Apologetic Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 Ok its ben my recent discovery that Einstiens theroy of Relativity is being challenged by a good point of lightspeed varying blah blah blah. and if this proves to be true then black holes wouldnt be holes but stopped light and what not. But it also says that the universe is flat or would collapes on its out matter. I for one think this can be true but improbible to prove(not impossible).The universe being flat and round can be from any perspective. Anyway what do yall think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaper Girl Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 I find that hard to believe...I don't think light can be stoped, even by black holes...black holes are cocentrated mass (the mass of a star the size of a pin...very dangerous). How can they be stopped light?! But whatever... I go with a model of the universe I saw and read about a while ago. The universe is anamorphus...and it is NOT collapsing, its expanding... ...does everything NEED to be measured? silly scientist... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taoistimmortal Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 ive never thoght of the universe as being either round or flat actually amorphous is a very good word for it as for blackholes being stopped light i beleive that idea has been around for at least two decades and is very easy to imagine if a black hole is a concentration of mass so strong in its gravity field that nothing which crosses its event horizon can escape then light would be the most important particle in a black holes diet(the energy most frequently caught)and if light moving at the well relitively constant speed that it does could escape black holes would not be very black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apologetic Posted January 2, 2004 Author Share Posted January 2, 2004 Im sorry you misunderstood but it was my bad typing.I mean a black hole is yes a enormous concentrant of mass/gravity. But they say that basicly everything litterally STOPs on the edge of a black hole. Light stops(hence the BLACK) and this is argueable to say that everysingle galixy was constructed like a drain because of blackholes and if everything is supose to stop at the edge of the black hole then they wouldnt have been sent out in diffrent forms of energy ect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taoistimmortal Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 ok by saying stopped light you mean in image or actuallity im a bit fuzzy on the details your trying to put forth and by saying a drain are you implying that at the center of every galaxy is a black hole as for a flat universe your saying that if the universe is flat it shall forever expand and never contract and round being the opposing possibility of the effect that the universe will one day contract and restart again with another big bang scale explosion if that is whaat is meant then i believe the universe to be flat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmos Jack Posted January 3, 2004 Share Posted January 3, 2004 Originally posted by Orca Wail I find that hard to believe...I don't think light can be stoped It's already been done. http://www.afrlhorizons.com/Briefs/Jun02/OSR0201.html Stopping or slowing light down doesn't prove Einstein wrong; however, making it go faster in a vacuum would. I don't think the universe is flat. Maybe our known little space in the universe. The universe in it's self is infinite. If the universe does have a edge than what is on the other side? In order for there to be a end to something, or a barrier something else has to begin. So even if all the matter in the universe comes to a edge and after that there is nothing. Who is to say that there isn't more universes beyond this one that we will never see? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmos Jack Posted January 3, 2004 Share Posted January 3, 2004 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apologetic Posted January 3, 2004 Author Share Posted January 3, 2004 Yes but infinity can be like nothing or 0. Not contained or observed by human logic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmos Jack Posted January 3, 2004 Share Posted January 3, 2004 Originally posted by Apologetic Yes but infinity can be like nothing or 0. Not contained or observed by human logic Well I'm not going to argue mathematics with you that's not my thing. Zero-Infinity blah blah blah as you say, but if the universe is infinite and it can be nothing or 0 than what are we? So what does 0 infinity have to do with the exponential quantity of the infinite universe? Ok I agree with you "The universe is flat and round." Ok you an me are at the edge of the universe. What's past the edge? Is it boundless nothing. That would be "infinity" wouldn't it? Is there a big hug stone barrier with a sign on it that says "Edge of the universe go back nothing to see?" Well what about this big stone barrier. So if there is barrier than there is something on the other side "infinity" or is the barrier of stone infinite? Common sense has little to do with observable human logic or mathematics. Human logic says there is a beginning and end to everything. Humans regularly make flawed judgments. I don't really think there is a big stone barrier by the way. I have been flamed for this type of thinking before. I just don't think the universe is contained in a box with nothing on the other side or in your case a flat round box. If there is nothing on the other side than there is infinite room for something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Jones Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 Originally posted by Orca Wail I find that hard to believe...I don't think light can be stoped, even by black holes...black holes are cocentrated mass (the mass of a star the size of a pin...very dangerous). How can they be stopped light?! it isnt stopped. it's "sucked in" .. light is a electromagnetic wave in space. it's direction can be influenced by magnetic fields. (this is how the crt in a tv works btw) and also black holes/ big masses are "deforming" space because of the immense mass they "carry" .. and even if the light is still going straight on .. if the space is squeezed or stretched it will follow space.. (gravity lens) I go with a model of the universe I saw and read about a while ago. The universe is anamorphus...and it is NOT collapsing, its expanding... hehe.. actually i think it's more like a (re)cycling process of "wobbling".. and also there is no "single" universe .. ever wondered where all the stuff goes to that is collected by these black holes? but this is hard to explain.. you have to "see" it to understand .. ...does everything NEED to be measured? silly scientist... yeah. those silly scientists. i guess you are one of the breed which is still living in caves next to the fire. but i have to wonder how you could post in an internet forum, writing on your notebook computers while calling someone via the mobile phone. there are a million things that need to be measured, just to build a house with a heating, a toilet and warm water flowing inside. i mean. you know?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrion Posted January 6, 2004 Share Posted January 6, 2004 Originally posted by Orca Wail ...does everything NEED to be measured? silly scientist... The WHOLE basis of science is measuring. Measuring how lold fossils are..measuring the distant of the Sun from Earth..measuring how well antibiotics work against bacteria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pad Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 The basic of science is not measuring. Science has a look at evrything that crosses its path and getting answers on numerous questions. And that help us to get a better insight on the reality around us. Cause when we open our eyes look at the world it isnt exactly like looking directly through a window. Most of the ideas we form of the world are based on what we "see", but that seeing can be really fooled. And combining science with our posibilities of our brain we can have a clearer vision. And as for the universe being "flat". How do you define flat? Flat like back in history when they called the world flat? Thats like defining everything in 2 dimensions. And i think we have come to a point where we have seen that that vision isnt fitting anymore. 3d or maybe 4d is they way to look at things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daring dueler Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 well as far as ive studied is that black holes are technically concentrate mass soo dense that not even light can escape, it simply consumes the light , and it cannot escape. as for flat or round, i vote infinite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homuncul Posted January 19, 2004 Share Posted January 19, 2004 Cosmological Jack Common sense has little to do with observable human logic or mathematics. Human logic says there is a beginning and end to everything. Humans regularly make flawed judgments. A very good point The purpose of science is knowledge as of any process of cognition, specifically it's about explaining our reality by an algorythm. One of it's methods is measuring, it is also the only link to the object it tries to investigate. There is no science without measuring as there is no sight without eyes. I don't like discussing infinities. I'd just say that with best devices we've got, we can now say that our universe is about 13 bln years old, that our universe is expanding faster and faster every moment with something (can't remember the digits) close to lightspeed, that is most probably expand forever. Nothing else is yet of any considerable probability to be pretending to be true. There is no implicitly proven varying lightspeed and there is no implicit alternative for Einstein's Relativity (and I think it should be most troubling to scientists that almost a century it's all stuck). Although I would love to hear everybody accept multiverse as true, there is not eough proof for it now, or it's probable that modern proof model relys on logic that needs immidiate quality leap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MennoniteHobbit Posted January 25, 2004 Share Posted January 25, 2004 Hey, hold on a sec. I thought black holes didn't stop light, they just gather light in and compress it. And, I believe the universe isn't flat, I think in a way it would be spherical. I mean, it's impossible for the universe to be infinite, isn't it? I mean, the only way for it to be infinite in size is for it to be recurring, let's say like a sphere. No matter which side u exit it, if u go around it, u would never be able to stop. So, theoretically if that's true, u could go so far, that u end up hitting urself i the back. Though, if the universe was flat, it would have to be in someway a circle, but that would be a little odd, wouldn't it? ARGH!!! Too much spatial physics! Oh well, at least I can stand physics and what-not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daring dueler Posted January 28, 2004 Share Posted January 28, 2004 Originally posted by MennoniteHobbit Hey, hold on a sec. I thought black holes didn't stop light, they just gather light in and compress it. And, I believe the universe isn't flat, I think in a way it would be spherical. I mean, it's impossible for the universe to be infinite, isn't it? I mean, the only way for it to be infinite in size is for it to be recurring, let's say like a sphere. No matter which side u exit it, if u go around it, u would never be able to stop. So, theoretically if that's true, u could go so far, that u end up hitting urself i the back. Though, if the universe was flat, it would have to be in someway a circle, but that would be a little odd, wouldn't it? . Not neciscarily true, the univers can , and probably is infinite, how is that impossible, you compare it to a sphere, which is a reacuring infinty, but thats not the only kind, at least in theory, i mean we have found nothign to be infinite, but space most likely is, what would be beyond it, our minds just cant grasp the notion of ever going, or maybe im just stupid and confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master_Ginn Posted February 26, 2004 Share Posted February 26, 2004 Mmmmmmmmm. Just a question and you've probably answered this in you posts so forgive if it's true, but does it matter if the universe is flat or round? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted February 26, 2004 Share Posted February 26, 2004 Originally posted by Feanaro Mmmmmmmmm. Just a question and you've probably answered this in you posts so forgive if it's true, but does it matter if the universe is flat or round? Well It would help to solve many questions about things. especially light traveling and such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted February 27, 2004 Share Posted February 27, 2004 It would help in the future. Doesn't really matter for us anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crow_Nest Posted March 4, 2004 Share Posted March 4, 2004 Nopes albert was wrong, if he said the univerus was flat does he mean as flat as a pancake? Does that mean we're flatened? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 Light does not travel at a constant speed. Light in vacuum travels at a constant (and, more importantly, invariant) speed. Light has been stopped. But not in vacuum. So Einstein was not proven wrong. In fact the Theory of Relativity has never been stronger than it is today. As for the issue of black holes, the model that predicts the horizon to be a physical entity that things would 'crash into' was created to explain the fact that black holes radiate energy. This however, can also be explained by the concept of negative energy. An interesting explanation for this concept can be found in the Scientific American Special Issue from spring 2003: The Edge of Physics. As for spacetime geometry, it's a mathematical concept used to model spacetime. The five-minute tour is that if the universe contains a critical amount of energy, then it is flat. Otherwise it is either round (if there is more energy) or saddleback-shaped (I don't know if this is the correct term in English, maybe Skin can explain) (if there is less energy). Now, the catch is that the universe is very close to containing the critical level of energy, so we don't know for sure which of the three fits. But because the universe contains almost exactly the right amount of energy, it is speculated that there is an unknown physical mechanism that ensures that there can only be this particular amount. For those who are interested in further reading on the subject, I can recommend "The New World of Mr. Tompkins," by Gamow and Stannard, where these (and other) concepts are explained nicely in layman's terms. Originally posted by Orca Wail ...does everything NEED to be measured? Of course. How are you going to determine what's relevant to measure, if you don't measure everything at least once? light is a electromagnetic wave in space. it's direction can be influenced by magnetic fields. (this is how the crt in a tv works btw) The electromagnetic fields around the black hole is not the issue here. The fact that photons have a momentum, means that it will loose energy as it escapes from the gravitational well of an object with a positive mass (the story is a bit longer than that, because equating dynamic and gravitational mass is not trivial). So a photon that crosses the event horizon of a black hole will have insufficient energy to escape. The electromagnetic effects are neglegtible here. The basic of science is not measuring. Science has a look at evrything that crosses its path and getting answers on numerous questions. And that help us to get a better insight on the reality around us. But that is measuring. Just because your eye isn't million-dollar piece of equipment doesn't mean that it doesn't measure. Human sensory input is measurements. So, in a sense, you are always measuring. And as for the universe being "flat". How do you define flat? Flat like back in history when they called the world flat? Thats like defining everything in 2 dimensions. And i think we have come to a point where we have seen that that vision isnt fitting anymore. 3d or maybe 4d is they way to look at things. Flat in the mathematical definition of the term: Space is flat if and only if geometry is Euclidian (e.g. the circumference of a circle is 2*PI*r). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark jedi 8 Posted March 7, 2004 Share Posted March 7, 2004 i was just wondering: is there more than 1 universe? i mean are we confined to this universe or do black holes create or transport everything they take in to another universe or "place"? if their is an end to the universe, is there any scientific explenation to what is on the other side? i'm just curious as i'm not really knowledgable with this sorta thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Jones Posted March 7, 2004 Share Posted March 7, 2004 i would say yes, that is a possibility, i think i've read once about a theory calling the "backside" of black holes white holes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted March 7, 2004 Share Posted March 7, 2004 Originally posted by dark jedi 8 i was just wondering: is there more than 1 universe? i mean are we confined to this universe or do black holes create or transport everything they take in to another universe or "place"? if their is an end to the universe, is there any scientific explenation to what is on the other side? i'm just curious as i'm not really knowledgable with this sorta thing. Depends on your definition of 'universe'. If you define the universe as being the volume of space within your Hubble Radius (the age of the universe times the speed of light), then there are infinite universes outside this one. The idea that black holes 'transports' stuff was hot a few years ago, but I don't know whether it had any support amongst real scientists. Personally I think it sounds like science fiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.