There's a difference between an empty space that exists and an empty space that doesn't. It's really weird and hard to explain, but just imagine space as enompassing all that exists. There is no outside because outside doesn't exist. In fact, giving it a name, even one like "the void" is kind of disingenuous because it implies there's something there to name. This is not the case.
Okay... So what you're saying is, it's more like this?
Yeah... But I have a question.
It looks asymmetrical, so, was the big bang 'symmetrical' you say, or somehow asymmetrical? If symmetrical, how did it change to asymmetry? If asymmetrical, why not asymmetrical a different way?
Yes, let us discuss what we know about the universe without a manned spacecraft or any kind of space travel technology we have now. The floating primitive tin can orbiting around earth does not count as a manned spacecraft.
What's weird is that the universe started with the Big Bang,but there was nothing before the Big Bang.They say that the Big Bang might of been created by two pararell universes colliding.
Also:What was left shortly after the Big Bang was hydrogen and helium.The gravity then started fusing the two elements together to make stars and such.
Yeah... But I have a question.
It looks asymmetrical, so, was the big bang 'symmetrical' you say, or somehow asymmetrical? If symmetrical, how did it change to asymmetry? If asymmetrical, why not asymmetrical a different way?
I believe the answer to to why the answer to why the CMBR is not isotropic is because of Quantum fluctuations after the Big Bang, which were small variations in energy of certain parts of the early Universe. Not positive about that though.
Yes, let us discuss what we know about the universe without a manned spacecraft or any kind of space travel technology we have now. The floating primitive tin can orbiting around earth does not count as a manned spacecraft.
Uh... "without any kind of space travel technology we have now?" but... Now is now. We have today's space travel technology today. If we had tomorrow's space travel technology today, then that would be weird. [/Missing the point]
What about them are incompatible? I've never found any contradictions.
Gravity is incompatible with the 2 theories. Gravity in the theory of relativity will not work with quantum mechanics.
I'm no physicist or even a scientist, so I can't really begin to explain it to you. Just going off my limited research in the field over the past few years.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who could not hear the music."
But string theory is just math, with no observation.
Also, is radioactive decay truly random, or does something insanely complex determine it? How can you have something entirely random, it doesn't make total sense.
But string theory is just math, with no observation.
Also, is radioactive decay truly random, or does something insanely complex determine it? How can you have something entirely random, it doesn't make total sense.
Why doesn't something random make sense?
As far as I know, radioactive decay is constant depending on the element.
They're not incompatible, they just need to be reconciled. Think of them as two ends of a rope, but the middle has yet to be discovered.
This could be true. That's why I said "technically". String or M-theory tries to unify them per se. Interesting to say the least in regards to your rope analogy. :smile.gif:
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who could not hear the music."
Changing the subject, anyone been following the next mission to Mars, the Mars Science Laboratory? If so, you know that it's getting ready to be shipped out to Kennedy Space Center at Cape Canaveral. What do you guys think of this mission?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. -Carl Sagan
The Universe is cool enough without making up crap about it - Phil Plait
God has put up quite a show. Isn't that right people? But what if this is heaven and not to be just Earth? Or, God had put up a simulation or test in order to show human-beings the meaning of life. And if we already know it? By looking at all these replies, it looks like everything we feel, taste, smell, hear, and look at are all 4-dimensional objects, in 3-dimensional shapes. And what if the universe is any shape? Such as...cubes, spheres, pyrimads, etc. Our universe or universes are billions and billions and BILLIONS...let's put it this way...INFINITE parsecs long, wide, tall, etc. I think it is best to just stop thinking about the universe and just start thinking about how will we spend our seconds of life...and end up...with God.
Okay... So what you're saying is, it's more like this?
Instead of this?
Yeah... But I have a question.
It looks asymmetrical, so, was the big bang 'symmetrical' you say, or somehow asymmetrical? If symmetrical, how did it change to asymmetry? If asymmetrical, why not asymmetrical a different way?
That video was awesome! I never really thought how damn large the universe is until hearing those numbers
hooray! Complete mind****!
Also:What was left shortly after the Big Bang was hydrogen and helium.The gravity then started fusing the two elements together to make stars and such.
Any questions?
I believe the answer to to why the answer to why the CMBR is not isotropic is because of Quantum fluctuations after the Big Bang, which were small variations in energy of certain parts of the early Universe. Not positive about that though.
The Universe is cool enough without making up crap about it - Phil Plait
Uh... "without any kind of space travel technology we have now?" but... Now is now. We have today's space travel technology today. If we had tomorrow's space travel technology today, then that would be weird. [/Missing the point]
Yes, exactly.
You heard that, green and red.
If one of the two it's the former, but it could be neither of those things.
Quantum theory
Technically, these 2 theories are incompatible.
String theory anyone?
What about them are incompatible? I've never found any contradictions.
The Universe is cool enough without making up crap about it - Phil Plait
Gravity is incompatible with the 2 theories. Gravity in the theory of relativity will not work with quantum mechanics.
I'm no physicist or even a scientist, so I can't really begin to explain it to you. Just going off my limited research in the field over the past few years.
But string theory is just math, with no observation.
Also, is radioactive decay truly random, or does something insanely complex determine it? How can you have something entirely random, it doesn't make total sense.
Why doesn't something random make sense?
As far as I know, radioactive decay is constant depending on the element.
They're not incompatible, they just need to be reconciled. Think of them as two ends of a rope, but the middle has yet to be discovered.
This could be true. That's why I said "technically". String or M-theory tries to unify them per se. Interesting to say the least in regards to your rope analogy. :smile.gif:
The Universe is cool enough without making up crap about it - Phil Plait