Sabian Turbocharged February 15, 2015 Share February 15, 2015 This thread was perfect until the 3rd post. ↡ Advertisement 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicfoo Turbocharged February 15, 2015 Share February 15, 2015 When this BIG is different to that BIG, a BIG thread suddenly stop moving even by that little bit..LOL 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angcheek Hypersonic February 15, 2015 Author Share February 15, 2015 For those wanted to know abit more about Calabi Yau, this is a simple history how it started https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehVpYqTuJLw 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angcheek Hypersonic February 15, 2015 Author Share February 15, 2015 HO Ho HO ... you work in science research ? Must be interesting . What you said is true ... many of the 'things' are still a theory. But this is exactly how human got started about Space , just like in the past, all said Earth is in the center and the rest of planets include sun circle around it ... but afew said its the sun thats in the center ........ ultimately we now know there is no Center in space. It takes a bit of time to proof all these crazy theory of course. Another interesting area are dark matter and higgs field. Just like black hole , ES on paper showed its there but no one can prove it back then. Even till date , they know its there but still cant show what BH is. Numerous errors abound in the one video I watched. Minor niggles like "caesium" spelt wrongly, for instance. But also many major factual and conceptual errors. These mostly pertain to the "small" end of the scale - or it may just be that I feel I am not qualified to comment on the large end of the scale because I'm not big on cosmology. Regardless... The Calabi-Yau (again misspelt "Cubi Yau" [sic]) manifold is a theoretical construct from algebraic geometry. To speak of its size is nonsensical. However, superstring theory posits that the Universe actually has more spatial dimensions than the three we perceive. It's just that the "extra" dimensions are wrapped up so compactly that we can't "see" them. Some people have hypothesised that the very very tiny "extra" dimensions take the form of a Calabi-Yau manifold, which is where that concept comes in. Next, to speak of the size of subatomic particles is highly misleading. The scattering cross-section, a highly technical definition, is usually used as a proxy for "size" at this scale. However, there is no real correlate to what we perceive as size on the macroscopic scale we're used to. The standard model actually treats particles as point-like, meaning zero size. Finally, there's mention of the "nanobe" as the smallest form of life. However, there's no broad scientific support for this and most scientists consider these structures to be non-living crystalline minerals. Those are the obvious errors I picked up on, I'm sure there are others. But I guess the main "point" of a video like this is to evoke a sense of wonder, and this does that just fine, so I guess on that score, it is a success. BTW, I don't want to derail this thread into a religious discussion, but I feel it's necessary to put this last bit in because someone else has already brought up the "G" word. It is completely possible for an atheist to feel an immense sense of wonder at the scale of the Universe. In fact, I (as an atheist) feel even more wonder at the grand majesty of this immense, impersonal and indifferent cosmos than I would if I believed in a (anthropomorphic or otherwise) Creator. I can sort-of reconcile myself with the deists who believe in a dispassionate prime mover and orchestrator (even if I don't believe in such myself), but simply cannot get on board with the whole theism thing with a personal god or gods. As far as I'm concerned, any entity petty enough to be concerned with my doings and my fate is too petty for me to bother worshipping. To put it more pithily: I cannot bring myself to care about a deity that might care for me. That mindset probably has a lot to do with why I like cats more than dogs, but I digress. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingenius Turbocharged February 15, 2015 Share February 15, 2015 Can someone tell or explain, is the universe finite or infinite ? How is it so ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1fast1 Supersonic February 16, 2015 Share February 16, 2015 (edited) Can someone tell or explain, is the universe finite or infinite ? How is it so ? This is an *excellent* question. The short answer is: no one is sure. Yet. We may never know. The long answer: definitions are everything. What does finite mean? Most people think of a finite structure as having an edge that you either "bash into" or "fall off". But this is not so, and the moment that people first realised that the Earth was not flat and you could circumnavigate the globe, they understood this concept. So it is possible for space (the Universe) to be finite and have no edge. You can go around the entire Universe and come back to where you started. Another consideration is curvature. It is conceptually easiest to consider a model of the Universe as a 2-space (a surface) embedded in a 3rd dimension, but it must be remembered that there is no necessity for embedding of the actual 3-space of the Universe in a hyperspace. Regardless, you can consider various types of curvature - flat (zero curvature), spherical (positive curvature) and hyperbolic (negative curvature). Flat curvature means the sort of elementary geometry we're used to (called Euclidean geometry) holds perfectly, i.e. parallel lines remain equidistant at infinity and internal angles of triangles sum to exactly 180 degrees. Neither of these conditions hold for the other two forms of surface. Here is where experimental evidence comes in. The nature of the observation is radiation from distant objects and comparing the observed to the expected size in the WMAP survey. The latest evidence is that the Universe is flat to within 0.4%. Now when we say "flat", most people immediately think of a flat plane. That's one possible model, which would mean the Universe is infinite - you keep going and you never end up where you started. But another possibility is a complex shape of zero curvature. The torus is one such shape. Think of the surface of a doughnut. If you're an ant crawling on it, all the axioms of Euclidean geometry would hold exactly because there is zero curvature. But if you crawled all around the doughnut, you'd end up exactly where you started. That's one model for a finite, flat Universe (except we're talking about a hypertorus (which we cannot visualise or draw) since we need an extra dimension). There are many others, some quite esoteric. In some models, you'd end up being seriously "messed up" by the time you got back to your starting point because of the way the space in the model is curved. [There is a big branch of mathematics called topology that deals with the essence of shapes - what parts are adjacent to what other parts, where boundaries lie and which edges are glued together, etc. - but disregards exact lines and angles (which geometry considers). In topology, the planar model would be called simply connected (no "holes") whereas the toroidal model (the doughnut surface) is *not* simply connected.] So, to sum up, it could go either way. All we know is that the Universe is very likely to be flat. If it's infinite, it's going to be a plane. But if it's not, then there are other models that apply. What is important to realise is that we must make a distinction between the entire Universe (a hypothesised entity) and the *observable* Universe (an entity we can actually observe, albeit in the "past" because the light takes a long time to reach us). The span of the observable Universe is about 13.8 billion light years in every direction. So we know the Universe is at least that big - it's almost certainly MUCH bigger. The only question is: how much? If it's a finite flat Universe we're dealing with, theoretically, one day, it may be possible to peer far enough and see the backs of our own heads! But not if it's an infinite Universe. More resources for you to look up (I highly recommend the Zogg the Alien videos, they're awesome): More information on WMAP's contribution: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_shape.html Edited February 16, 2015 by Turboflat4 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darryn Turbocharged February 16, 2015 Share February 16, 2015 By the way, our earth will be engulfed by the sun in 5b years ... so nomatter how u see it ... solar planets will be done for So HDB prices up or down? 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
F355 Turbocharged February 16, 2015 Share February 16, 2015 BTW, I don't want to derail this thread into a religious discussion, but I feel it's necessary to put this last bit in because someone else has already brought up the "G" word. It is completely possible for an atheist to feel an immense sense of wonder at the scale of the Universe. In fact, I (as an atheist) feel even more wonder at the grand majesty of this immense, impersonal and indifferent cosmos than I would if I believed in a (anthropomorphic or otherwise) Creator. I can sort-of reconcile myself with the deists who believe in a dispassionate prime mover and orchestrator (even if I don't believe in such myself), but simply cannot get on board with the whole theism thing with a personal god or gods. As far as I'm concerned, any entity petty enough to be concerned with my doings and my fate is too petty for me to bother worshipping. To put it more pithily: I cannot bring myself to care about a deity that might care for me. That mindset probably has a lot to do with why I like cats more than dogs, but I digress. I read this over and over , and come to a conclusion that I could not have penned it better . 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
F355 Turbocharged February 16, 2015 Share February 16, 2015 What you said is true ... many of the 'things' are still a theory. THEORY , though constantly falsifiable , is the highest level attainable for any ideas in science . The theory of gravity , the atomic theory , the germ theory for diseases , the theory of evolution , are just some of science greatest theories . 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darryn Turbocharged February 16, 2015 Share February 16, 2015 The Christian God. Genesis 1:1 - In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth. Well, I think I shouldn't be preaching here, in this secular forum. So I shall leave it as such. So you believe in a literal interpretation of the bible? So that all of us are actually descended from Adam and Eve who had children? Who then created God? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ender Hypersonic February 16, 2015 Share February 16, 2015 Great that people put in effort to to makes videos for laymen to grasp a little bit of the wonders of science. I could never understand this thru reading. At least now my knowledge improve by 0.0001%. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darryn Turbocharged February 16, 2015 Share February 16, 2015 BTW, I don't want to derail this thread into a religious discussion, but I feel it's necessary to put this last bit in because someone else has already brought up the "G" word. It is completely possible for an atheist to feel an immense sense of wonder at the scale of the Universe. In fact, I (as an atheist) feel even more wonder at the grand majesty of this immense, impersonal and indifferent cosmos than I would if I believed in a (anthropomorphic or otherwise) Creator. I can sort-of reconcile myself with the deists who believe in a dispassionate prime mover and orchestrator (even if I don't believe in such myself), but simply cannot get on board with the whole theism thing with a personal god or gods. As far as I'm concerned, any entity petty enough to be concerned with my doings and my fate is too petty for me to bother worshipping. To put it more pithily: I cannot bring myself to care about a deity that might care for me. That mindset probably has a lot to do with why I like cats more than dogs, but I digress. Clap clap clap... Here's my question to you... Is it possible to be both atheist and at the same time believe that there is a "force" acting that is greater than any one of us? I cannot accept the theory / possibility of an omniscient "God" (of whatever name you want to use, be it Shiva, God, Allah, Yahweh) but I do wholeheartedly support the idea of "Karma" - that what we "get" out of life is in concordance with what we give. (but that "get" and "give" have variable meanings and definitions) 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boringchap Turbocharged February 16, 2015 Share February 16, 2015 So you believe in a literal interpretation of the bible? So that all of us are actually descended from Adam and Eve who had children? Who then created God? Yes. Nobody created God. He exists. http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/who_created_god.html 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darryn Turbocharged February 16, 2015 Share February 16, 2015 Yes. Nobody created God. He exists. http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/who_created_god.html If nothing created God, why do you need a god to create the universe? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boringchap Turbocharged February 16, 2015 Share February 16, 2015 If nothing created God, why do you need a god to create the universe? God doesn't need anything. He created the universe. That is His sovereign will. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ender Hypersonic February 16, 2015 Share February 16, 2015 (edited) Monty Python's take on explaining how big is the universe and how insignificant we are Clap clap clap... Here's my question to you... Is it possible to be both atheist and at the same time believe that there is a "force" acting that is greater than any one of us? I cannot accept the theory / possibility of an omniscient "God" (of whatever name you want to use, be it Shiva, God, Allah, Yahweh) but I do wholeheartedly support the idea of "Karma" - that what we "get" out of life is in concordance with what we give. (but that "get" and "give" have variable meanings and definitions) Yes, a Conspiracy Theorist, Edited February 16, 2015 by Ender 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolicense Turbocharged February 16, 2015 Share February 16, 2015 If nothing created God, why do you need a god to create the universe? do you really want to chase the rabbit down the rabbit hole? 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1fast1 Supersonic February 16, 2015 Share February 16, 2015 Clap clap clap... Here's my question to you... Is it possible to be both atheist and at the same time believe that there is a "force" acting that is greater than any one of us? I cannot accept the theory / possibility of an omniscient "God" (of whatever name you want to use, be it Shiva, God, Allah, Yahweh) but I do wholeheartedly support the idea of "Karma" - that what we "get" out of life is in concordance with what we give. (but that "get" and "give" have variable meanings and definitions) You might want to look up "deism" - there are different "flavours" thereof. Pick one that suits you best. ↡ Advertisement Link to post 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 NowRelated Discussions
Related Discussions
3 Big Money Mistakes Singaporean In Their 30's
3 Big Money Mistakes Singaporean In Their 30's
Bringing a nice & new luggage bag to China...think again
Bringing a nice & new luggage bag to China...think again
To be Happy, start thinking about Death!
To be Happy, start thinking about Death!
Monkey think, another monkey do
Monkey think, another monkey do
How much space do we really need to make babies?
How much space do we really need to make babies?
Is Something Big Coming To California, USA ?
Is Something Big Coming To California, USA ?
Is FN2 is really a failure?
Is FN2 is really a failure?