Southperry.net
Does this make sense to you? - Printable Version

+- Southperry.net (https://www.southperry.net)
+-- Forum: Social (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Rubik's Cube (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=58)
+--- Thread: Does this make sense to you? (/showthread.php?tid=33549)

Pages: 1 2


Does this make sense to you? - Jamie_Kurosawa - 2010-12-01

.


Does this make sense to you? - DrRusty - 2010-12-01

Think of it like this

The universe is BILLIONS of years old.
Man kind has only had modern science for a few hundred years.

To even think that in our blink of an existence could even be close to 1/10000 of the total knowledge of the universe is ignorance imo.

Just 150 years ago people couldn't even imagine us flying through the air carrying a hundred people. In 150 years, I'm sure we're going to develop things that we couldn't even imagine today. Technology expands exponentially so I'm sure we'll be much more impressive as time goes on.

I don't feel like looking up the video of Michio Kaku, but he says the likely hood of there being life on other planets is 100%.


Does this make sense to you? - OB3LISK - 2010-12-01

I'm not sure if that's a paper or if you're asking us our opinions lol.

Some of your questions (*cough number two cough*) seem more like philosophy though.


Does this make sense to you? - Holypie - 2010-12-01

As for #3, it's most likely because all things are 'lazy', travelling around in a circular orbit takes less energy that say, a triangle because turning takes energy.


Does this make sense to you? - Jamie_Kurosawa - 2010-12-01

Dr. Michio Kaku was one of the sources I used for this regarding the Black Hole Infinity calculation.


Does this make sense to you? - Mute - 2010-12-01

Jamie_Kurosawa Wrote:Dr. Michio Kaku was one of the sources I used for this regarding the Black Hole Infinity calculation.

This sounded very much like Prof. Kaku's field of work.


Does this make sense to you? - DrRusty - 2010-12-01

Kaku is a great physicist and very entertaining to watch Biggrin


Does this make sense to you? - Jamie_Kurosawa - 2010-12-01

The thing I see with the Theory of Relativity is this... what if the theory of relativity is correct when it comes to a seemingly impossible situation like a Black Hole. I know Dr. Kaku has stated that the Infinity calculation is a problem for physicists, but my question is this:

If each attempt using relativity and even quantum theory always brings about Infinity when calculated against something such as a quantum singularity, is answer of Infinity actually not a problem, but a solution that is correct by every definition?


Does this make sense to you? - SwordStaker - 2010-12-01

I'll just answer number 2 XD.

I think to think we would be the only life form in the entire universe would be sort of dumb. It would be like saying all religion is the same thing. Do I believe there really are "green men" out there? Absolutely not. We say Aliens and once we do we usually think of creatures but then we call people without citizenship "illegal aliens". Do I think there are creatures out there far and wide that would go beyond any and all reasoning of science? Absolutely. I think the reason we keep looking for an answer and any life is because mans biggest fear is always the unknown. But then as scared as we are of whats out there we're always dying to find out what it is. For all we know a advanced civilization could be watching our every move. We don't know and thats also scary. They could be watching and waiting for us to fall into a huge world war with each other then attack. Does it have to be creatures?Of course not. One thing for sure is IF we ever do find out whats really out there it will shake all biology we've been taught and learned up to this point. Just my input.


Does this make sense to you? - Herborist - 2010-12-04

I hate you burst your bubble, but a lot of the "points" you made and questions you asked are based on science fiction.

First off, the myth that humans only use a portion of their brain (usually cited as 10%Wink is just plain wrong. A simple PET scan will tell you that almost all of the brain is active. In general, we are not limited by ANYTHING. In fact, there are many, many stories of people operating entirely outside the broad range of survivability we have. There are people who had shards of metal go through their brain and live, people who have had to remove their own legs and climb out of mountainous holes, all sorts of amazing people who do all sorts of amazing things.

According to most mathematical models of the universe, there should be at least one other planet out there with life on it. In fact, life itself really wants to exist - our genetic code is actually quite "fat" with stuff with we don't need. It's been proven that life could exist with less in worse conditions. Having said that, there are a lot of inhospitable planets around us; tough luck, Earth. Take that, and factor in the difficulties of space travel and communication - it wouldn't be feasible to hop on a ship and go to another galaxy for many reasons (supplies, fuel, food, etc. etc.).

As any scientist can tell you, when it comes to our universe, there's no such thing as a "law," i.e., something that holds true everywhere. There are A LOT of situations where classic Newtonian physics (the physics that governs large bodies like you, me, the Earth, but not things on the atomic scale) and quantum mechanics can't explain why things happen the way they are. Just so you know, an atom isn't at all similar to planetary orbits; planets orbit each other in MUCH more uniform patterns. Did you know that electrons move so fast that we can't even tell you where they are? The best we can do is tell you what the probability is that an electron will be in a certain area.

And finally, black holes. Imagine a net stretched out, then drop a bunch of stuff on top of it. Those items on top of it are galaxies, planets, you, and me. The "curves" in the net that we create are gravity. You and I have gravity, it's just so small because we're so small that you can't really experience its effects. Back holes are "rips" in that fabric. In essence, they're negative space that's creating a need for things to fill it. Nothing is there - a vacuum - and when you open a vacuum to something it pulls in everything. Throughout history science has met things that seem impossible and it eventually understands them and labels them. Right now we don't understand black holes fully, but we will. Did you know that we didn't understand light for the longest time? People didn't what it was - a wave, matter, both? Einstein finally solved this us, but until he did, light was some kind of magical thing that existed to us!

You have a lot of misconceptions that I'm sure you picked up from movies and books.


Does this make sense to you? - GummyBear - 2010-12-07

1 - Current science does not explain why our body still functioning while we sleep. There is a high state of subconsciousness operates our body that we're not aware of. Certainly, I do not know the nitty gritty details of how my body works, eg how many beats my heart must do, which arteries should receive which amount of blood, etc. For that, I know our conscious state is limited. As for how to expand it and why, no idea. We're such destructive creatures as we are right now, no need for more capacity.

2 - We "assumed" to be truly alone in the universe because we cannot find anyone else, nor we have the capacity to search far and wide for other "living" beings. It's curiosity that forces us to seek the unknown. Also, being the first to find something adds to that madness. Even here, people tried to have "first reply" to certain thread.

3 - Equilibrium.

PS: those are what I think. I am not saying they're technically correct.


Does this make sense to you? - Devil - 2010-12-07

Jamie_Kurosawa Wrote:3. Why does all matter follow a uniform pattern with a orbital body revolving around a nucleic body such as atoms (hydrogen), as well as moons circling planets, planets circling stars, stars circling the supermassive blackholes at the center of galaxies? If the universe has no intelligent design, shouldn't all matter be chaotic in nature not conforming to a single yet vital design that is uniform to everything from the smallest to the largest?
Matter does not follow a uniform pattern if you zoom out enough. The uniform pattern you talk about stops at Galaxy-scale.

Outside that Galaxy-scale is "The Large Scale Structure" of the Universe. This structure is near total randomness and it exceeds the grasp of gravity, because it's expansion-speed is increasing, and not decreasing.

Here's a video of it, every dot you see is a Galaxy (like the Milky Way), and what you see, is only 1.5% of the (expected) current size of the Universe. The large "blobs" of light, indicate multiple Galaxies "near" to each other in a cluster. This is an actual 3D model, not an artist impression.

[video=youtube;W35SYkfdGtw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W35SYkfdGtw[/video]


Does this make sense to you? - Herborist - 2010-12-07

GummyBear Wrote:1 - Current science does not explain why our body still functioning while we sleep. There is a high state of subconsciousness operates our body that we're not aware of. Certainly, I do not know the nitty gritty details of how my body works, eg how many beats my heart must do, which arteries should receive which amount of blood, etc. For that, I know our conscious state is limited. As for how to expand it and why, no idea. We're such destructive creatures as we are right now, no need for more capacity.

2 - We "assumed" to be truly alone in the universe because we cannot find anyone else, nor we have the capacity to search far and wide for other "living" beings. It's curiosity that forces us to seek the unknown. Also, being the first to find something adds to that madness. Even here, people tried to have "first reply" to certain thread.

3 - Equilibrium.

PS: those are what I think. I am not saying they're technically correct.

Yeah... no. Science can exactly explain how we function while we sleep - we have subconscous areas of our brain that perform vital homeostatic functions while we sleep, just like while we're awake. Ever heard of the hypothalmus?


Does this make sense to you? - GummyBear - 2010-12-07

Herborist Wrote:Yeah... no. Science can exactly explain how we function while we sleep - we have subconscous areas of our brain that perform vital homeostatic functions while we sleep, just like while we're awake. Ever heard of the hypothalmus?

I think you took my first line too directly. Science does not know everything about the human body and its inner functionality, sleep was just a metaphor I used to describe a different state of consciousness. Tho, that is not my point. My point is that we as a human being does not require the complicated knowledge of how our body operates in order to operate it. That "ignorance" seems solid enough to say that our brain has higher functionality that our consciousness does not fathom. This vast ocean of knowledge are completely untouched to us human, yet everybody knows how. We learn about a human body through examinations and analysis, not decyphering how our higher subconscious works. Even your statement refers to subconscious areas in our brain. It is somewhat aligned with the statement "mankind operates in a limited state".


Does this make sense to you? - Herborist - 2010-12-07

GummyBear Wrote:I think you took my first line too directly. Science does not know everything about the human body and its inner functionality, sleep was just a metaphor I used to describe a different state of consciousness. Tho, that is not my point. My point is that we as a human being does not require the complicated knowledge of how our body operates in order to operate it. That "ignorance" seems solid enough to say that our brain has higher functionality that our consciousness does not fathom. This vast ocean of knowledge are completely untouched to us human, yet everybody knows how. We learn about a human body through examinations and analysis, not decyphering how our higher subconscious works. Even your statement refers to subconscious areas in our brain. It is somewhat aligned with the statement "mankind operates in a limited state".

This "vast ocean of knowledge" you're referring to is a cluster of autonomic functions not available to us consciously for very good reason. If you somehow gained access to any one of those then the system would be compromised and you would forever have to regulate that aspect on your own. Science knows everything about the human body with only one exception: the brain. Besides that, we know quite literally how everything works with very small gaps in knowledge that are being filled contemporarily.

Almost everyone in this thread is woefully under educated on even the most basic of scientific fact.


Does this make sense to you? - Mute - 2010-12-07

The one thing to note is science is never finite, and every day things are discovered or pondered that question what we know, may know, think we know, or don't know. I saw this the other day on kotaku, and the fact that scientists can say they've captured anti-hydrogen is perplexing; for one thing how would one even begin trying to explain that to a layman? Hell, I myself don't know how to understand it outside of it being something pretty big.


I've never been one to try and tackle the matter of black holes, despite their nature which appeals to me in a lot of ways. To say that energy and mass are conserved, and they just transition from one another is thrown out the window with them. It does bring to mind a few arguments on the very manner of existence (if a black hole is the ultimate end, what was the ultimate beginning?), and this is just those black holes that form from the collapse of supermassive stars. What about the theory that at the center of each galaxy lies a supermassive black hole? It's astounding.


Does this make sense to you? - Herborist - 2010-12-07

Mute Wrote:The one thing to note is science is never finite, and every day things are discovered or pondered that question what we know, may know, think we know, or don't know. I saw this the other day on kotaku, and the fact that scientists can say they've captured anti-hydrogen is perplexing; for one thing how would one even begin trying to explain that to a layman? Hell, I myself don't know how to understand it outside of it being something pretty big.


I've never been one to try and tackle the matter of black holes, despite their nature which appeals to me in a lot of ways. To say that energy and mass are conserved, and they just transition from one another is thrown out the window with them. It does bring to mind a few arguments on the very manner of existence (if a black hole is the ultimate end, what was the ultimate beginning?), and this is just those black holes that form from the collapse of supermassive stars. What about the theory that at the center of each galaxy lies a supermassive black hole? It's astounding.

Black holes =/= antimatter. Just wanted to say that.

Antimatter, in essence, is just the opposite of matter. Same exact composition, except it has an opposite charge. If you take chemistry in college you'll find out that most atoms can spin in either -1/2 or 1/2 (the value of m, the magnetic spin number). Since they can go either way, antimatter goes the way that matter usually tends to go.

And once again, just because you all don't understand something doesn't mean science at large doesn't.


Does this make sense to you? - Mute - 2010-12-07




Does this make sense to you? - Herborist - 2010-12-07




Does this make sense to you? - DarkQThunder - 2010-12-07

Most of what I would say has already been said, so I'll just add a little:

3. Orbits for large bodies are actually elliptical, while orbitals of electrons in atoms are just sets of probabilities that an electron is in that space at any given point in time. (google for more info/images)