this picture and it's implications are magnificent

CptStern said:
ok now I know you're drunk or hopped up on goofballs


how the hell did this impregnate the Virgin Mary?:

<thor>




:rolling:
Click to expand...

What is the meaning of this. Get out of my Reason 4, stern.
 
Why do people find all this "space is really, really, really big" stuff so fascinating? I mean, space is big, I understood that years ago, why do people keep marveling at the idea? Oh this thing, is way bigger than this thing, and this thing is way bigger than this thing...
 
Because its size is far too large for us to even comprehend well, and it's incredible how little of a space we occupy in it.

There are more reasons why space personally fascinates me but I find them hard to put into words.
 
you guys are talking about me again arent you

<unzips pants>


why yes, yes it is
 
Vegeta897 said:
Because its size is far too large for us to even comprehend well, and it's incredible how little of a space we occupy in it.
Click to expand...

Yes, but that's a single thought, a single idea, and it's stupid how many people just go around being all "Holy shit, space is big, what's the big picture, we're so insignificant, etc" thinking they're the least bit original or profound. As you say, there are many more amazing and unbelievable aspects to the universe, and many people never get past that one simple fact.
 
Corp. Sheepo said:
Why do people find all this "space is really, really, really big" stuff so fascinating? I mean, space is big, I understood that years ago, why do people keep marveling at the idea? Oh this thing, is way bigger than this thing, and this thing is way bigger than this thing...
Click to expand...

It's fascinating because it's hard to imagine, I guess.
 
Corp. Sheepo said:
Yes, but that's a single thought, a single idea, and it's stupid how many people just go around being all "Holy shit, space is big, what's the big picture, we're so insignificant, etc" thinking they're the least bit original or profound. As you say, there are many more amazing and unbelievable aspects to the universe, and many people never get past that one simple fact.
Click to expand...

You're clearly missing the point entirely. I'm not trying to think I'm "the least bit original or profound", the thought legitimately makes my mind boggle. You must have spent a lot of time with pseudo-intellectual posers who like to talk about this kind of stuff just to sound smart or something.
 
Love the gif on page 1. The one on page 3, not so much. What the **** was that?
 
Vegeta897 said:
You're clearly missing the point entirely. I'm not trying to think I'm "the least bit original or profound", the thought legitimately makes my mind boggle. You must have spent a lot of time with pseudo-intellectual posers who like to talk about this kind of stuff just to sound smart or something.
Click to expand...

I wasn't implying anything about you, and I was really having a hard time phrasing that right. Any way, my point is still there.
 
Corp. Sheepo said:
Yes, but that's a single thought, a single idea, and it's stupid how many people just go around being all "Holy shit, space is big, what's the big picture, we're so insignificant, etc" thinking they're the least bit original or profound. As you say, there are many more amazing and unbelievable aspects to the universe, and many people never get past that one simple fact.
Click to expand...

it's not just a simple thought...it freezes your mind trying to imagine it. it's something you feel in the gut not the mind. it's hard to explain.
 
But there is nothing to explain. It's a simple concept taken to the extreme. The universe is big. There, I just explained it.
 
As a symbol, it is very potent, and humans are symbolic animals.
 
Corp. Sheepo said:
Yes, but that's a single thought, a single idea, and it's stupid how many people just go around being all "Holy shit, space is big, what's the big picture, we're so insignificant, etc" thinking they're the least bit original or profound. As you say, there are many more amazing and unbelievable aspects to the universe, and many people never get past that one simple fact.
Click to expand...

Id hate to hear your opinion on religion then.

Anyway, I hate how people come up with the whole 'The universe is expanding', because it makes my head hurt to think about it.

So, if the universe is expanding, here is an example of the brains inability to comprehend it;

If its expanding, as humans we instantly therefore believe 'space' has a boundry. A wall of sorts that defines its shape, like a ball. Why? Because thats what expansion encorporates, within its own definition. We've limited our own brains ability to comprehend it by using a word that isnt adequate enough to describe whats happening. Expansion is simply, in this context, the movement outward of that boundry correct?

So, if space is expanding, and we arguably take it to therefore have a 'boundry', what exactly is space expanding INTO?

This argument has stumped everyone ive ever talked to about it, albeit mainly drunk/slightly drunk and the topic of god comes up.

Riddle me that whilst you lie awake in bed now.
 
I took this picture. Lomberg didn't give me credit.
article-1159091-03BD2461000005DC-24_468x351_popup.jpg
 
Tarkus said:
We're certainly not alone, that's for sure. But the size of the universe is the biggest obstacle for communication between civilizations. Unless there is a way to achieve speeds faster than the speed of life, we problably never will be able to establish communication with aliens.

Not in our life times at least, that's for sure
Click to expand...

People who site Drake's Equation and then state that life MUST exist are full of shit. Drake's equation doesn't prove anything because it is all based on made up data. It only convinces people for whom the sight of mathematics is a convincing argument because they don't understand it. We have no idea about the mechanics of how life arises, and we are still unable to replicate the formation of life. From this, how can you come up with a probability of life arising on another planet? Despite the vastly large number of stars, the probability of life arising on any one star could be even more vastly infinitesimal. When you are making up data and picking numbers out of the air, even a very small probability like one in a million can be an infinite number of orders of magnitude greater than it should be.

Dumbwads then point out that we exist on Earth, so therefore there is a good probability of other life existing. The logical fallacy being that our existence is a prerequisite to ask the question in the first place. You cannot attach a probability to something that is a certainty. In all situations where the Earth doesn't exist, there is nobody to ask about it. It could be that (relative to our understanding of physics, not absolute reality where probability doesn't really exist) there is a tiny tiny tiny probability of life arising on Earth, we just weren't around to see any of the failed cases.
 
Corp. Sheepo said:
Why do people find all this "space is really, really, really big" stuff so fascinating? I mean, space is big, I understood that years ago, why do people keep marveling at the idea? Oh this thing, is way bigger than this thing, and this thing is way bigger than this thing...
Click to expand...

ugh, statements like this annoy me. When people don't respect and appreciate this type of shit it just confuses the hell out of me. Don't you want to know more? Don't you want to know how we came to be?

it's like a tiny bug not caring (if it had the ability to think) why there are these giant structures and moving pieces of metal everywhere (cars).
 
Phobie said:
I EFFING love that gif.
Click to expand...

I was disappointed that it didn't end with Tengen Toppa Gurren-Lagann.

Dan said:
Dumbwads then point out that we exist on Earth, so therefore there is a good probability of other life existing. The logical fallacy being that our existence is a prerequisite to ask the question in the first place. You cannot attach a probability to something that is a certainty. In all situations where the Earth doesn't exist, there is nobody to ask about it. It could be that (relative to our understanding of physics, not absolute reality where probability doesn't really exist) there is a tiny tiny tiny probability of life arising on Earth, we just weren't around to see any of the failed cases.
Click to expand...

Thanks for putting what I thought into words, Dan.
 
Tyguy said:
ugh, statements like this annoy me. When people don't respect and appreciate this type of shit it just confuses the hell out of me. Don't you want to know more? Don't you want to know how we came to be?

it's like a tiny bug not caring (if it had the ability to think) why there are these giant structures and moving pieces of metal everywhere (cars).
Click to expand...

You're misunderstanding me, I'm fascinated by all the forces of the universe and I'd like to learn more. The only thing that I find stupid is people who can't seem to get past this concept of "lol the universe is big check out this compared to this!". I don't mind ants questioning the mechanisms around them but the ones that go "Oh hey that things way bigger than us!" and "And this thing is way bigger than that thing!". It's the most over considered and pointlessly pondered concept ever.

Also, I typed a far better worded reply earlier but I guess it just never posted.
 
My god... my grandpa(well, he's married to my grandma, not grandpa by blood) or grandma(they have same e-mail) sent me an e-mail titled

"The Earth is my footstool"

And it's basically a chain letter but it shows the scope of the universe much like this, and it chalks it all up to god and basically makes it all religious. <sigh>

HUMBLING,
ISN'T IT?

And yet, God
knows how many hairs are on your head, and not
even a single sparrow dies apart from His
will (Mt. 10:29-31)!


NOW
HOW BIG ARE YOU?
AND HOW BIG ARE THE THINGS
THAT UPSET YOU TODAY?


AND
HOW BIG IS YOUR GOD?


KEEP LIFE IN
PERSPECTIVE.

(then an image that looks like a graffiti be happy)

AND DON'T SWEAT THE SMALL STUFF!



IT'S ALL UNDER HIS CONTROL (Job 38)
STILL SOME SAY THERE IS NO GOD !


HOPE YOU CAN FIND TIME TO FORWARD THIS TO A
FRIEND....................
Click to expand...
 
Raziaar said:
My god... my grandpa(well, he's married to my grandma, not grandpa by blood) or grandma(they have same e-mail) sent me an e-mail titled

"The Earth is my footstool"

And it's basically a chain letter but it shows the scope of the universe much like this, and it chalks it all up to god and basically makes it all religious. <sigh>
Click to expand...

Just send it on, delete all the God stuff. Or attribute it to some other world-creating god. I recommend Mesopotamian mythology.
 
Jintor said:
Just send it on, delete all the God stuff. Or attribute it to some other world-creating god. I recommend Mesopotamian mythology.
Click to expand...

I am the end of the line for all chain letters my friend. Not even legitimate ones get through me. They all come to me to succumb to the elements.
 
I hope that when we die we're somehow able to know or at least learn about the rest of the universe in every aspect. All the other aliens who have their own FPS games and stuff. Hot damn. And then some, like alien Hitlers and messed up shit.
 
What fascinates me even more is the fact that those ****ing huge stars are made from atoms...

-dodo
 
jverne said:
take a look at this video...

even tough this guy fails to realize science is ever changing and nothing is absolute, he does have a point when he talks about red shift. how do we know galaxies are not just orbiting. and beside how do we measure 13 billion years if we don't have a starting point.


edit: i fail...forgot the video

*vid*
Click to expand...

The guy who made the video showed his lack of understanding of universe.Clearly, this guy shows a bunch of misconceptions about the Big Bang Theory.

First, it is not possible that the observed phenomenon of universal expansion is owing to the orbital movement of outer galaxies. The reason is that it is observed that almost every star red-shifts, with only very few exemptions which may due to the blue-shift stars' previous interaction with other stars. It is a metric expansion. The Big Bang theory never relies on whether the Earth is the centre of the universe. Because every stars are moving away from each other. The Earth can be moving away from the centre of the universe as well. But what is important is the all the distances relative to any stars are increasing no matter the direction. The position and velocity of earth is irrelevant.

Second, galaxy never born from galaxies collision. Rather, the collision shatter the galaxies into more number of galaxies or a galaxy in different form. No mass or energy is produced. No entropy is decreased. Much like car crash. There are no new components of car being birth, rather a form of broken and disorganised shatters are spawned. The formation of new form of constellations and stars only means an increase of entropy. Collectively, the galaxies are approaching to there death despite the seemingly "birth" of new stars and constellations. Therefore, the reality is entirely different from the "life cycle" described by the video.
 
Every time I am under the influence of anything except alcohol (which just makes me...drunk), I get MIND BLOWN by how big space is. It's such a cliche. I can't get my mind around how big it is, it sucks. I want to understand.

I always also think...what happens when it ends?

Wait, does it end? Does space just...come to an end? If it does, what's beyond it?

...Nothing? BUT THERE ISN'T EVER NOTHING IS THERE OH GOD MY MIND IS GOING TO EXPLODE
 
Phobie said:
Every time I am under the influence of anything except alcohol (which just makes me...drunk), I get MIND BLOWN by how big space is. It's such a cliche. I can't get my mind around how big it is, it sucks. I want to understand.

I always also think...what happens when it ends?

Wait, does it end? Does space just...come to an end? If it does, what's beyond it?

...Nothing? BUT THERE ISN'T EVER NOTHING IS THERE OH GOD MY MIND IS GOING TO EXPLODE
Click to expand...

Cowboy Universe
The first parallel universe shown, it was created simultaneously by the Medium-Sized Bang. In this universe, everybody dresses as cowboys. Before the events of "The Farnsworth Parabox" (4ACV15) , it was thought the only other existing parallel universe. It is possible that this is the only universe which was extradimensionally adjacent to our own, thus limiting access to the others. Through various means, these extradimensional gaps have been bridged.
 
bbson john said:
The guy who made the video showed his lack of understanding of universe.Clearly, this guy shows a bunch of misconceptions about the Big Bang Theory.

First, it is not possible that the observed phenomenon of universal expansion is owing to the orbital movement of outer galaxies. The reason is that it is observed that almost every star red-shifts, with only very few exemptions which may due to the blue-shift stars' previous interaction with other stars. It is a metric expansion. The Big Bang theory never relies on whether the Earth is the centre of the universe. Because every stars are moving away from each other. The Earth can be moving away from the centre of the universe as well. But what is important is the all the distances relative to any stars are increasing no matter the direction. The position and velocity of earth is irrelevant.

Second, galaxy never born from galaxies collision. Rather, the collision shatter the galaxies into more number of galaxies or a galaxy in different form. No mass or energy is produced. No entropy is decreased. Much like car crash. There are no new components of car being birth, rather a form of broken and disorganised shatters are spawned. The formation of new form of constellations and stars only means an increase of entropy. Collectively, the galaxies are approaching to there death despite the seemingly "birth" of new stars and constellations. Therefore, the reality is entirely different from the "life cycle" described by the video.
Click to expand...

hmm...i see. sounds logical. but what about galaxies that collide together. are they just an anomaly a result of local gravitational forces?

oh and...when they say that the universe is 13 billion years old, they should really say at least 13 billion years?
 
jverne said:
what about galaxies that collide together. are they just an anomaly a result of local gravitational forces?
Click to expand...
11979042.jpg


Galaxies collides probably due to these two scenarios. The left one depicts the two galaxies flying away in an almost parallel path. The gravity of the two galaxies slowly pull the two galaxies together. They meet and pass through each other.

The right one shows a light galaxy, indicated as the red path is moving initially ahead of another massive galaxy, indicated as the blue path. The light galaxy is being pulled and decelerated by the heavy galaxy. Until the light galaxy is being taken over by the heavy galaxy. It looks like the two galaxies go into a head on collision. Then the heavy galaxy pass over the light galaxy. The heavy galaxy afterwards pull the light galaxy in the same direction as the expansion of the universe.


oh and...when they say that the universe is 13 billion years old, they should really say at least 13 billion years?
Click to expand...

Yes, 13 billion years is merely an estimation of the age of universe. It is very likely to be the lower bound of the age of universe. Yet, the real age of the universe should not be too far away from 13 billion years. For example, the age of the universe is extremely unlikely to exceed 20 billion years. It is because the measurement of background radiation gives scientists a relatively precise measurement.

Unlike what is described by the video, detection of background radiation differs from detection of stars and galaxies greatly. Stars and galaxies far away from earth may be too far to be observed. The light scattered so thin that the Hubble Telescope simply omitted their existence. However, background radiation presents everywhere. It can be detected with earth-based radiotelescope pointing to anywhere in space. Simply say, on the one hand, stars and constellations are birds and gulls in the sky. They are small dots which are hard to be observed distant away. On the other hand, background radiation is the azure sky, which can be seen immediately if we look up. Even if the blue sky is ten times higher than the flying animals, the sky is still infinitely more visible than other airborne objects.

Therefore, measuring time by background radiation is pretty accurate. Although more power telescopes can help scientists discover more distant galaxies; the boundary of the universe, defined by background radiation, will not be pushed further away.

Yet, some of the points in the video is correct. For instance, the nature of dark matter and dark energy is largely unknown by current physics. I won't be surprised if a few years later, the age and size of the universe turn out to be much older and larger. Or that big bang theory is invalid. After all, science is evolving every minute. Yet, the big bang theory is pretty much the only handful of scientific theories we have currently that describes our universe the most precisely.
 
Phobie said:
Every time I am under the influence of anything except alcohol (which just makes me...drunk), I get MIND BLOWN by how big space is. It's such a cliche. I can't get my mind around how big it is, it sucks. I want to understand.

I always also think...what happens when it ends?

Wait, does it end? Does space just...come to an end? If it does, what's beyond it?

...Nothing? BUT THERE ISN'T EVER NOTHING IS THERE OH GOD MY MIND IS GOING TO EXPLODE
Click to expand...
How i see it is that it doesnt have to end with some kind of wall with nothing behind it. Like the galaxy is a huge hollow ball with nothing outside it... it just wouldnt make sense.

How i think it would be more realistic is if there isnt a wall, an end, a border... whatever you want to call it. But that its a (geometrical) space, much like the surface of a ball, which has a radius, lenght, hieght and depth, but not an end.
tl;dr: space is infinite but has a diameter (imo).

-dodo

edit: maybe comparable to tiling textures?
 
bbson john said:
11979042.jpg


Galaxies collides probably due to these two scenarios. The left one depicts the two galaxies flying away in an almost parallel path. The gravity of the two galaxies slowly pull the two galaxies together. They meet and pass through each other.

The right one shows a light galaxy, indicated as the red path is moving initially ahead of another massive galaxy, indicated as the blue path. The light galaxy is being pulled and decelerated by the heavy galaxy. Until the light galaxy is being taken over by the heavy galaxy. It looks like the two galaxies go into a head on collision. Then the heavy galaxy pass over the light galaxy. The heavy galaxy afterwards pull the light galaxy in the same direction as the expansion of the universe.




Yes, 13 billion years is merely an estimation of the age of universe. It is very likely to be the lower bound of the age of universe. Yet, the real age of the universe should not be too far away from 13 billion years. For example, the age of the universe is extremely unlikely to exceed 20 billion years. It is because the measurement of background radiation gives scientists a relatively precise measurement.

Unlike what is described by the video, detection of background radiation differs from detection of stars and galaxies greatly. Stars and galaxies far away from earth may be too far to be observed. The light scattered so thin that the Hubble Telescope simply omitted their existence. However, background radiation presents everywhere. It can be detected with earth-based radiotelescope pointing to anywhere in space. Simply say, on the one hand, stars and constellations are birds and gulls in the sky. They are small dots which are hard to be observed distant away. On the other hand, background radiation is the azure sky, which can be seen immediately if we look up. Even if the blue sky is ten times higher than the flying animals, the sky is still infinitely more visible than other airborne objects.

Therefore, measuring time by background radiation is pretty accurate. Although more power telescopes can help scientists discover more distant galaxies; the boundary of the universe, defined by background radiation, will not be pushed further away.

Yet, some of the points in the video is correct. For instance, the nature of dark matter and dark energy is largely unknown by current physics. I won't be surprised if a few years later, the age and size of the universe turn out to be much older and larger. Or that big bang theory is invalid. After all, science is evolving every minute. Yet, the big bang theory is pretty much the only handful of scientific theories we have currently that describes our universe the most precisely.
Click to expand...

You're too smart bbson_john!

You must be eliminated!

Oh and don't forget those galaxies are made up of individual stars and planets and shit... so lots of them will go pew pew pew away from the galaxies at rapid speed!

At least I think so.
 
Phobie said:
Every time I am under the influence of anything except alcohol (which just makes me...drunk), I get MIND BLOWN by how big space is. It's such a cliche. I can't get my mind around how big it is, it sucks. I want to understand.

I always also think...what happens when it ends?

Wait, does it end? Does space just...come to an end? If it does, what's beyond it?

...Nothing? BUT THERE ISN'T EVER NOTHING IS THERE OH GOD MY MIND IS GOING TO EXPLODE
Click to expand...

There will eventually be a point where entropy reaches zero.

If you have time read this. It's been posted a bunch in the past but I love reading it.

The Last Question - Isaac Asimov
 
Dodo said:
How i see it is that it doesnt have to end with some kind of wall with nothing behind it. Like the galaxy is a huge hollow ball with nothing outside it... it just wouldnt make sense.

How i think it would be more realistic is if there isnt a wall, an end, a border... whatever you want to call it. But that its a (geometrical) space, much like the surface of a ball, which has a radius, lenght, hieght and depth, but not an end.
tl;dr: space is infinite but has a diameter (imo).

-dodo

edit: maybe comparable to tiling textures?
Click to expand...

BUT.... What if nothing is really "infinite"?

Just like nothing is really nothing. If you see what I mean.

Although I have a blind friend, and when I asked her once when we were younger what she sees when she opens her eyes, she said "nothing". I was like "what, just like..black?" and she said "No, I see NOTHING. There's nothing there"

Mind was blown.
 
Phobie said:
BUT.... What if nothing is really "infinite"?

Just like nothing is really nothing. If you see what I mean.

Although I have a blind friend, and when I asked her once when we were younger what she sees when she opens her eyes, she said "nothing". I was like "what, just like..black?" and she said "No, I see NOTHING. There's nothing there"

Mind was blown.
Click to expand...
well the surface of a ball is infinite as it doesnt have a end.
doesnt mean you cant measure the diameter, you just have to pick a point to start measuring from.

Whats always puzzled me is the fact that cosmic background radiation is equal everywhere you look. This would mean that we are exactly in the middle of the universe, which i doubt, or that there isnt a center, and that everything is "in the centre" of an infinite space.
wow trippy. : D

-dodo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

-smash-
Movies, TV Series, Music, and More are Coming to Steam
Replies
7
Views
50K
FoxLeks
FoxLeks
Warped Dan
Earth-Size Alien Planet at Alpha Centauri Is Closest Ever Seen
Replies
11
Views
3K
Slug Advisor
Slug Advisor
Sectorial
Half-Life 2 Canon (Theory)
Replies
5
Views
3K
MFL
MFL
VirusType2
NASA "Scores of Earth-like planets"
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
No Limit
No Limit
Dandan
New Moon Found Orbiting Pluto
Replies
27
Views
2K
Dandan
Dandan
Back
Top