13 Things That Don't Make Sense

N.P.C.

Newbie
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
120
Reaction score
0
This is a new scientist article that was published some time ago, some e of you may of seen it some of you may not of however either way it makes for very interesting reading

13 Things That Don't Make Sense

I found this fascinating especially the ones about the Pioneer missions I had no idea they had gone off course like that.
 
I feel dumb after read all that

but I ask,if the unvierse was created by the big bang,what was before the big bang?
 
<RJMC> said:
I feel dumb after read all that

but I ask,if the unvierse was created by the big bang,what was before the big bang?

The small bang.

Duh.
 
but I ask,if the unvierse was created by the big bang,what was before the big bang?

That's an excellent question, theoretically nothing would of been before this universe, bu the possibility of another universe that imploded upon itself is there, however given that our universe is expanding without any brakes I find that unlikely.
 
I've never heard 'retarded' being used as a synonym for 'awesome' before :O
 
but my biggest omfg why questiong is how big is the universe?is infinite right?
 
Nope. The thread doesn't suck. Space sucks because of all the things we can't fathom.

Yeah but that is what makes it great all the things we don't know all the millions of problems waiting for solutions, I like the idea of problem solving, I enjoy it and incorperate into my work makes it more intresting, makes life more intresting.
 
and in an infinite universe there is life out there!

space is stupid cool.
 
God I hate space so much. It actually literally pisses me off.

Well not like "I will kick you ass pissed" but like


"**** space."
 
I think the one about space being 28 billion light years wide, and 14 billion years old is the neatest.
 
...basically what i got out of all this is that we're all idiots.


I mean, what the hell do we know??
 
Very little about the universe xcellerate but the will to explore and understand drives us on to find out, its the thing common to all humans I reckon.
 
Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, so there is no way heat radiation could have travelled between the two horizons to even out the hot and cold spots created in the big bang and leave the thermal equilibrium we see now.
Expect for the fact they found particles that travel faster than the speed of light.
This article is dated.
 
actually if light started in the middle, it would take 14 billion years to get to either side.
 
I read somewhere that Dark Matter was completely undetectable by all means that we humans had, and that was how they decided it existed and assigned it properties.

That placebo effect was pretty cool.
 
RakuraiTenjin said:
God I hate space so much. It actually literally pisses me off.

Well not like "I will kick you ass pissed" but like


"**** space."
Sigged.

Truly, though, I love the fact that there is so much that we still don;t know or understand - provides hope in an uncertain future
 
Cool stuff.

But cold fusion is garbage, you students can go look up your nearest physics professor(assuming hes not a nutjob) and ask.
 
The more we observe the universe, the more we realize how primitive we are. The more I read, the more I'm beginning to believe that there may be multi-universes.
 
Fliko said:
Expect for the fact they found particles that travel faster than the speed of light.
This article is dated.

First I've heard of it. Do you have any links or information about what the exact experiment was.
 
satch919 said:
The more we observe the universe, the more we realize how primitive we are. The more I read, the more I'm beginning to believe that there may be multi-universes.

Ya..in the years to come mankind finds out they are more and more primitive than they ever though possible and in doing so, they realise how primitive their existance is...and move to another universe where the size of it is about 200 million square kilometers, and they can control everything around them...hence, making their existance more believable and therefore, not feeling so meaningless. (A reading from "The stupid existance" Written by Zen on the 7th planet of the Antari system)
 
Personally, I think we should discover the whole "bottom of the ocean" scene..but I do enjoy space.
 
Just goes to show how little about the universe and about reality we really know. It really is absolutely mind-boggling. :eek:
 
The fact that many (most? hope not!) scientists still believe in a completely malfounded theory as ridiculus as "teh omfgpwnzorz bang" makes me realize just how little we know about space.

It's like:
Scientist #1: "Hrm, wonder how teh universe started..."
#2: "Must it have started?"
#1: "Well, yes, if not then we couldn't explain it, could we?"
#2: "Right."
#1: "Wonder if it was noisy..."
#2: "Musta been. You know, expansion, vibration. There was matter involved. Musta been."
#1: "I think we'll call it "teh bang".
#2: "Nice name. I like it."
#1: "Wonder if it was big..."
and so on.

.bog.
 
9 Dark energy

IT IS one of the most famous, and most embarrassing, problems in physics. In 1998, astronomers discovered that the universe is expanding at ever faster speeds. It's an effect still searching for a cause - until then, everyone thought the universe's expansion was slowing down after the big bang. "Theorists are still floundering around, looking for a sensible explanation," says cosmologist Katherine Freese of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. "We're all hoping that upcoming observations of supernovae, of clusters of galaxies and so on will give us more clues."

One suggestion is that some property of empty space is responsible - cosmologists call it dark energy. But all attempts to pin it down have fallen woefully short. It's also possible that Einstein's theory of general relativity may need to be tweaked when applied to the very largest scales of the universe. "The field is still wide open," Freese says.

Vaccum energy? there are already some solid theories.

Its the flaws in presently accepted classical theory and classical electrodynamics that make it unexplainable because it cant be explained within those models.

All good scientist's should know if a regular phenomena cant be explained within the model their using, the model is either wrong or insufficient.

Ever since James Clerk Maxwell's broken symmetry systems where discarded by Lorentz along with active vacuum this has been the problem.

In the 1880s, several scientists - Heaviside, Gibbs, Hertz etc. - strongly assaulted the Maxwellian theory and dramatically reduced it, creating vector algebra in the process. Then circa 1892 Lorentz arbitrarily symmetrized the already seriously constrained Heaviside-Maxwell equations, just to get simpler equations easier to solve algebraically, and thus to dramatically reduce the need for numerical methods (which were a "real bear" before the computer).

But that symmetrization also arbitrarily discarded all asymmetrical Maxwellian systems - the very ones of interest to us today if we are seriously interested in usable EM energy from the vacuum.

Here's the origional equation's before they where symmetrised if anyone is interested.

http://www.jeremygaul.com/images/stories/notationofmaxwellfieldequations.pdf

Basically the theories we so dogmatically adhere to today cannot explain it because they are heavily flawed from the foundations up, which is why they are unable to successfully predict or calculate these phenomena.
 
<RJMC> said:
I feel dumb after read all that

but I ask,if the unvierse was created by the big bang,what was before the big bang?

This is something i've always asked that people who believe in the big bang have never been able to prove. Because nothing can exist before substance itself. Something had to create it... it wouldn't just be there from nothingless. Thus I believe in god.

People still can't answer me... what created the substance we now know in the universe, and if the big bang created the stuff we know... what created the big bang? And what created that? and that, and that?

Things simply cannot exist without a definite origin. Well, unless you're god. :D

And no... I can't explain the existence of god. However... its far easier to believe that something immortal such as a 'god' from simple definition exists... than something such as simple matter which created more matter. Bah. its all confusing. And i'm sleepy. I was playing multi theft auto for ages this morning.
 
Raziaar said:
This is something i've always asked that people who believe in the big bang have never been able to prove. Because nothing can exist before substance itself. Something had to create it... it wouldn't just be there from nothingless. Thus I believe in god.

People still can't answer me... what created the substance we now know in the universe, and if the big bang created the stuff we know... what created the big bang? And what created that? and that, and that?

Things simply cannot exist without a definite origin. Well, unless you're god. :D

And no... I can't explain the existence of god. However... its far easier to believe that something immortal such as a 'god' from simple definition exists... than something such as simple matter which created more matter. Bah. its all confusing. And i'm sleepy. I was playing multi theft auto for ages this morning.

The theory is that matter and antimatter cancel eachother out, and thus it is possible to create matter out of nothing as long as you create antimatter alongside it. This theory fits with other theories, and some of it all can be founded on actual research, but it is still just theories.

"How can something be" is still unanswered. We don't really know. Some people use theories to explain it, others use the concept of god.

.bog.
 
The likelyhood of the entire universe as we know it appearing out of thin air, created by nothing other than itself is about as likely as a 5 million pound bag of solid gold coins appearing out of thin air and falling on my neighborhood.

The whole concept of god seems much more plausible to me than that.
 
Raziaar said:
The likelyhood of the entire universe as we know it appearing out of thin air, created by nothing other than itself is about as likely as a 5 million pound bag of solid gold coins appearing out of thin air and falling on my neighborhood.

The whole concept of god seems much more plausible to me than that.
How so? They are both processes beyond comprehension by our current knowledge... both involving things that, by our understanding, must have no initial point of creation... except, one of them also happens to have infinite knowledge and power. IMO, that last bit tips the scales in favor of the "no God" side. Once again, the argument for God is "we don't understand something, so it must be supernatural" while the explanation of the existence of God himself is even more absurd.
 
The only thing that could possibly interest an omnipotent God is: would it be capable of destroying itself? If it wasn't then it wouldn't be omnipotent, but if it was it wouldn't be omnipotent either. So it tried it anyway, and it destroyed itself, leaving its debris about the universe. With the internet, we are building a global consciousness, and with our technology we are acquiring incredible power. Maybe we're God's broken-up-bits re-assembling themselves.

Now where did I get that from?
 
Back
Top