|
psyconaught
Chemical Connoisseur


Registered: 11/04/10
Posts: 6,100
Last seen: 7 years, 2 months
|
|
Quote:
Dark matter could make up the space in between atoms and lesser molecules but know one knows for sure yet. As for anti-matter, well that's just the polar opposite of matter, positive electrons, negative electrons and so on. Who can say what purpose it serves? Maybe to power black holes due to the amount of energy it releases when exposed to matter?
Dark matter is not the space in between atoms and lesser molecules. "nothing" does not have mass. Dark matter is simply a place holder term for an unknown gravitational force measured throughout the universe. But it is not the space in between atoms. If dark matter was constant I would agree with your hypothesis. But dark matter comes in clumps etc. We can actually measure the gravitational lensing of dark matter (that is the gravity from dark matter bending light photons). And anti matter does not "power" black holes. Gravity does.
-------------------- Think for yourself, question authority
|
Curt-vs-thepipe
Professional teenage idiot


Registered: 02/14/13
Posts: 88
Loc: Atlanta, Georgia. USA! US...
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
|
If you're interested in physics and space I suggest you look up Michio Kaku. Read some of his publications and watch some of his youtube videos, they are truly mind broadening, very interesting, and extremely informative. He's up there with Hawking and Einstein.
-------------------- Time: an infinite amount of moments with an infinite amount of possibilities. Stock tip: invest in graphene. You'll soon see why.
|
Curt-vs-thepipe
Professional teenage idiot


Registered: 02/14/13
Posts: 88
Loc: Atlanta, Georgia. USA! US...
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: infinite universe theory [Re: psyconaught]
#19266643 - 12/12/13 04:22 PM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
psyconaught said:
Quote:
Dark matter could make up the space in between atoms and lesser molecules but know one knows for sure yet. As for anti-matter, well that's just the polar opposite of matter, positive electrons, negative electrons and so on. Who can say what purpose it serves? Maybe to power black holes due to the amount of energy it releases when exposed to matter?
Dark matter is not the space in between atoms and lesser molecules. "nothing" does not have mass. Dark matter is simply a place holder term for an unknown gravitational force measured throughout the universe. But it is not the space in between atoms. If dark matter was constant I would agree with your hypothesis. But dark matter comes in clumps etc. We can actually measure the gravitational lensing of dark matter (that is the gravity from dark matter bending light photons). And anti matter does not "power" black holes. Gravity does.
Thanks for the info and for correcting me. Not real sure why I said black holes could be powered by anti-matter as it really has nothing to do with them lol Also I meant to say 'lesser particles' as in the many particles smaller than atoms, not lesser molecules. Although I assume you realize what I meant.
-------------------- Time: an infinite amount of moments with an infinite amount of possibilities. Stock tip: invest in graphene. You'll soon see why.
|
Magicman69
All About the Benjamins



Registered: 05/29/13
Posts: 6,876
|
|
If you were to travel in a straight line through space eventually you would end up where you started.-My physics teacher
|
KingKnowledge
Around



Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 2,876
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 4 years, 6 months
|
Re: infinite universe theory [Re: Magicman69]
#19266689 - 12/12/13 04:34 PM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Magicman69 said: If you were to travel in a straight line through space eventually you would end up where you started.-My physics teacher
Questionable.
In 4 dimensions, yes. In 11? Maybe not.
|
psyconaught
Chemical Connoisseur


Registered: 11/04/10
Posts: 6,100
Last seen: 7 years, 2 months
|
|
Quote:
KingKnowledge said:
Quote:
Magicman69 said: If you were to travel in a straight line through space eventually you would end up where you started.-My physics teacher
Questionable.
In 4 dimensions, yes. In 11? Maybe not.
well since we live in the 3rd dimension (4th if you count time) then i'm assuming that is what he is referring to. The human experience.
-------------------- Think for yourself, question authority
|
KingKnowledge
Around



Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 2,876
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 4 years, 6 months
|
Re: infinite universe theory [Re: psyconaught]
#19266929 - 12/12/13 05:36 PM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
psyconaught said:
Quote:
KingKnowledge said:
Quote:
Magicman69 said: If you were to travel in a straight line through space eventually you would end up where you started.-My physics teacher
Questionable.
In 4 dimensions, yes. In 11? Maybe not.
well since we live in the 3rd dimension (4th if you count time) then i'm assuming that is what he is referring to. The human experience.
But I don't think it would work like that. If there are more than 3 dimensions (11 is string theory), or if the universe is constantly expanding but finite, you may get to an end somewhere. Or just keep going to infinity.
Lol who knows, this is above me.
|
psyconaught
Chemical Connoisseur


Registered: 11/04/10
Posts: 6,100
Last seen: 7 years, 2 months
|
|
humans will never reach 'the end' unless we somehow harness faster than light travel (wormholes etc). Because the universe is expanding at the speed of light.
-------------------- Think for yourself, question authority
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
|
Quote:
Curt-vs-thepipe said: If you're interested in physics and space I suggest you look up Michio Kaku. Read some of his publications and watch some of his youtube videos, they are truly mind broadening, very interesting, and extremely informative. He's up there with Hawking and Einstein.
If you are interested in physics and space I suggest you avoid Michio Kaku. He bullshits and is shockingly ignorant on a number of topics (his butchering of evolution comes to mind). He is nowhere close to the greats like Einstein, Feynman, Dirac or even Hawking. The claim that he is a great like Einstein makes those of us who actually studied physics cringe. Hes a celebrity, not a great physicist. For popularizes of physics, I would stick to Neil deGrasse Tyson, he is far better.
|
psyconaught
Chemical Connoisseur


Registered: 11/04/10
Posts: 6,100
Last seen: 7 years, 2 months
|
Re: infinite universe theory [Re: DieCommie] 1
#19267064 - 12/12/13 06:09 PM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DieCommie said:
Quote:
Curt-vs-thepipe said: If you're interested in physics and space I suggest you look up Michio Kaku. Read some of his publications and watch some of his youtube videos, they are truly mind broadening, very interesting, and extremely informative. He's up there with Hawking and Einstein.
If you are interested in physics and space I suggest you avoid Michio Kaku. He bullshits and is shockingly ignorant on a number of topics (his butchering of evolution comes to mind). He is nowhere close to the greats like Einstein, Feynman, Dirac or even Hawking. The claim that he is a great like Einstein makes those of us who actually studied physics cringe. Hes a celebrity, not a great physicist. For popularizes of physics, I would stick to Neil deGrasse Tyson, he is far better.
for sure stick to Neil deGrasse Tyson. He is not only a brilliant physicist but a fantastic orator and educator as well.
-------------------- Think for yourself, question authority
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 5 hours, 18 minutes
|
Re: infinite universe theory [Re: psyconaught]
#19267110 - 12/12/13 06:20 PM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
psyconaught said:
Quote:
DieCommie said:
Quote:
Curt-vs-thepipe said: If you're interested in physics and space I suggest you look up Michio Kaku. Read some of his publications and watch some of his youtube videos, they are truly mind broadening, very interesting, and extremely informative. He's up there with Hawking and Einstein.
If you are interested in physics and space I suggest you avoid Michio Kaku. He bullshits and is shockingly ignorant on a number of topics (his butchering of evolution comes to mind). He is nowhere close to the greats like Einstein, Feynman, Dirac or even Hawking. The claim that he is a great like Einstein makes those of us who actually studied physics cringe. Hes a celebrity, not a great physicist. For popularizes of physics, I would stick to Neil deGrasse Tyson, he is far better.
for sure stick to Neil deGrasse Tyson. He is not only a brilliant physicist but a fantastic orator and educator as well.
Ya, those guys are OK, but if I think Sean Carroll does the best lecture.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Curt-vs-thepipe
Professional teenage idiot


Registered: 02/14/13
Posts: 88
Loc: Atlanta, Georgia. USA! US...
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: infinite universe theory [Re: psyconaught]
#19267123 - 12/12/13 06:23 PM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
psyconaught said:
Quote:
DieCommie said:
Quote:
Curt-vs-thepipe said: If you're interested in physics and space I suggest you look up Michio Kaku. Read some of his publications and watch some of his youtube videos, they are truly mind broadening, very interesting, and extremely informative. He's up there with Hawking and Einstein.
If you are interested in physics and space I suggest you avoid Michio Kaku. He bullshits and is shockingly ignorant on a number of topics (his butchering of evolution comes to mind). He is nowhere close to the greats like Einstein, Feynman, Dirac or even Hawking. The claim that he is a great like Einstein makes those of us who actually studied physics cringe. Hes a celebrity, not a great physicist. For popularizes of physics, I would stick to Neil deGrasse Tyson, he is far better.
for sure stick to Neil deGrasse Tyson. He is not only a brilliant physicist but a fantastic orator and educator as well.
Well fuck me sideways then
-------------------- Time: an infinite amount of moments with an infinite amount of possibilities. Stock tip: invest in graphene. You'll soon see why.
|
psyconaught
Chemical Connoisseur


Registered: 11/04/10
Posts: 6,100
Last seen: 7 years, 2 months
|
Re: infinite universe theory [Re: koods] 1
#19267137 - 12/12/13 06:26 PM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
psyconaught said:
Quote:
DieCommie said:
Quote:
Curt-vs-thepipe said: If you're interested in physics and space I suggest you look up Michio Kaku. Read some of his publications and watch some of his youtube videos, they are truly mind broadening, very interesting, and extremely informative. He's up there with Hawking and Einstein.
If you are interested in physics and space I suggest you avoid Michio Kaku. He bullshits and is shockingly ignorant on a number of topics (his butchering of evolution comes to mind). He is nowhere close to the greats like Einstein, Feynman, Dirac or even Hawking. The claim that he is a great like Einstein makes those of us who actually studied physics cringe. Hes a celebrity, not a great physicist. For popularizes of physics, I would stick to Neil deGrasse Tyson, he is far better.
for sure stick to Neil deGrasse Tyson. He is not only a brilliant physicist but a fantastic orator and educator as well.
Ya, those guys are OK, but if I think Sean Carroll does the best lecture.
the difference is that Neil Tyson doesn't really lecture. He's the modern day Carl Sagan. Sure there are better professors. But as a public figure putting for the importance of the sciences and inspiring interest in the sciences there is not better than Neil deGrasse Tyson.
-------------------- Think for yourself, question authority
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
|
Quote:
Curt-vs-thepipe said: Well fuck me sideways then
Heh, I understand. I read his books when I was a novice too. And back in the day, he actually did physics and was probably with it. But of course he did string theory and one wouldn't expect him to be an expert on topics outside his field. But maybe when you get in front of a camera you start to get full of yourself, you stop publishing and you get old until you arn't quite as with it as you used to be. "Popular" physics books are usually appreciated by the physics community, but sometimes they just go over the top and you cant help but roll your eyes. Im sure this happens in all fields. Its aggravating when some "expert" on TV starts blabbing bullshit about something we know because we know others just eat it up. I wouldn't be surprised if same thing has happened to you with drugs or shrooms or something else you know about.
My favorite pop-physics book is probably Q.E.D. by Feynman. I think Hawking's classic is probably the best general pop-physics book out there for a novice.
Of course Sagan is a classic, (if not a bit preachy and long winded. He reminds me of my dad, which is not a good thing. lol).
Here he describes what was written in perhaps the first pop-science/math book, Flatland
Edited by DieCommie (12/12/13 07:04 PM)
|
|