On March 28 2014 06:30 vasoline73 wrote:
I don't understand how this would make religious people upset? lol
Imagine you have this super obese woman, and she and a bunch of other really obese women joined up, so they decide to make a club or some shit!
Maybe something like *Being Fat is a Choice, go us Yay*, spreading to the world the benefits of being fat, then their circle of obesity, surely, but slowly increase (there's a lol here), they get a club house, start doing fat ppl games, and really going at it!!
Then suddenly, during one of their speeches, a gentleman appears, a doctor (worried man), steps up, takes the microphone, and lays down the law, on what is really happening in their body, and what it does to them!!
Of course they should react!! At least, hopefully, some of them will wake up, and start taking care of themselves, instead of giving in to this overweight-sheep, herd mentality!
On March 28 2014 06:30 vasoline73 wrote:
I don't understand how this would make religious people upset? lol
Imagine you have this super obese woman, and she and a bunch of other really obese women joined up, so they decide to make a club or some shit!
Maybe something like *Being Fat is a Choice, go us Yay*, spreading to the world the benefits of being fat, then their circle of obesity, surely, but slowly increase (there's a lol here), they get a club house, start doing fat ppl games, and really going at it!!
Then suddenly, during one of their speeches, a gentleman appears, a doctor (worried man), steps up, takes the microphone, and lays down the law, on what is really happening in their body, and what it does to them!!
Of course they should react!! At least, hopefully, some of them will wake up, and start taking care of themselves, instead of giving in to this overweight-sheep, herd mentality!
I mean, for all you know
lol. Seriously like... you can believe in the concept of "nothing" existing (something no one can fathom and that no science will probably ever exist to explain or observe it as there is no "nothing" in our universe) outside of the universe which we now clearly know has borders but can't see your concept of nothing is something? I MSPainted that image because it was lol worthy but to act like you know is just funny to me. No one knows. Obviously people who believe the Earth is 4000 years old are pissed but for generally spiritual people...?
Last edit: 29/03/2014 04:11
1
asdf2000 United States. Mar 29 2014 15:43. Posts 7693
On March 28 2014 06:30 vasoline73 wrote:
I don't understand how this would make religious people upset? lol
Imagine you have this super obese woman, and she and a bunch of other really obese women joined up, so they decide to make a club or some shit!
Maybe something like *Being Fat is a Choice, go us Yay*, spreading to the world the benefits of being fat, then their circle of obesity, surely, but slowly increase (there's a lol here), they get a club house, start doing fat ppl games, and really going at it!!
Then suddenly, during one of their speeches, a gentleman appears, a doctor (worried man), steps up, takes the microphone, and lays down the law, on what is really happening in their body, and what it does to them!!
Of course they should react!! At least, hopefully, some of them will wake up, and start taking care of themselves, instead of giving in to this overweight-sheep, herd mentality!
I mean, for all you know
lol. Seriously like... you can believe in the concept of "nothing" existing (something no one can fathom and that no science will probably ever exist to explain or observe it as there is no "nothing" in our universe) outside of the universe which we now clearly know has borders but can't see your concept of nothing is something? I MSPainted that image because it was lol worthy but to act like you know is just funny to me. No one knows. Obviously people who believe the Earth is 4000 years old are pissed but for generally spiritual people...?
well said, nice pic lol
Grindin so hard, Im smashin pussies left and right.
I think you got it all wrong lol, im saying I have no idea, but when we discover things, that are as accurate as we human can make something, I'd rather go with that idea. Than a random thought, with no evidence, no proof, and that's damaging to society, dulls critical thinking, and I could go on and on.
You could take that picture,and you could photo shop 3 trillion other images, and go with that, if you want to, we can be quite creative. It's just not "waterproof" it holds no weight, and it should be ridiculed and discarded quickly.
It should not be taken up by some random fool with power he shouldn't have, put into school, and taught to kids as fact, and how things work.
I'm well aware that most things, we don't know, and that's where I get most of my rush, trying to figure out, and learn things I have no idea about, I know it's endless, and whenever you aquire a lot of new knowledge, it just makes you aware of all the things you don't know about the subject you just put your toe in!!
You were probably trolling anyway, but I often fall for those lol
1
vasoline73 United States. Mar 30 2014 02:17. Posts 808
Not trolling and I agree doctrines shouldn't be stopping knowledge from getting to people (schools that don't teach evolution, safe sex, etc. all lol worthy and should be spited)
I just think that being aware that there is nothing outside of the universe somewhere should have people asking "what's nothing?" You're right that 3 trillion other things could fit in that image but humanity will never know what it or its it is. We're never leaving the universe or going to be able to observe outside of it.
Last edit: 30/03/2014 02:17
1
vasoline73 United States. Mar 30 2014 05:08. Posts 808
There's no evidence or direct proof of nothing outside of the universe (edit: and there never will be) but you believe in it's existence, is all I'm saying.
At some point in that debate, Dawkins talks about "nothing" and those things you are mentioning here.
1
vasoline73 United States. Mar 30 2014 22:12. Posts 808
Thank you for video link, I will try to find the relevant section The multiverse theory is fine and we may prove it but there's still the question of "what started the multiverse/is there something outside the multiverse/etc." Again, not really trying to be outlandish, but there is definitely data that we will be unable to retrieve at some point.
If we're surrounded on all sides by a "wall" thick of 100 universes, how do we ever hope to see the multiverse edge? If the multiverse is infinite, why does it follow a different pattern/have different properties/ than the finite universes inside of it? If it's finite, is it surrounded by more multiverses and is there an edge to this "omniverse" of multiverses (whatever you would like to call it) and then the questions continue on.
There's a limit to observation (imo) and unless humanity is around another million years and technology continues to grow exponentially (both unlikely), I doubt we will ever be able to tackle "impossible" questions like this.
Last edit: 30/03/2014 23:13
1
vasoline73 United States. Mar 30 2014 22:26. Posts 808
On March 30 2014 04:08 vasoline73 wrote:
There's no evidence or direct proof of nothing outside of the universe (edit: and there never will be) but you believe in it's existence, is all I'm saying.
From what i read, some scientists are trying right now to prove the multiverse may exist. They believe acceleration of our universe is caused due to a gravitational pull from another universe. Seens like it will take 100 years to find evidence to prove their calculation are accurate.
You may be right but saying stuff like "and there never will be" its usually a very dumb statement.
Wouldn't being surrounded by a multiverse likely compress our universe? Gravity of all the other universes around us pushing in? Or is the multiverse expanding as well and why? Is there only one other universe or...?
Last edit: 30/03/2014 22:26
1
vasoline73 United States. Mar 30 2014 22:30. Posts 808
Watching the Dawkins answer to the nothing question... from wikipedia...
"In physics, the word nothing is not used in any technical sense. A region of space is called a vacuum if it does not contain any matter, though it can contain physical fields. In fact, it is practically impossible to construct a region of space that contains no matter or fields, since gravity cannot be blocked and all objects at a non-zero temperature radiate electromagnetically. However, even if such a region existed, it could still not be referred to as "nothing", since it has properties and a measurable existence as part of the quantum-mechanical vacuum. Where there is supposedly empty space there are constant quantum fluctuations with virtual particles continually popping into and out of existence. It had long been theorized that space is distinct from a void of nothingness in that space consists of some kind of aether, with luminiferous aether postulated as the transmission medium for propagating light waves (whose existence has been disproven in the now famous Michelson-Morley experiment)."
If there is a "nothing" it has not been observed and never will be...
The fancy hyperboles are good at catching laymen's attention, but do not forget:
1.) We have no evidence of a big bang. We have, however, been very keen to attribute our observations to the theory of one. Science has, for a long time, worked a little bit awkwardly in regards of this, and instead of analyzing test results and drawing conclusions from the work, we have set our minds into a state where we have already reached a conclusion, and are hell-bent on getting our observations match it.
2.) The 'infinitely expanding universe' is still mostly based upon red shift of light. Now coupled with the previous hard-coded dogma of current sciences, it is given as a proof of a big bang which exploded the universe outwards into infinity.
These two examples are the staples of today's cosmology, but they are a form of circular reasoning where you have already decided the outcome. Interwoven together, like time (how long it takes for light to travel a certain amount of meters) to space (how much space does light travel through in a certain amount of time).
The finding itself is meaningless. Much like Higgs boson, the finding of which was alike finding a new harmonics when you already know the rules they adhere to, but could have not created an instrument to go that low -- an engineering feat, but not a scientific breakthrough.
On March 31 2014 04:40 Kusimuumi wrote:
The fancy hyperboles are good at catching laymen's attention, but do not forget:
1.) We have no evidence of a big bang. We have, however, been very keen to attribute our observations to the theory of one. Science has, for a long time, worked a little bit awkwardly in regards of this, and instead of analyzing test results and drawing conclusions from the work, we have set our minds into a state where we have already reached a conclusion, and are hell-bent on getting our observations match it.
2.) The 'infinitely expanding universe' is still mostly based upon red shift of light. Now coupled with the previous hard-coded dogma of current sciences, it is given as a proof of a big bang which exploded the universe outwards into infinity.
These two examples are the staples of today's cosmology, but they are a form of circular reasoning where you have already decided the outcome. Interwoven together, like time (how long it takes for light to travel a certain amount of meters) to space (how much space does light travel through in a certain amount of time).
The finding itself is meaningless. Much like Higgs boson, the finding of which was alike finding a new harmonics when you already know the rules they adhere to, but could have not created an instrument to go that low -- an engineering feat, but not a scientific breakthrough.
and why is it exactly that scientists are desperate of proving that a big bang happened?
The cosmic microwave background radiation was discovered accidentally by people who didn't give a fuck about the BB model theory
If you think the entire scientific community is blinded from selectively looking at the the facts that validate their misconceptions, do us both a favor and crush their stupidity with a paper that will make you famous and rich and the rest of us wiser and able to say " I knew that guy"
new shit has come to light... a-and... shit! man...
On March 30 2014 04:08 vasoline73 wrote:
There's no evidence or direct proof of nothing outside of the universe (edit: and there never will be) but you believe in it's existence, is all I'm saying.
From what i read, some scientists are trying right now to prove the multiverse may exist. They believe acceleration of our universe is caused due to a gravitational pull from another universe. Seens like it will take 100 years to find evidence to prove their calculation are accurate.
You may be right but saying stuff like "and there never will be" its usually a very dumb statement.
Wouldn't being surrounded by a multiverse likely compress our universe? Gravity of all the other universes around us pushing in? Or is the multiverse expanding as well and why? Is there only one other universe or...?
Gravity doesn't push it pulls, so obviously no compression.
IIRC, the enormous amount of energy that indirectly shows in our universe (for example it is slowing the expansion) but that we cannot find, could be the gravity of other universes leaking to ours through all 10/11 dimensions that we are said to have. The rational being that gravity is the only long-range interaction as well as being always attractive, whole universes would be heavily attractive.
On the other hand, it is not sure that gravity makes any sense outside of the universe, where there would be no space or time. Just like asking what happened "before" the big bang makes no sense since time began there.
On March 30 2014 04:08 vasoline73 wrote:
There's no evidence or direct proof of nothing outside of the universe (edit: and there never will be) but you believe in it's existence, is all I'm saying.
From what i read, some scientists are trying right now to prove the multiverse may exist. They believe acceleration of our universe is caused due to a gravitational pull from another universe. Seens like it will take 100 years to find evidence to prove their calculation are accurate.
You may be right but saying stuff like "and there never will be" its usually a very dumb statement.
Wouldn't being surrounded by a multiverse likely compress our universe? Gravity of all the other universes around us pushing in? Or is the multiverse expanding as well and why? Is there only one other universe or...?
Gravity doesn't push it pulls, so obviously no compression.
IIRC, the enormous amount of energy that indirectly shows in our universe (for example it is slowing the expansion) but that we cannot find, could be the gravity of other universes leaking to ours through all 10/11 dimensions that we are said to have. The rational being that gravity is the only long-range interaction as well as being always attractive, whole universes would be heavily attractive.
On the other hand, it is not sure that gravity makes any sense outside of the universe, where there would be no space or time. Just like asking what happened "before" the big bang makes no sense since time began there.
This will be my last statement in the thread (unless someone quotes directly and wants to continue) because I think we all realize there's no point in a derail where no one reaches any conclusion...
...but gravity is what causes massive stars to form and there is massive compression at the center of said stars, because of gravity. It may be that all the hydrogen was pulled together, but push and pull are kind of relative terms (I think?) when it comes to gravity, don't you think? Anything at the center of a mass is being compressed by additional mass it has pulled to itself; in a sense that matter is being "pushed" by gravity? Or rather, it's gravity is pulling mass towards it which in turn is "pushing into it," so "in a way" one could say gravity is causing the compression.
So yeah there's a chance we are could be expanding because of gravity of other universes, definitely. I imagine it would be more like a stretch of our space-time fabric (universe being compressed but ripped apart [seemingly expanding to us inside of it] at the same time.)
Pretty crazy stuff to think about, and to stay on OP's original post, amazing scientific discovery. Good shit.
Last edit: 31/03/2014 20:53
1
vasoline73 United States. Mar 31 2014 21:35. Posts 808
On March 31 2014 12:13 Mariuslol wrote:
SPACETIME BEGAN THERE! SPACETIME!! yeeaah
On March 30 2014 04:08 vasoline73 wrote:
There's no evidence or direct proof of nothing outside of the universe (edit: and there never will be) but you believe in it's existence, is all I'm saying.
From what i read, some scientists are trying right now to prove the multiverse may exist. They believe acceleration of our universe is caused due to a gravitational pull from another universe. Seens like it will take 100 years to find evidence to prove their calculation are accurate.
You may be right but saying stuff like "and there never will be" its usually a very dumb statement.
Wouldn't being surrounded by a multiverse likely compress our universe? Gravity of all the other universes around us pushing in? Or is the multiverse expanding as well and why? Is there only one other universe or...?
Gravity doesn't push it pulls, so obviously no compression.
IIRC, the enormous amount of energy that indirectly shows in our universe (for example it is slowing the expansion) but that we cannot find, could be the gravity of other universes leaking to ours through all 10/11 dimensions that we are said to have. The rational being that gravity is the only long-range interaction as well as being always attractive, whole universes would be heavily attractive.
On the other hand, it is not sure that gravity makes any sense outside of the universe, where there would be no space or time. Just like asking what happened "before" the big bang makes no sense since time began there.
This will be my last statement in the thread (unless someone quotes directly and wants to continue) because I think we all realize there's no point in a derail where no one reaches any conclusion...
...but gravity is what causes massive stars to form and there is massive compression at the center of said stars, because of gravity. It may be that all the hydrogen was pulled together, but push and pull are kind of relative terms (I think?) when it comes to gravity, don't you think? Anything at the center of a mass is being compressed by additional mass it has pulled to itself; in a sense that matter is being "pushed" by gravity? Or rather, it's gravity is pulling mass towards it which in turn is "pushing into it," so "in a way" one could say gravity is causing the compression.
So yeah there's a chance we are could be expanding because of gravity of other universes, definitely. I imagine it would be more like a stretch of our space-time fabric (universe being compressed but ripped apart [seemingly expanding to us inside of it] at the same time.)
Pretty crazy stuff to think about, and to stay on OP's original post, amazing scientific discovery. Good shit.
Gravity indeed is causing compression "inside" a star by pulling stuff to its center. But on the other hand, a planet nearby will be stretched by, not compressed, since stuff is pulled "outside" of the planet, towards the star. That's how I think of the gravity of a universe stretching a nearby universe, not compressing it.
I understand that I could be completely wrong since attraction between universes is kinda crazy. It's just the "pushing" term that bothers me, like gravity could be repulsive somehow (which it never is).
