***The Scale of the Universe***

[Chill Mists (Chilly) 801]

Welp. I'm tiny.

[Comet Tail 808]

Haha! Indeed. I guess it just puts everything into perspective. Its literally almost impossible to really fathom the scale of the universe we live in. (Not only that, but we are now discovering different dimensions and universes that make up multiverses etc, although only theory, some intense math and speculation does not disprove it...and this is where I draw the line. My intellect can barely handle THIS universe!).

[...]

 

I'd agree, except for the addition of the word "almost"

 

If you think about it, different scales really are kind of different worlds in themselves. The world of atoms is very different than the world we live in, or the world of galactic formations or interstellar space.

 

One especially interesting idea, is that if the universe is infinite, and if there are infinite multiverses, then anything that's consistent in itself could be possible; anything with any probability of happening has happened, will happen, and is happening.

 

That would make heaven one heck of an interesting place, eh? Glad I'm not the one that has to figure out how to get all that to work

 

And anyways, it's kind of funny. Albert Einstein didn't believe in a personal Christian sort of God, but believed in a somewhat pantheistic God, but not even that, he sort of saw God as the elegant, beautiful order of the cosmos. Yet what he said describing God, seems very true from my experience:

"Coincidence is God's way of remaining anonymous."

 

On a strikingly similar note; one thing that's always fascinated me is the Anglo-Saxon/Viking concept of "Wyrd". It is literally the root for our word "weird", and what it means is the personified course of fate, or coincidence, just how things play out, and it was a sort of concept of God that they had. It's fascinating stuff, really.

Edited June 16, 2012 by EASA - Matt

[Steel Matt 250]

 

One especially interesting idea, is that if the universe is infinite, and if there are infinite multiverses, then anything that's consistent in itself could be possible; anything with any probability of happening has happened, will happen, and is happening.

 

That would make heaven one heck of an interesting place, eh? Glad I'm not the one that has to figure out how to get all that to work

 

And anyways, it's kind of funny. Albert Einstein didn't believe in a personal Christian sort of God, but believed in a somewhat pantheistic God, but not even that, he sort of saw God as the elegant, beautiful order of the cosmos. Yet what he said describing God, seems very true from my experience:

"Coincidence is God's way of remaining anonymous."

 

On a strikingly similar note; one thing that's always fascinated me is the Anglo-Saxon/Viking concept of "Wyrd". It is literally the root for our word "weird", and what it means is the personified course of fate, or coincidence, just how things play out, and it was a sort of concept of God that they had. It's fascinating stuff, really.

 

Indeed, it is all fascinating stuff. Quite honestly, there isn't a enough words in any language to describe how fascinating it is.

 

They say in regards to time (although we are limited by time), God and the Universe as no such limitation. So I believe you are 100 percent correct in saying, anything that could happen in any possible scenario or combination has happened, is happening, and will happen. It reminds me of a verse in a worship song, as well as scripture "Who was, and is, and is to come".

 

In the business world, (more appropriately, science), mathematical modeling, statistical process control, and optimization models help to optimize and fully utilize certain processes, given a number of possible solutions based on ones X and Y variables. It's quite interesting, because although there are almost an infinite number of possibilities in any given problem, the true solution (in optimization) it to literally find the optimal solution, based on what you want and/or are looking for. Here is the relation: [without going into too much detail], a lot of the times, we find there is no optimal solution when the conditions are right. And if the Universe and everything in it has an infinite number of possibilities present in a given situation, we may SAY we can find optimal solutions and answers to science and mathematical problems...but the "solutions" can only go as far as the information we know. Conclusion: there may never be a true optimal solution to anything in this present life, as things in there current state can always be improved upon

 

On an unrelated note, a theory exists that at the center of every galaxy, exists a black hole. On the animation, I found something called "The Great Attractor" = which, by it's behavior, seems to be some type of Mega Black hole? But instead of pulling in other stars in one galaxy, it's pulling in hundreds of galaxies closer to it. Its all VERY fascinating.

[spas-ticShotty 3,584]

I've had this wierd idea that if something were to travel far enough in deep space, it would end up where it started.

 

Basically imagining it as the inside of an orb

[Steel Matt 250]

I've had this wierd idea that if something were to travel far enough in deep space, it would end up where it started.

 

Basically imagining it as the inside of an orb

 

This is what I love about science...because speculation and ideas are what lead us to start asking questions...and attempting to find answers to those questions!

 

Of course, we know that we can peer deep into space with instruments such as the Hubble Space Telescope. There is just no way to accurately predict how big space is...especially if its infinite.

 

But lets put your perspective in another way! Hundreds of years ago, we thought the Earth was flat. If you attempted to keep sailing the Earth in order to reach the end, you would be out of luck as it would seem to go on forever. The only proof we would have of it not spreading into infinity, would be if we recognized a landmark that we had seen before. Then we could draw conclusions from there. In the end, imagining space like an orb, in my opinion, is not that crazy of a theory. In fact, it would make more sense to us than infinity.

[Comet Tail 808]

I've had this wierd idea that if something were to travel far enough in deep space, it would end up where it started.

 

Basically imagining it as the inside of an orb

 

This is what I love about science...because speculation and ideas are what lead us to start asking questions...and attempting to find answers to those questions!

 

Of course, we know that we can peer deep into space with instruments such as the Hubble Space Telescope. There is just no way to accurately predict how big space is...especially if its infinite.

 

But lets put your perspective in another way! Hundreds of years ago, we thought the Earth was flat. If you attempted to keep sailing the Earth in order to reach the end, you would be out of luck as it would seem to go on forever. The only proof we would have of it not spreading into infinity, would be if we recognized a landmark that we had seen before. Then we could draw conclusions from there. In the end, imagining space like an orb, in my opinion, is not that crazy of a theory. In fact, it would make more sense to us than infinity.

 

Imagine a sphere. A sphere has a 2-d surface, and if you go forever on it, you end up where you started.

 

If the universe itself is warped in something like a "sphere" shape, then our 4-dimensional timespace, is, by analogy, the 2-d surface of the sphere. It is possible to have warped space.

 

Now, considering that time itself is a dimension, it might even be possible that the sphere is a 5-dimensional shape, so that time and space curve back to the starting point. Though it seems like it might cause a problem for casuality, it might not. I think it would violate entropy, though, unless some process countered that. But once again, I'm not really enough of an expert to say, and I think even the experts might disagree on that part.

[MVC NVMXD JVRXD 2,406]

Wow. I am SO significant!

[A Blithering Div 247]

The universe is truly massive. Even the best description of a nanosecond (

) cannot do the universe justice. Whats even better is that its expanding and accelerating and we don't know whats causing it. At the moment its theorized that dark matter/energy is causing it but we don't even know what that is.

 

Semi-related:

[Krystal 1,468]

Did anyone notice Minecraft world on here? It's 64,000 square kilometers

Edited June 20, 2012 by Jarrettlicious

[Gigachip 148]

wow, saw the video on the first page...

truly awesome how big yet small we are

[Whiteshade 1,426]

Did anyone notice Minecraft world on here? It's 64,000 square kilometers: about the size of Neptune

 

Neptune is only 64,000km²? Isn't that like, smaller than Pluto?

[Krystal 1,468]

http-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IVqMXPFYwI&feature=related

 

Something about the video some people may not have realized: once zoomed out of our solar sysem, all of the little specks of dust are actually other solar systems, nebulas, and groups of stars. And once zoomed out of our galaxy all of the little dots are other galaxies.

[Steel Matt 250]

Quick little update:

 

And then the Universe got even more complicated!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypy0Jt5iMfs

 

Quite interesting. Of course, this may answer some questions, but raises countless more in the process in physics, mathematics, sciences, theology, history, and numerous other topics. Theory and science fiction is slowly becoming science fact.

 

Another debate that pops up in my mind: If the "God Particle" is responsible for the beginning of the theorized big bang, what created the "God Particle"? (I have my thoughts based on my faith, but scientifically things are getting interesting) So many questions! That's what I personally love about the Universe.

Edited July 5, 2012 by Steel Matt

[Akemi Homura 7,680]

The music is phenomenally soothing and fitting for this kind of presentation. It actually feels like you're in harmony with what you're seeing on the screen, especially seeing how it is a representation of everything around us - big or small.

[Marshmallow 1,137]

I don't know if I've mentioned this already or not, but look at the size of protons and neutrons, then look at the size of electrons. After that, look at the size of molecules. It's really amazing how most of the universe, even what we consider a very dense solid object like a lead brick, is by an absolutely staggering majority, empty space.

 

This

People often overlook just how small electrons are compared to atoms.

 

If an atom was to be magnified to be the size of the Earth, then its electrons probably would not be much bigger than a cherry.

And don't get me started on neutrinos and the likes. These particles are so small that they pass through our bodies and everything without ever touching a single atom. It's mind-boggling.

 

And you have the same thing with infinitely large objects. What is shown in OP's video is just a tiny tiny part of the universe.

Infinity is a mind blowing concept.

[Love4discord18 269]

The video gave me butterflies, it was that awesome

[Sakamoto 103]

Holy cracker...

 

 

Now that's surely mind-blowing as hell

[Steel Matt 250]

As a small little tribute to Neil Armstrong, I thought it might be appropriate to add a little something to the thread. Without him and his team, space exploration would not have been viewed the same.

 

 

 

What about the future of space exploration?

 

[I used to be a stranger 7,993]

What's most interesting to me is that the Planck Length is theorized to be the smallest possible length. You can't have a partial Planck Length, because there is no space between one side of a Planck Length and the other.

 

Is that to mean a planck length is equal to the size of a Point in space which presupposedly has no dimensions and is simply information of a location?

 

Bah, I suppose a dimension like that is only relevant to quantum mechanics, since for all practical intents and purposes, such a distance is essentially nil.

[Evilshy 5,090]

 

 

Is that to mean a planck length is equal to the size of a Point in space which presupposedly has no dimensions and is simply information of a location?

 

Bah, I suppose a dimension like that is only relevant to quantum mechanics, since for all practical intents and purposes, such a distance is essentially nil.

 

Well, it's strange, because at scales that small, physics works totally different from the everyday stuff we're used to dealing with. Because of how certain particles move and interact and stuff, it would be impossible to measure any distance smaller than a Planck Length, but it is measurable distance. AFAIK, if one were to observe a particle traveling on this scale, the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle would prevent you from seeing anything move a distance shorter than a Planck Length. Or something like that.

 

I'm by no means an expert on this stuff :/

[I used to be a stranger 7,993]

Well, it's strange, because at scales that small, physics works totally different from the everyday stuff we're used to dealing with. Because of how certain particles move and interact and stuff, it would be impossible to measure any distance smaller than a Planck Length, but it is measurable distance. AFAIK, if one were to observe a particle traveling on this scale, the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle would prevent you from seeing anything move a distance shorter than a Planck Length. Or something like that.

 

I'm by no means an expert on this stuff :/

 

As I understand it, at the quantum level, classical physics do not work, and the lines between energy and matter begin to blur tremendously.

[Dusty Soul 2,611]

I saw this about 3 days ago... It is quite interesting to think that we are really that insignificant, and all that we have built really serves no purpose in the big picture...

[Evilshy 5,090]

 

 

As I understand it, at the quantum level, classical physics do not work, and the lines between energy and matter begin to blur tremendously.

 

Pretty much, yeah. Perhaps more interesting is wave-particle duality. I'm sure you've heard of superposition, where a particle is occupying all possible quantum states until it is observed? Well, there's this thing called the Double Slit test. They fire a stream of particles through 2 slits in a piece of metal, at a wall. If you observe the wall, the particles produce a pattern consistent with firing waves through 2 slits. However, if you observe the particles while they travel between the emitter and the slits, you will see individual particles, and the pattern on the wall will be consistent with firing particles through the slits (2 clusters of individual particles hits, like throwing baseballs through 2 holes in a wall and recording where they land).

But the weirdest part?

If you observe the particles between the slits and the wall, you will see the particles as if they had been observed when leaving the emitter. In theory, if you let them travel as waves until passing through the slits, the particles would be in a pattern consistent with a wave traveling through slits, but you don't. You get a pattern as if they had been particles the entire time. So this basically means that not even time works the same way at the quantum level.

[I used to be a stranger 7,993]

But the weirdest part?

If you observe the particles between the slits and the wall, you will see the particles as if they had been observed when leaving the emitter. In theory, if you let them travel as waves until passing through the slits, the particles would be in a pattern consistent with a wave traveling through slits, but you don't. You get a pattern as if they had been particles the entire time. So this basically means that not even time works the same way at the quantum level.

 

And that's how friendship was made.

 

Freaking matter, how does it work?

I guess that sort of disestablishes that troll argument about "what is light, is it a particle or wave?". The answer of course, is yes.

[Evilshy 5,090]

 

 

And that's how friendship was made.

 

Freaking matter, how does it work?

I guess that sort of disestablishes that troll argument about "what is light, is it a particle or wave?". The answer of course, is yes.

 

As Obi-Wan would say, "It is a wave and a particle, from a certain point of view."

Because it technically is

Sorry, just had to nerd it up.