Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Jascal
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 00:03:00 -
[151]
Originally by: Vivus Mors
Originally by: Dark Shikari Huh?
The big bang took place everywhere, because space itself was created with the big bang. Space expands, NOT MATTER! The Big Bang was not an explosion, this is a common misperception.
There was no place where the big bang took place--it took place EVERYWHERE. Where you are sitting right now--it took place there. It took place where I'm sitting. It took place 13 billion light years away, too.
No matter where you are in the universe, you will see everything moving away from you. Its like if you're in a loaf of bread with chocolate chips in it--the whole loaf of bread expands, and all the other chips appear to be moving away from the perspective of any particular chip.
Not only do you have no idea what you're talking about, but you're claiming evidence that doesn't exist. We have known since the days of Hubble (nearly a century ago!) that we are not the center of the universe, nor does the universe have a centerpoint.
LMAO!!! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!
Thank you, that was hilarious, unless you were serious, then it was very very incorrect.
How about this, you say my evidence doesnÆt exist???
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Cambridge Cosmology
Berkley Cosmology
Now, I wish that people would read what I have been saying carefully, but I know that will never happen:
Originally by: Dark Shikari We have known since the days of Hubble (nearly a century ago!) that we are not the center of the universe, nor does the universe have a centerpoint.
I never claimed we are at the center, and in fact, we are quite likely quite far from it. Second, the ôcentral point of expansionö isnÆt the center of the universe, itÆs the center of where all that matter is expanding outward away from. Please do look at Cambridge, Berkley, or NASAÆs links there, unless of course some of the foremost bodies on the study of space arenÆt ôgood enoughö, but if you would be so kind as to furnish several hundred of your own Doctorates and Masters degrees on the subject of Astronomy to show that you are of individual authority to trump their ôargumentö, then I suggest you take heed of their work.
Originally by: Dark Shikari Not only do you have no idea what you're talking about
ItÆs very interesting you suggest that, when youÆre the one furnishing absolutely no evidence of any kind to support yourself, where as Cambridge, Berkley, and NASA have the utmost support of my side. Further more, youÆre claiming ôspontaneous creationö, a theory that is approximately 150-200 years old, .......
Dark is right, there is no meaning to the idea you misinterpret that the big bang took place at a specific location. You are assuming a space-time existance before space-time existed. Read your references more carefully, you should see that you are adding information that the authors themselves did not state.
Another point that is interesting is that the density of a galactic core black hole averages to be about that of sea water. Quite an eye opener when I calculated that in astrophysics. Notice I did not say the density of the singularity. Density is asymptotic at the singularity and the common baselines we use for measurement just dont work. That is why they say 'the physics' beyond the event horizon is unknown in any detail other than mass, charge and angular momentum.
Incidentally, it is the good fortune for all of us that most black holes will have both spin and charge, for those are the conditions necessary to create the double event horizon, and open the doors to such phenomena as worm holes. Hello warp drive. Well, someday, maybe. Hawking and Thorne have a time travel bet going, and I don't think either has paid the other the $1.
|
Jascal
RONA Deepspace
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 00:03:00 -
[152]
Originally by: Vivus Mors
Originally by: Dark Shikari Huh?
The big bang took place everywhere, because space itself was created with the big bang. Space expands, NOT MATTER! The Big Bang was not an explosion, this is a common misperception.
There was no place where the big bang took place--it took place EVERYWHERE. Where you are sitting right now--it took place there. It took place where I'm sitting. It took place 13 billion light years away, too.
No matter where you are in the universe, you will see everything moving away from you. Its like if you're in a loaf of bread with chocolate chips in it--the whole loaf of bread expands, and all the other chips appear to be moving away from the perspective of any particular chip.
Not only do you have no idea what you're talking about, but you're claiming evidence that doesn't exist. We have known since the days of Hubble (nearly a century ago!) that we are not the center of the universe, nor does the universe have a centerpoint.
LMAO!!! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!
Thank you, that was hilarious, unless you were serious, then it was very very incorrect.
How about this, you say my evidence doesnÆt exist???
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Cambridge Cosmology
Berkley Cosmology
Now, I wish that people would read what I have been saying carefully, but I know that will never happen:
Originally by: Dark Shikari We have known since the days of Hubble (nearly a century ago!) that we are not the center of the universe, nor does the universe have a centerpoint.
I never claimed we are at the center, and in fact, we are quite likely quite far from it. Second, the ôcentral point of expansionö isnÆt the center of the universe, itÆs the center of where all that matter is expanding outward away from. Please do look at Cambridge, Berkley, or NASAÆs links there, unless of course some of the foremost bodies on the study of space arenÆt ôgood enoughö, but if you would be so kind as to furnish several hundred of your own Doctorates and Masters degrees on the subject of Astronomy to show that you are of individual authority to trump their ôargumentö, then I suggest you take heed of their work.
Originally by: Dark Shikari Not only do you have no idea what you're talking about
ItÆs very interesting you suggest that, when youÆre the one furnishing absolutely no evidence of any kind to support yourself, where as Cambridge, Berkley, and NASA have the utmost support of my side. Further more, youÆre claiming ôspontaneous creationö, a theory that is approximately 150-200 years old, .......
Dark is right, there is no meaning to the idea you misinterpret that the big bang took place at a specific location. You are assuming a space-time existance before space-time existed. Read your references more carefully, you should see that you are adding information that the authors themselves did not state.
Another point that is interesting is that the density of a galactic core black hole averages to be about that of sea water. Quite an eye opener when I calculated that in astrophysics. Notice I did not say the density of the singularity. Density is asymptotic at the singularity and the common baselines we use for measurement just dont work. That is why they say 'the physics' beyond the event horizon is unknown in any detail other than mass, charge and angular momentum.
Incidentally, it is the good fortune for all of us that most black holes will have both spin and charge, for those are the conditions necessary to create the double event horizon, and open the doors to such phenomena as worm holes. Hello warp drive. Well, someday, maybe. Hawking and Thorne have a time travel bet going, and I don't think either has paid the other the $1. -Old and in the way . . Shine up the Mod's bullet before you let them carry it in their shirt pocket :) |
Auldare
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 00:56:00 -
[153]
As far as i can gather, just prior to the big bang (i know there was no time at this point but hey it's easier to imagine) matter was in one point but as there was no space, that point was hypothetically the universe and hence everywhere.
From every point in the universe you see all other matter expanding away from you hence where you are is where the big bang originated. this means everywhere the big bang started but at the origin of the big bang all matter was within a singularity. it's hard to get your head round but the big bang originated at a focused point that had no location since there was no space to locate it within in the first place.
So in the end, the was no locatable origin of the big bang on any map as there was no map when it happened.
Now I'm no expert i just love reading up on these kinda things that make you try and get your head round and have a headache afterwards
================================================
|
Auldare
The Ninja Coalition Phobos Alliance
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 00:56:00 -
[154]
As far as i can gather, just prior to the big bang (i know there was no time at this point but hey it's easier to imagine) matter was in one point but as there was no space, that point was hypothetically the universe and hence everywhere.
From every point in the universe you see all other matter expanding away from you hence where you are is where the big bang originated. this means everywhere the big bang started but at the origin of the big bang all matter was within a singularity. it's hard to get your head round but the big bang originated at a focused point that had no location since there was no space to locate it within in the first place.
So in the end, the was no locatable origin of the big bang on any map as there was no map when it happened.
Now I'm no expert i just love reading up on these kinda things that make you try and get your head round and have a headache afterwards
================================================
|
Faid Abregas
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 15:57:00 -
[155]
Edited by: Faid Abregas on 07/08/2006 15:57:41 OK I have just read this thread and missed out several pages, but here goes:
1) Time is not a dimension - it is something that stops everything happening at once
2) Black holes are not 'wormholes' or rips in the fabric of space/time (theories which theoretical physicists come up with to get more funding rather than get a real job hehe), they are just super dense 'stars' that have such dense gravitational fields that nothing we know of can escape their gravity 'well'
3) No-one has been near a blackhole so they can't say otherwise - all they see is referred data/events which correspond to (2) above
4) If a wormhole exists at all, we have no way of reaching it with our current technology, and if we did (and we went 'through' it) we have no technology to report back that we were successful - say we ended up across the universe... light/radiowaves from stars that far away travel at lightspeed so we may not find out in our generation that our trip was productive
5) How could we use blackholes as 'wormholes' as all matter would be converted to neutronium or worse on traversing the event horizon?
6) When we approach the speed of light, according to Einsteins theory of relativity we would approach infinite mass and therefore become a blackhole of our own - who knows, all observable blackholes could be other spacefaring races attempting to break the lightspeed barrier and inadvertendly eradicated their own race from the universe!
Discuss :))
|
Avon
Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 16:07:00 -
[156]
Originally by: Faid Abregas
1) Time is not a dimension - it is something that stops everything happening at once
Ironic. You wait a year to tell us this?
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
|
Faid Abregas
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 16:09:00 -
[157]
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: Faid Abregas
1) Time is not a dimension - it is something that stops everything happening at once
Ironic. You wait a year to tell us this?
Nah, i wait a year to read the forums
|
Avon
Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 16:10:00 -
[158]
Originally by: Faid Abregas
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: Faid Abregas
1) Time is not a dimension - it is something that stops everything happening at once
Ironic. You wait a year to tell us this?
Nah, i wait a year to read the forums
Well, read the old post quietly - let them rest in peace. They don't like being dragged back to life.
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
|
Sha'blach
Amarr Peregrinus Amarria
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 19:17:00 -
[159]
alright, I didnt read past the 3rd page, but I'm friggen amazed that nobody has mentioned the C (speed of light) is not a constant either :p
Astrophysics 4tw!!! ------------ Peregrinus Amarria
|
Bombasy
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.08.08 04:54:00 -
[160]
Edited by: Bombasy on 08/08/2006 04:54:43 omg thread necro ftl!
|
|
Eilie
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.08.08 06:23:00 -
[161]
Edited by: Eilie on 08/08/2006 06:24:33
Originally by: Bombasy Edited by: Bombasy on 08/08/2006 04:54:43 omg thread necro ftl!
lol... I just read the whole thing without realizing it was a nerco thread... but it was interesting!
Are those guys still around? I want to see them debate some more!
|
Markisa Dakk
|
Posted - 2006.08.08 13:58:00 -
[162]
Originally by: Krapz
I'm still hoping for the day that 1 of my Eve isk equaled 1 standard isk.
Oohh, yeah, early retirement for us real life ISK users...
:-)
|
Kin Hanyerec
Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.08.08 14:37:00 -
[163]
Originally by: Sha'blach alright, I didnt read past the 3rd page, but I'm friggen amazed that nobody has mentioned the C (speed of light) is not a constant either :p
Astrophysics 4tw!!!
the speed depends of the matter the light goes through. I've read sometime ago that some material can make the light go faster than in the void.
|
News
Minmatar Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2006.08.08 15:30:00 -
[164]
I saw DJ posts and I was getting all excited about him posting again. Necro ftl :(
|
vanBuskirk
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.08.08 15:42:00 -
[165]
Vivus and Shikari, on the subject of black, brown and white dwarfs:
A black dwarf is a white dwarf so old that it has cooled down to a temperature at which it no longer shines. There may be none of them yet, because that much mas with such a small area cools down very slowly.
A brown dwarf is an object rather bigger than Jupiter, maybe ten times, that shines very faintly because of the heat generated during its gravitional collapse. In fact Jupiter itself is at the extreme bottom end of this scale - it emits about three times as much heat as it receives from the Sun.
A white dwarf is the remnant of a star that simply ran out of fuel, but was not massive enough to blow up in a supernova. No fusion occurs in white dwarfs - they shine simply from residual heat.
And to complete the list, red dwarfs are simply very small, cool stars. Fusion occurs in them - very slowly.
Does this clear things up?
---------------------------------------------- "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." ---------------------------------------------- |
Humble Voh
|
Posted - 2006.08.08 16:15:00 -
[166]
I don't know lots about it, but I thought there was a big difference between Einstein's relativity and the English word 'relative'. As far as I know, nothing in Einstein's theories precluded a physical centre to the universe.
|
Skva
Caldari Infinitus Odium
|
Posted - 2006.08.08 19:20:00 -
[167]
To quote Victor Meldrew, I don't believe it.
I've just read every god damn post in this thread and about 2 pages back, had a feeling of de ja vu. Carried on reading it, and didn't notice the date until Avon pointed it out.
I should really read the dates on threads before I commit to reading several pages of the stuff, I already read this last year. :/ Your signature is too large! Please resize it according to the forum guidelines. Jacques Archambault |
Bombasy
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.08.08 20:02:00 -
[168]
Originally by: Eilie Edited by: Eilie on 08/08/2006 06:24:33
Originally by: Bombasy Edited by: Bombasy on 08/08/2006 04:54:43 omg thread necro ftl!
lol... I just read the whole thing without realizing it was a nerco thread... but it was interesting!
Are those guys still around? I want to see them debate some more!
I think some are, I just thought that one year would've been enough that people would actually visit the links Vivus posted and noticed that it contradicts what he says they prove. I found it hilarious.
|
Terror DeBiaN
Lucid Space Discoveries
|
Posted - 2006.08.09 19:55:00 -
[169]
God created it all in 6 days + 1 day of rest!
^ | See it all makes sense!
Terror
--- CEO - Lucid Space Discoveries -LSD- |
Samiloth Justinian
Caldari Black Bag Ops
|
Posted - 2006.08.09 22:48:00 -
[170]
Hahaha, what a great thread :) Until now, I thought Deklein was the best source for forum entertainment and Eve-o drama. Reading this made my day, and it was actually quite interesting since I know little about the whole thing.
|
|
Albert Einstiein
Miners And Designers
|
Posted - 2007.06.02 15:43:00 -
[171]
Came across this thread, After reading all the above statements, Vivus is close to the mark, but no one has calculated that light speed is purely a measurement through our own universe and changes according to what medium it travels through. Also different colour light travels at different speeds.
Also the problem with calculating 'The centre of the big bang' is that all those objects which supposedly originate from this point will have a mass and would have effected the trajectory of all objects within their own gravitational pull.
Sorry to throw a spanner in the works, but this is why its still a theory and not a proven fact.
|
Hoshi
Blackguard Brigade Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.02 16:07:00 -
[172]
Holy necromancer... ---------------------------------------- A Guide to Scan Probing in Revelations |
Jarna
Amarr Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2007.06.02 16:14:00 -
[173]
Each color of light travels at different speeds when put through different mediums. In a vaccuum, the difference in speed is minute. Hence why there is a single constant speed for white light. Once you start pushing the light through mediums and messing with it's frequencies, then it changes, but even then, once again, the changes are minute between the colors.
|
Korizan
Oort Cloud Industries
|
Posted - 2007.06.02 16:27:00 -
[174]
Edited by: Korizan on 02/06/2007 16:29:33 Edited by: Korizan on 02/06/2007 16:28:47 Edited by: Korizan on 02/06/2007 16:27:17
Originally by: Albert Einstiein Came across this thread, After reading all the above statements, Vivus is close to the mark, but no one has calculated that light speed is purely a measurement through our own universe and changes according to what medium it travels through. Also different colour light travels at different speeds.
Also the problem with calculating 'The centre of the big bang' is that all those objects which supposedly originate from this point will have a mass and would have effected the trajectory of all objects within their own gravitational pull.
Sorry to throw a spanner in the works, but this is why its still a theory and not a proven fact.
Actually Yes and No The basic principle is that a wave has a baseline speed called the speed of light. In theory all waves can go no faster then that constant. However waves will go slower depending on the medium there are passing through. But that does not mean the frequency of the wave has changed. Frequency = 1/t or the time it takes one wave to complete a cycle. 1 hz is 1 cycle per second Now a waves frequency can be blocked or channeled or even changed depending on outside influences. However your relative speed to that of the light can also lead to perceived frequency shift. The Red and Blue shift is the most commonly talked of shifts. The reality is that the frequency was not changed but do to the speed variation you do not receive the true frequency.
This basic principle is how the theory of the faster you go to the speed of light the slower time passes.
Well this is VERY incomplete and it is a very hard subject to explain in a paragraph. And I am sure you all don't want to read a paper on it.
|
Nullity
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.06.02 17:26:00 -
[175]
Is this thread being resurrected once per year now?
|
Max Hardcase
Art of War Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.06.02 17:31:00 -
[176]
Originally by: Albert Einstiein Came across this thread, After reading all the above statements, Vivus is close to the mark, but no one has calculated that light speed is purely a measurement through our own universe and changes according to what medium it travels through. Also different colour light travels at different speeds.
Also the problem with calculating 'The centre of the big bang' is that all those objects which supposedly originate from this point will have a mass and would have effected the trajectory of all objects within their own gravitational pull.
Sorry to throw a spanner in the works, but this is why its still a theory and not a proven fact.
A Fact is a piece of data. Scientific Theories are frameworks that tie the facts together in a predictable manner.
If you are discussing Science then Theories are not equal to hunches ( which is how the word is used in non-scientist talk ).
So that last statement of yours is a load of malarkey.
I do apologise for the ongoing attempts at thread Necromancy though, but I loathe inaccurate statements.
|
Quetzalcoatle
Silver Snake Enterprise Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.06.02 19:13:00 -
[177]
Originally by: Jarna In a vaccuum, the difference in speed is minute.
In the spirit of the big argument between Vivus, DS and Baun: 'minute' doesn't equel 'non-existing'
|
Jaabaa
Minmatar Dental Drilling Corporation
|
Posted - 2007.06.02 20:50:00 -
[178]
Originally by: Albert Einstiein Also different colour light travels at different speeds.
Originally by: Jarna In a vaccuum, the difference in speed is minute.
AFAIK all electromagnetic radiation (from gamma rays up through the visible light spectrum and into long wave) propagates at exactly the same speed, 299 792 458 m/s, also better known as the speed of light. -- Jaabaa - CEO - Dental Drilling Corporation |
lofty29
Infinitus Odium
|
Posted - 2007.06.02 21:07:00 -
[179]
Originally by: slapp warp bubble bends the space, making the "route" shorter
No, it compresses the space infront and spits it out the back, making, in effect, a big vaccum infront of the ship (a SUPER vaccum! ) which sucks it along at godly speeds. --- My sig has gone into exile
This poster likes to tempt forum mods and has been voted most likely to get killed by an angry alligator - Ductoris |
Cortana Autumn
|
Posted - 2007.06.03 00:37:00 -
[180]
From my own logic since as we all know energy cannot be created or destroyed (and thus mass since...) as it simply moves between different forms;
At the big bang there was a set amount of mass/energy and as such the universe as a finite supply of energy/mass (spread between the 4% we can detect, the 22% of which is dark matter and the 74% of which is dark energy (which is very rough of course)).
Thus the big bang happened "everywhere" as at the point of the big bang all energy was at this point and since then it has changed to different states etc. Effectivly I was at the big bang (even my eve character) since my energy was originally at this point in one form or another.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |