Forum Settings
       
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

A matter of PhysicsFollow

#27 Jun 15 2007 at 2:33 AM Rating: Decent
Debalic wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:
Maybe tomorrow you can watch Disney's Pochantus and speculate on the history of indigenous peoples in North America. That'd be sweet.

Sure, why not? Or, we could watch Braveheart and speculate on the Scottish uprising against the Brits.


Or watch 300 and speculate on the heterosexual practices of Ancient Greece.

Or watch The Patriot and speculate...

Or watch Pearl Harbour and...

Or watch Marie-Antoinette...

Or watch...

Or...

Anyway, Holywood isn't that big on historical movies, is it?

____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#28 Jun 15 2007 at 6:20 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
I'm just wondering what this has to do with the Science channel.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#29 Jun 15 2007 at 10:30 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

I'm just wondering what this has to do with the Science channel.


It has to do with the "Science Channel" programing being largely oversimplified poorly edited **** thrown together to provide some way to pass the time for Star Trek fans when they're not cyboring in Klingon.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#30 Jun 15 2007 at 10:38 AM Rating: Decent
Smasharoo wrote:

I'm just wondering what this has to do with the Science channel.


It has to do with the "Science Channel" programing being largely oversimplified poorly edited sh*t thrown together to provide some way to pass the time for Star Trek fans when they're not cyboring in Klingon.



Klingon is to hard to pronou...uh, I mean, fucking nerds.
#31 Jun 15 2007 at 2:02 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Ugh. I never could stand Star Trek. Except for a few of the first batch of movies, and the glorious cheesiness of the original series.

Edited, Jun 16th 2007 3:31am by Debalic
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#32 Jun 16 2007 at 12:59 AM Rating: Default
A theory, black holes disperse when 2 black wholes collide, forming an explosion of sorts creating a new universe?
#33 Jun 16 2007 at 1:01 AM Rating: Default
Kaelesh wrote:
[quote=The One and Only Katie]Cody to STFU.


I didn't see you add anything to this thread, ****.

I'm of the belief that OOT'ers add nothing but wasted space in any thread, so stfu cnut. Oh and "****"? Seriously, sooooo last year. I prefer kumquat.
#34 Jun 16 2007 at 9:43 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Katie wrote:
Codyy wrote:
So, you know how the closer an object moves to the speed of light, the slower time passes for it?

Black holes have a gravitational pull so strong that they capture even light, which is known as the fastest moving thing in the universe. So, is it possible that when a black hole sucks something in, it is forced to accelerate, faster and faster, then to the object it may have only been in the black hole for 2 hours going like 50% the speed of light, but to the rest of the slow moving universe (us) it would have been about 2 million years? So when we throw something into a black hole, maybe it will reappear in 2 million, or in other words travel into the future?

That was my random theory of the day...

Cody to STFU.

And you're being quite productive, aintcha?
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#35 Jun 16 2007 at 11:52 AM Rating: Good
****
6,730 posts
The One and Only Katie wrote:
A theory, black holes disperse when 2 black wholes collide, forming an explosion of sorts creating a new universe?


Seriously people, you are like a bunch of teenagers asking the big questions about dog and the universe and acting as if no one else asked these same questions themselves, trained someone elses. I only read the science magazines causualy and yet... ah fUck it. Here's the answer to your question Katie:

Colliding Black Holes

Two Supermassive Black Holes Spiraling Toward Collision
#36 Jun 16 2007 at 3:30 PM Rating: Default
The One and Only Katie wrote:
Kaelesh wrote:
The One and Only Katie wrote:
Cody to STFU.


I didn't see you add anything to this thread, ****.


I'm of the belief that OOT'ers add nothing but wasted space in any thread, so stfu cnut. Oh and "****"? Seriously, sooooo last year. I prefer kumquat.
And you're not adding wasted space to this thread?

Here's some barbed wire - go ream yourself with it.
#37 Jun 17 2007 at 8:48 AM Rating: Good
Imaginary Friend
*****
16,112 posts
Quote:
there is a correlation to the beginning of our universe - the Big Bang - and the phenomenon that occurs in this universe, that of the black hole. The Big Bang is the theory that our universe was begat of a singularity - an infinitely small, infinitely dense point that exploded into all the matter that currently exists.


Time is just an other dimension. So the idea of there being a "real" begining and end of existence as we know it would be a skewed falsehood in truth.
This is is you don't recognize the distinction betwixt "existence" and the "universe". When you are focused from within the Time dimension however, you may measure all you want about the processes that comprise your particular pocket of space/time.

So to say that our universe WAS begat on a singularity is a bit "off" for me. I would say that is IS begat on a singularity; and yet even that is skewed because it still intones particulate time. A point that is "infinately small" as you say... That would probabably be the level where the rules of Time/Space are not applicable... you get into raw data that is seperate from the rules of the physical universe.. because they are that "small". The notion of the point "exploded into all the matter that currently exists" would simply mean the application of Order (Space/Time) that is to say; The SINGULARITY is the Source of ALL Matter in the Universe as it kind of "explodes" out into these dimensions and essentially through ideas like Space and Time provides the building block for the Order and Patterns that make up the universe as we know it. The singularity is still there. Is is like the filament of a light bulb. It emits order and the pattern that organizes this "data" into the reality and all points of time and space that we exist in.. things made of things made of things... but once you break it down ultimatly.. the singularity is there in a constant state of creation.

The notions of things disappearing in one "place" and reappearing in another "place" is just indicative of that Singularity acting as a HUB through space/time and that energy patterns(matter) can be manipulated to the same "vibes" as certain portals into space/time that would take you down further levels into the lesser formed orginization patterns of existance and allow you to traverse space/time...
It's like tunnels leading into tunnels into tunnels as Space/Time as WE know it is so warped there that it will pass you through the common dimension.
Quote:

Essentially, the matter collected into a black hole is spit out into a new universe, a pocket universe that may be a step lower on the hierarchy of our own. This leads to the conclusion that our own universe was spawned from another universe 'above' ours, and that our universe subsequently spits out others.


I would include any kind of substantial pattern that is yet seperate from that of our own universe; an other universe... However my idea is that Our physical universe is One particular "state" of Energy... thus when something is Created that matches our own state within the Laws of Physics.... it would be our Same Universe.
The matter that is collected into a black hole is sometimes viewed as DATA. Be it that case that this data may still contain some Information about it's origins and source or make some kind of contribution towards what it's "usage" would be on the "Other Side" of the Black Hole (hub) then you could relly say that no Information is ever lost but merely goies on to participate in further acts of Creation in other Levels of Existance.. be it another part of our own universe or in another Plane of Existance alltogether.


Edited, Jun 17th 2007 12:48pm by Kelvyquayo
____________________________
With the receiver in my hand..
#38 Jun 17 2007 at 8:59 AM Rating: Decent
****
8,619 posts
I just Knew that Kelvy's answer was going to be worth a read Smiley: grin, it also confused the sh*t out of me but it was worth it.
#39 Jun 17 2007 at 3:24 PM Rating: Good
Imaginary Friend
*****
16,112 posts
I am here to serve.
____________________________
With the receiver in my hand..
#40 Jun 17 2007 at 3:34 PM Rating: Default
the theory of black holes "dissapating" is hotly debated. there is still the conversion of mass, and where it goes to deal with. and the gravitational field created by all that condensed matter to boot. if that matter "dissapated", or floated free of the black hole, ot would rapidly expand being it is no longer subjected to the massive forces that condensed it in the first place.

one of the more accepted theorys is that all the matter in the universe was at one point condensed by a massive black hole, then, at some point, the mass became critical by fusion, the same force that powers a star, and it all exploded spreading matter in all directions.

the expanding universe theory.

this theory also says at some time, the energy causing the universe to expand will eventually become less than gravitational forces again, and then everything will eventually start collapsing in on itself into the mother of all black holes starting the process all over again.

the science behind this theory is sound with just two points of contintion. the universe should be expansing at a faster rate because there is not enough mass to form enough gravity to slow it. thus the introduction of "dark matter" to explain away that problem.

the second, and most important issue is......what caused all that condensed matter imploding in on itself to explode outward? fusion is a theory, but it doesnt hold being a dark hole will swallow starts without belching as well as planets.

God mabe?
#41 Jun 17 2007 at 3:40 PM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Kelvyquayo wrote:
I am here to serve.
OMG is a singularity. Smiley: eek

____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#42 Jun 17 2007 at 5:47 PM Rating: Good
**
474 posts
One of the wonkiest (technical term) problems that arises with black holes is the idea that "data" is lost from objects entering the hole. This kind of goes contrary to that whole conservation of mass/energy deal.

Kelvy's theory that the information just passes on to a different plane of existence.. is one I hadn't heard before. And honestly sounds right to my intuition - given that the laws of thermodynamics are absolute (an assumption), then that mass/energy entering the hole can't be destroyed. It has to go somewhere.

Well, I'm an engineer, so that's officially over my quota for theoretical speculation for the year.
#43 Jun 17 2007 at 8:31 PM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
Kelvyquayo wrote:
My opinions.

Less philosophy and more science please.

To respond to the original question, the idea of black holes engender other universes as depicted in cartoons and movies is highly unlikely, however if the word universe is appropriately redefined for a specific contextual usage it is possible.

But black holes are not mystic phenomenon. They function within the same rules as all other physical phenomenon, it is just that we have yet to accurately describe how all the force we've witness act.
#44 Jun 18 2007 at 12:51 AM Rating: Decent
Allegory wrote:
Kelvyquayo wrote:
My opinions.

Less philosophy and more science please.


When it comes to the Universe, Kelv's opinions are science.

Fact.

____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#45 Jun 18 2007 at 1:58 AM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
Monsieur RedPhoenixxx wrote:
When it comes to the Universe, Kelv's opinions are science.

Fact.

Sorry I am not a transcendental idealist.

Edit: Cause I'm good at quoting.

Edited, Jun 18th 2007 5:00am by Allegory
#46 Jun 18 2007 at 3:00 AM Rating: Decent
Allegory wrote:
Sorry I am not a transcendental idealist.


Well then you're obviously in the wrong place.

Here, it's transcendental idealist or bust, Mister.

____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#47 Jun 18 2007 at 7:31 AM Rating: Decent
*
174 posts
I am in the same boat as you. No education to speak of, but I've read up about basic physics and some other stuff on my own time, since I was 13 actually, 19 now. It really is a privilege that we have access to this kind of modern research. Our generation does not just ponder stuff... We feck with it too. ^^

At any rate, for along time we thought that nothing can escape a black hole. However, Dr. Hawking discovered Hawking Radiation. Which is emitted from black holes.

Actually, it is both emitted from the black hole, and sucked into the black hole. Even stranger, both parts respond to interaction regardless of which part was exposed to it. In theory, this would let us see whats on the other side, but not without extreme difficulty.

I've not read too much on "White holes" Though they sound very interesting. I've thought perhaps Black holes might link to another part of this universe... But a brand new one... Hmmmm, There are many other theories that suggest limitless universes... Maybe several of those theories are true... Thats mind-boggling.

Another amazing concept is "Dark Matter" and "Dark Energy".

The thought that the absence of matter exerts force makes me think "The Big Bang" theory could actually be how things here got started. If not something even stranger... That reminds me of an amusing quote:

"There is a theory which states that if ever for any reason anyone discovers what exactly the Universe is for and why it is here it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another that states that this has already happened."

Anyway, I best keep this short. But if you do have an interest in this kinda stuff, you should get a subscription to discover mag, or even just check out their site, all the articles are there for free. :) http://discovermagazine.com

P.S.

Was reading some comments before I posted, and I don't wanna start another ramble but... To briefly respond to a few things I saw...

Jophiel wrote:
no object can leave a local area of space containing a singularity.
As far as I know, Hawking radiation is the only thing that can escape a black hole. It contains an imprint of everything that went into the hole, but you would need 100% of the "Out-falling" radiation to decode the information

Quote:
I was looking for a nice wallpaper.

Try This, I'm gonna upload another 200 or so good ones when I get around to it. Mostly Hi-Res all hand picked. Also a couple tile pics for use as table backgrounds. ;)

Codyy wrote:
So, you know how the closer an object moves to the speed of light, the slower time passes for it?

Speed of light: 186,000 miles per second.(Rounded down) A theory says that at that speed matter would cease to exist. We have moved particles in labs to within 1 mph of that speed and mapped all kinds of reactions. The part about time slowing down is proven.

AngstyCoder wrote:
What made that stuff? ;)

Until recently, we have had to assume there were forces at work we were not yet aware of, we still assume this. However, recently, we discovered that "Nothing" or the absence of something, does indeed have weight, and does indeed have force. 1 pound of nothing would be a cube with sides measuring 250,000 square miles.

Imo, maybe if all that nothing just sat around for a few billion years, enough force would pent up to cause a massive explosion...? O.o

Allegory wrote:
It has been awhile since I read the journal, but it had to do with matter spontaneously appearing and disappearing in pairs. While one particle cannot escape the gravity on the "surface" of a singularity, it's sister particle can. Which is why black holes do emit particles.

Hawking Radiation. The interesting part is those "Sister particles" remain linked no matter how far apart they are.

Ok I'll stop for real this time. Good thread though.
#48 Jun 18 2007 at 8:11 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
4,593 posts
Linux enthusiasts have been trying to reverse engineer the black hole for years. It's the ultimate gzip compression tool. Unfortunately Microsoft has a patent on compressing stuff via black hole and has contracted sony to build the first black hole compression DRM technology.
#49 Jun 18 2007 at 3:47 PM Rating: Good
Imaginary Friend
*****
16,112 posts
Allegory wrote:
Kelvyquayo wrote:
My opinions.

Less philosophy and more science please.


Never was a "show your work" kind of student.
I guess I'm just too cool for school.

____________________________
With the receiver in my hand..
#50 Jun 18 2007 at 11:56 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Kelvyquayo wrote:
Allegory wrote:
Kelvyquayo wrote:
My opinions.

Less philosophy and more science please.

Never was a "show your work" kind of student.
I guess I'm just too cool for school.

I guess if you don't have a degree in the relevant topic you aren't allowed to discuss it. I wonder how many astrophysicists we actually have here.

If it came down to that, all I can post about is dropping out of high school.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#51 Jun 19 2007 at 12:59 AM Rating: Decent
Debalic wrote:
Kelvyquayo wrote:
Allegory wrote:
Kelvyquayo wrote:
My opinions.

Less philosophy and more science please.

Never was a "show your work" kind of student.
I guess I'm just too cool for school.

I guess if you don't have a degree in the relevant topic you aren't allowed to discuss it. I wonder how many astrophysicists we actually have here.

If it came down to that, all I can post about is dropping out of high school.


I can post about rolling joints, and the merits of a flexible 4-3-3 formation when playing away from home.

____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 279 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (279)