things cant move faster than light?
einstien is an idiot
if we are here and we could see where we might have been x time ago then doesnt that intrinsially mean that things have gone faster than light?!?
dummie

[Furtherman]

if thats true that how is it possible that things cant move faster than light?
einstien is an idiot
if we are here and we could see where we might have been x time ago then doesnt that intrinsially mean that things have gone faster than light?!?
dummie

I think you ought to rethink your questioning - or read the book I suggested.

[AJDELAWARE]

if thats true that how is it possible that things cant move faster than light?
einstien is an idiot
if we are here and we could see where we might have been x time ago then doesnt that intrinsially mean that things have gone faster than light?!?
dummie

Well for one thing, some german guys have proven that things can travel faster then light (but only for 3 feet?!) and Im just saying what some guy who is trained in astronomy told me.

[JPMNICK]

if thats true that how is it possible that things cant move faster than light?
einstien is an idiot
if we are here and we could see where we might have been x time ago then doesnt that intrinsially mean that things have gone faster than light?!?
dummie

not at all. it means light has a speed limit, and by looking deep into space, we are looking "back into time"

think of it like this.

you are watching a baseball game, but from the deep outfield. someone hits the ball. you see it happen. then 2 seconds later you hear it. the sound and the action are 2 seperate events to you. to the catcher, both things are 1 event.

sound has a speed. just like light does. so from the vantage point of earth, everything we see now is from the catcher standpoint. and we look deeper into space, we are like the fan in the outfield observing space as it was billions of light years ago.

[DolaMight]

For more info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overwhelmingly_Large_Telescope

If you build a telescope strong enough you should be able to see the back of your head. Einstein line.

[AJDELAWARE]

Im reading about all this stuff right now (slow daY) and it is totally a mind-effer. Its really hard for me to wrap my brain around a lot of it, because its just so huge.

[EliSnow]

Apparently they are building a telescope in Europe (I dont know what stage its at) named the O.W.L. (OverWhelmingly Large) that will be able to look into space so far that it will see the beginning of time. What that means, I have no idea.

The fools!!!! Don't they read comics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krona_%28comics%29)?!! They'll end up seeing a giant hand, entropy will seep in, and could possibly cause the end of the universe!!!

http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/9016/handwithcosmosas6.jpg

[Furtherman]

It can be hard to wrap your brain around it - in fact, I saw Brian Greene give a lecture this year and he used that exact phrase because as you tell any of simple facts to a group of people, there is a tendency for all to laugh. Whereas, you'll look at the guy next to you and see that he doesn't get it either so they'll have that common bond to just say "That's crazy" and walk away. Saftey in numbers.

But, if you look into this stuff yourself, if you really do the research, you see that it's not at all impossible, even if you do feel it improbable.

For example. Is the universe infinite? Right now, the simple facts that we have tend to point to: Yes, the universe in infinite.

We are all a result of certain atoms and forces, such as gravity. We're put together in a certain way that creates our existence.

Now, in an infinate universe, it is a mathematical possibility that these same kind of atoms and forces will get together in the same way. That means, somewhere else, there is another you. And that means there is an infinite number of "you" elsewhere in this universe and parallel universes. There can be subtle differences throughout the infinite "you" - different colored hair or even wearing a different colored shirt - but they're out there - in an infinite universe.

Now that is hard to wrap your brain around - but it's the human ego that prevents most of us from ever fully embracing it. But think about it - how many times have you seen someone look or act almost exactly like someone you know?

Now I wouldn't even attempt to compare that to an infinite scale, but we're all made of the same stuff, and mathematically speaking, we will come close to duplication and repetition. It's just the laws of nature and physics.


Then again, there could be different laws of nature and physics in other universes, and even more closer to home, other galaxies. We just don't know yet.

[AJDELAWARE]

Yeah, the more I read the more it makes sense. I really wish I had the interest when i was younger, as well as the overall intellect and discipline to take up the sciences as a career, cause things like this and archeology just seem so damn rewarding. I mean imagine what it must be like to gaze upon something that nobody has ever seen before, yet its been around for 12 billion years?!

[Furtherman]

I feel the same exact way. I've read more on this stuff in the past 10 years than I ever did in school. In fact, I even take notes! I'm such a geek. :laugh:

[JPMNICK]

It can be hard to wrap your brain around it - in fact, I saw Brian Greene give a lecture this year and he used that exact phrase because as you tell any of simple facts to a group of people, there is a tendency for all to laugh. Whereas, you'll look at the guy next to you and see that he doesn't get it either so they'll have that common bond to just say "That's crazy" and walk away. Saftey in numbers.

But, if you look into this stuff yourself, if you really do the research, you see that it's not at all impossible, even if you do feel it improbable.

For example. Is the universe infinite? Right now, the simple facts that we have tend to point to: Yes, the universe in infinite.

We are all a result of certain atoms and forces, such as gravity. We're put together in a certain way that creates our existence.

Now, in an infinate universe, it is a mathematical possibility that these same kind of atoms and forces will get together in the same way. That means, somewhere else, there is another you. And that means there is an infinite number of "you" elsewhere in this universe and parallel universes. There can be subtle differences throughout the infinite "you" - different colored hair or even wearing a different colored shirt - but they're out there - in an infinite universe.

Now that is hard to wrap your brain around - but it's the human ego that prevents most of us from ever fully embracing it. But think about it - how many times have you seen someone look or act almost exactly like someone you know?

Now I wouldn't even attempt to compare that to an infinite scale, but we're all made of the same stuff, and mathematically speaking, we will come close to duplication and repetition. It's just the laws of nature and physics.


Then again, there could be different laws of nature and physics in other universes, and even more closer to home, other galaxies. We just don't know yet.

not to mention there is still a lot of math and physics that still needs to be invented to explain things.

[AJDELAWARE]

Isn't odd that as we get further out of school the more interest we have in school related things? I could care less about stuff like this when I was in highschool or my first time at college, but now its all so much more interesting to me. Same with a lot of history and engineering topics. I spend more time watching the history channel and similar channels then I ever did studying it in school.

[JPMNICK]

Isn't odd that as we get further out of school the more interest we have in school related things? I could care less about stuff like this when I was in highschool or my first time at college, but now its all so much more interesting to me. Same with a lot of history and engineering topics. I spend more time watching the history channel and similar channels then I ever did studying it in school.

it is the hormones. at age 16, all you can think about is getting laid. as you get older and your body calms down, you have more free time to think about other things

[zentraed]

so i watched this thing on history channel
the way i understand the big bang is there was a highly dense ball that exploded
and we are still in the after affects (the out ward expansion of the universe)
eventually everything will stop moving out and come back together and reform the ball

did atoms themselfs get wider during this?
do atoms hold the same physical prinsipals of the universe (nucli-suns planets electrons)?
what is radio carbon dating?
is big bang creationism on a larger scale to account for a god?
arg

if thats true that how is it possible that things cant move faster than light?
einstien is an idiot
if we are here and we could see where we might have been x time ago then doesnt that intrinsially mean that things have gone faster than light?!?
dummie

ironically, it's einstein's theory of general relativity that leads to the Big Bang Theory's formulation. His special theory of relativity is the one that prescribes light as the universal speed limit.

The most important aspect of GR is that space-time is curved. This is a difficult concept to imagine in 3-dimensional space, but there's a mathematical thereom that proves that a curved 3D space can be embedded in a 3D-space :-) (A curved 2D space can only be embedded in a 3D space, so it's pretty significant). John Nash actually did some work in that field (guy depicted in a "Beautiful Mind").

Black Holes represent regions of space that are curved so much that no path can take you beyond the event horizon. The Big Bang was kind of like an unfolding of an intensely curved space such as that. The entire fabric of the universe and all of its energy were contained in a singularity that unfolded into our universe today and that continues to expand. As the energy level dropped, the different laws of nature began to appear, and finally the universe that we see today came to be.

Atoms didn't exist yet, as the universe was too energetic for them. They're held together by two forces (nuclear force in the nucleus, eletromagnetism between the electron and the nucleus), and also the protons and neutrons (which are composed of quarks) may not have been around just yet. Also, heavier atoms are made in stars through nuclear fusion.

And please don't ever compare the Big Bang to creationism...

[zentraed]

This may be a little intense, but it goes through the Big Bang timeline. It helps to know that first, everything is a form of Energy. Photons, electrons, quarks, pions, whatever. Second, they all interact through quantum mechanical fields. String theory and other Grand Unified Theories, or Theories of Everything, assert that at high energies, all forces in nature (Strong Nuclear, Weak Nuclear, Electromagnetism, Gravity) become the same single force. As the energy drops, the forces begin to differentiate themselves. That should get you through the first instants of our Universe's history :smile:

Big Bang Timeline at Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_timeline)

[Bulldogcakes]

what is radio carbon dating?

Lilly, like everyone else.

[jetdog]

Lilly, like everyone else.

bada-bing!








and now the dork factor...radio carbon dating is based on the accumuation of carbon atoms into living organisms. As living organisms they take up nutrients from theri surroundings and incorporate these nutrients into their body. This incorporation changes the ratio of carbon that is "unstable" (radioactive carbon, carbon14 I think) to stable carbon isotopes with respect to the organisms surroundings, i.e. the environment, where radioactive to stable carbon ratios are for all intents and purposes constant. Now, when an organism dies, it stops accumulating carbon, both radioactive and stable. Now, since radioactive carbon decays at a fast enough rate, we can analyze the amount of radioactive carbon in a biological sample and thus the ratio of radioactive carbon to stable carbon will give us the approximate time when an organism died, i.e. it stopped accumulating carbon.

Please step in and critique this explanation (I'm looking at you Zentraed), it was off the top of my head and I would love to hear anything furhter on it.

[zentraed]

bada-bing!








and now the dork factor...radio carbon dating is based on the accumuation of carbon atoms into living organisms. As living organisms they take up nutrients from theri surroundings and incorporate these nutrients into their body. This incorporation changes the ratio of carbon that is "unstable" (radioactive carbon, carbon14 I think) to stable carbon isotopes with respect to the organisms surroundings, i.e. the environment, where radioactive to stable carbon ratios are for all intents and purposes constant. Now, when an organism dies, it stops accumulating carbon, both radioactive and stable. Now, since radioactive carbon decays at a fast enough rate, we can analyze the amount of radioactive carbon in a biological sample and thus the ratio of radioactive carbon to stable carbon will give us the approximate time when an organism died, i.e. it stopped accumulating carbon.

Please step in and critique this explanation (I'm looking at you Zentraed), it was off the top of my head and I would love to hear anything furhter on it.

sounds good to me :bye:

Carbon-14 has a half-life of about 5,700 years, so it's only accurate for about 40,000 years (not from the top of my head)

[jetdog]

From what I understand, the claim that researchers (I think both from Germany and Japan) have observed particles moving faster than the speed of light is based on Schrodinger's uncertainty pricinple, in these cases it is refered to as quantum tunneling. An atom is "shot" along a specified course. This course contains a barrier assumably impenetrable to electromagnetic particels, i.e. an electron, that the particels are routed around with the use of magnets. The particel detector is placed just behind the impenetrable barrier and the particles travel in a series of 90-degree turns around the barrier. What these researches claimed to observe was electrons hitting the detector before it was physically possible for the particles to travel the disctance around the barrier, i.e. three sides of a square compared to a straight line. The idea is that, the electrons behave as a quantum of energy, as such, theri exact location can only be described by a statistical equation, it can never be truly defined. Thus what these researchers claimed thay were observing were the electrons at the far ends of the bell curve, those that had "tunneled" through the impenentrable barrier.
The experiment is highly criticized I think, but amazing none the less.

[sailor]

The Big Bang was NOT a single point of light that exploded... it was an expansion that happened everywhere at the same time. In all likelyhood we are the result of a former universe collapsing on itself or the result of a collision between two other universes.

And get this, in an infinite universe, the odds are better that our universe is the result of a creation of someone else. I'm not talking god, I'm talking The Matrix style.

The shows you see on History Channel and Discovery are good, but water down explanations.

I highly recommend you read this book: The Elegant Universe by Prof. Brian Greene (http://www.amazon.com/ELegant-Universe-Brian-Greene/dp/009928992X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-9909797-9878455?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1189014747&sr=8-1)

It breaks down all the hard physics of undering the universe into easy laymans terms.

never read that one. i'm a big fan of a brief history of time (http://www.amazon.com/Brief-History-Time-Stephen-Hawking/dp/0553380168), myself.

and astronomy was the one class in college that i truly loved.

[led37zep]

Perhaps this can shed some light on the subject.
http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b217/fritoe/S1V1_3D.jpg

[sr71blackbird]

Did any of you guys see my electric universe thread? >+++ (http://www.ronfez.net/forums/showthread.php?t=61990&highlight=electric+universe)<

I thought you'd like it.

[JPMNICK]

Did any of you guys see my electric universe thread? >+++ (http://www.ronfez.net/forums/showthread.php?t=61990&highlight=electric+universe)<

I thought you'd like it.

i did see it, and i downloaded the show and never watched it.

i never watched it because of this line "
The theory basically postulates that electricity, and not gravity is the binding force of the universe"

gravity is the weakest of the atomic forces, and electromagnetism is much stronger than gravity could ever be. just like how we can pick up metal with magnets, even though we have gravity on the planet.

the movies just seemed a little to agenda driven to me, like a post-doc student or something that wanted to make a name for himself

i will eventually check it out i am sure.

[topless_mike]

sorry guys, but you all are starting to scare me.

http://www.wallpapergate.com/data/media/173/Vida_Guerra_007.jpg

[AJDELAWARE]

I plan on spending my free time today reading about all this stuff. And if I want to take a break from the hard stuff, I might even dabble in some STRING THEORY. Astronomy and String Theory could be the 2 most mind boggling ideas in the world.

[Yerdaddy]

I figured it would just be a guy playing solitaire while chain smoking non-filtered lucky strikes.

that would be jesus

More likely he's smoking cloves. Fuckin hippy!

And this thread is the reason I'm glad I learned about all this shit in public school in Kansas.

Homework = Genesis pages 1 through 1.

Final exam = "God created the earth in a week... True or Go To Hell?

[Freakshow]

For more info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overwhelmingly_Large_Telescope

Sounds like Europe has size envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very_Large_Array

I like the show Brian Green did on PBS about string theory. There was a lot of stuff about Einstein, up until almost the present. It did explain all that stuff in a pretty understandable way, but you still need proof of a college degree just to put it in your netflix queue.

[AJDELAWARE]

Sounds like Europe has size envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very_Large_Array


According to they way my Prof was talking the other night, astronomy is nothing but size envy when it comes to telescopes. You never have one big enough, and theres always one bigger to be bought/built.

To be honest, all of this stuff sounds like pot talk to begin with haha. String theory, using a telescope to view the beginning of time, etc.

[AJDELAWARE]

It also looks like the VLA is simply for picking up Radio waves of light, while the O W L is going to be picking up visible and infrared light.

[JPMNICK]

According to they way my Prof was talking the other night, astronomy is nothing but size envy when it comes to telescopes. You never have one big enough, and theres always one bigger to be bought/built.

To be honest, all of this stuff sounds like pot talk to begin with haha. String theory, using a telescope to view the beginning of time, etc.

in the end size envy is good for the scientific community and people of the world, so I guess it is better than having nuclear weapons envy

[Furtherman]

For another mind blower, check out Decoding the Universe: How the New Science of Information Is Explaining Everything in the Cosmos, from Our Brains to Black Holes. (http://www.amazon.com/Decoding-Universe-Information-Explaining-Everything/dp/sitb-next/067003441X)

http://images.barnesandnoble.com/images/10830000/10836283.jpg

We're all just bits of information!