Cominus Posted April 25, 2004 Share Posted April 25, 2004 I remember reading an article about "the universe" and about it's demesions. There are 10 demesions and our universe or galaxy or something is 4 demensioned and thats all we see, i read in in like a time magazine or maybe it was popular science. I don't fully understand what it means, i just remember reading about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cominus Posted April 25, 2004 Share Posted April 25, 2004 Energy is not made of subatomic particles. Also, as far as anyone knows, there's just one universe rather a multitude of universes or in other words a multi-verse. True they can't physically prove the universe is finite, but through mathematics and science they've proven it is. Right now, they believe the universe is expanding, but eventually, some scientists believe, it will then contract on itself.Different schools of mathematics have different theories. But right now its leaning more towards a finite universe. It's not proven which will be hard, but don't say it is proven. This string theory is also gaining a lot of momentum and could also possibly be right. And by logic, you should realize that a finite universe isn't proven by mathematics since there are different theories being worked out by math. When one theory remains, that will be the victor. Till then, it's all speculation. And this string theory stuff is very interesting and it would be awesome if it is true. Quantum mechanics is a beautiful thing. I have a test on quantum physics on Wednesday. It's going to suck... Yeah, but a theory is just that - a theory. Two thousand years ago everyone KNEW the earth was flat. A thousand years ago everyone KNEW the sun and all the planets revolved around the earth. The romans used lead piping to build their drainage systems - and it eventually turned everyone in Rome insane. Whenever I think of this fact, I can't help wondering what practices/beliefs/theories we hold now that will be viewed as fundamentally STUPID a thousand years from now (if the human race lasts that long - we're not going too hot at the moment! ) A scientific theory is different from normal theories. That's what everyone gets wrong. For a scientific idea to even become a theory is a very tough thing in itself. For example, Eistein's Theory of Relativity. Mathematically its true, and has been shown to work at Stanford but it still isn't a law. There are very few scientific laws. The only ones I can think of are Newton's Law of Gravitation. It's a pity they use the word theory because the general public is too stupid to realize what it really means. Here's an arctilce testing einstiensTheory And here's the article aout the 10 demension universe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cominus Posted April 25, 2004 Share Posted April 25, 2004 I was thinking, what if the universe "walls are like those little path way things like in pac man where if you enter it you just come out of the other side, you dont ever go anywhere, the universe is just so big that you just get distorted and lost when you come out the other end. Slimy yet satisfying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OverlordMondo Posted April 25, 2004 Share Posted April 25, 2004 The Pacmaverse theory hmm? I always agreed with that one myself. Sometimes I like to imagine my self flying through space eating stars... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cominus Posted April 25, 2004 Share Posted April 25, 2004 The Pacmaverse theory hmm? I always agreed with that one myself. Sometimes I like to imagine my self flying through space eating stars...LOL! I made it up my self, j/k . Thats it, im castrot the damn cuban dictator and everybody has to follow my pacmverse thoery or suffer and die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smilee Posted April 25, 2004 Share Posted April 25, 2004 I was thinking, what if the universe "walls are like those little path way things like in pac man where if you enter it you just come out of the other side, you dont ever go anywhere, the universe is just so big that you just get distorted and lost when you come out the other end. Slimy yet satisfying.Hmm, according to you, if you went to the edge of the universe and stepped out, you would find yourself at the otherside. Sounds like 2 giant wormholes at each end of the Universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cominus Posted April 25, 2004 Share Posted April 25, 2004 (edited) I was thinking, what if the universe "walls are like those little path way things like in pac man where if you enter it you just come out of the other side, you dont ever go anywhere, the universe is just so big that you just get distorted and lost when you come out the other end. Slimy yet satisfying.Hmm, according to you, if you went to the edge of the universe and stepped out, you would find yourself at the otherside. Sounds like 2 giant wormholes at each end of the Universe. Are you threatning my theory? Im castro flocking dictator. j/k but anyways In that article that i posted the link to it talks about that. I think that's part ot the string theory, or some other one...my brain hurts >_<....anyways it's a nice concept, i like it. It's like being a 3d sphere fun house where you see your self with mirros all around and if you through like a paper ball at your self youd hit your back like 2 seconds later. It sounds weird but hey, have you ever tried to see whats beyond the universe? Or reached the egde? Edited April 25, 2004 by Cominus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StriderSkorpion Posted April 26, 2004 Share Posted April 26, 2004 Well, if you believe the Futurama theory, you'll see another universe. I always wondered if it was possible to reach the "end of the universe" and what would happen when you reached it. I personally thought maybe it would wrap around (ala Pac-Man), but that's opinion and not theory. IIRC, Einstein's Theory of Relativity is an extension of Newton's Laws of Physics. Newton's laws applied mainly to activity on a "planet's" surface, while relativity helped explain further aspects that don't fit in the laws. That "testing" of Einstein's theory is old news. They're thinking maybe they'll have to expand the theory again. I never did hear what ever came of it. The idea of ten dimensions (it's spelled with an i, not an e ), would explain the "wrap around" effect that we were discussing, if I'm not mistaken. Currently we're considered to at least live in a four dimensional world (space/time being the fourth). It's to help explain the movement of time and the possibility of black holes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L.S.D Posted April 26, 2004 Share Posted April 26, 2004 Whoa, I left the forum for two days, and the topic change from religion to universe. Interestng read. Keep it up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smilee Posted April 26, 2004 Share Posted April 26, 2004 I was thinking, what if the universe "walls are like those little path way things like in pac man where if you enter it you just come out of the other side, you dont ever go anywhere, the universe is just so big that you just get distorted and lost when you come out the other end. Slimy yet satisfying.Hmm, according to you, if you went to the edge of the universe and stepped out, you would find yourself at the otherside. Sounds like 2 giant wormholes at each end of the Universe. Are you threatning my theory? Im castro flocking dictator. j/k but anyways In that article that i posted the link to it talks about that. I think that's part ot the string theory, or some other one...my brain hurts >_<....anyways it's a nice concept, i like it. It's like being a 3d sphere fun house where you see your self with mirros all around and if you through like a paper ball at your self youd hit your back like 2 seconds later. It sounds weird but hey, have you ever tried to see whats beyond the universe? Or reached the egde? Basically, ur trapped here forever!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.X Posted April 26, 2004 Share Posted April 26, 2004 Maybe I should've put it proven in quotes. But that's their evidence that it is more than a hypothesis (hence being a theory), it's not scientific law, so it could easily be wrong. Yes, there are many hypotheses and theories about the universe, but that at least was the main school of thought. Mr. X, I don't care what you believe, I don't know why I even bothered trying to contradict your beliefs. You're beliefs are your own and I respect that. BTW, the charges do not represent energy. It's just the attractive force. Also, you're thinking of neutrons, not neutrinos. Protrons and electrons aren't subatomic particles, either. Unless I'm mistaken, quarks are subatomic particles.No, it's not an error, I 've taken the example of neutrinos. Neutrons 've no charge too. U're wrong, coz electrons & protons 'R subatomic particles : main constitutives of atoms of matter (electrons'R in orbital & protons make the atomic nuclei [with neutrons, if it's an isotope]). Not all quarks are subatomic particles : quarks can not exist by themselves, they've to be bound to other quarks by the exchange of gluons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now