Notices
Results 1 to 57 of 57
Like Tree23Likes
  • 2 Post By Markus Hanke
  • 2 Post By tk421
  • 3 Post By adelady
  • 1 Post By Strange
  • 1 Post By Flick Montana
  • 1 Post By lightspeed
  • 1 Post By Dywyddyr
  • 3 Post By adelady
  • 1 Post By Strange
  • 2 Post By Strange
  • 1 Post By nsbm ranger
  • 1 Post By Markus Hanke
  • 1 Post By Strange
  • 1 Post By Dywyddyr
  • 1 Post By beefpatty
  • 1 Post By John Galt

Thread: All of existence ?

  1. #1 All of existence ? 
    1 Ugly MoFo warthog213's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    147
    Hello everyone, Warthog213 here. (not a scientist)
    (Warning this is an idea) and by no means proven to be a fact.... Because just like any observer of the things around us I do know for sure which is fact and which is false "I haven't traveled the stars"
    This is just one of the possibilities in which our universe has come to exist and an explanation how and why we see what we see....

    My idea about our universe is simple, all particles such as atoms and parts which make up an atom are all made of even smaller parts which we know as electrons, protons, neutrons and the nucleus. And what I am saying is that these particles are made of even smaller parts (building blocks with names unknown) These parts of these atoms are not hollow and can not be made of just nothing and because we can not see them doesn't mean that they do not exist.... They would be millions of times smaller than an atom, meaning there would be an entire universe inside each atom and its atomic structure....
    Atoms make up everything here on earth and throughout the universe.... I think its silly to discredit the fact that it is possibly the way nature has designed our whole universe. I think this continues on and on in both directions, that building blocks keep getting smaller and even smaller and that our entire universe as we see it is just a smaller part of a larger object that we are just tiny particals in and that would go on into infinity, in both directions getting larger and smaller as well. "meaning that our universe exist somewhere inside of a larger atom.... My idea for thinking this is that time would relative to that smaller or larger space meaning that we are a small speck of time in that larger object just as an atoms time in our space is just a speck of time here in our space. If you draw a line "to represent time" and place points on it to represent an atoms existence then the time for those universes inside that atom will exist within that atoms frame of existence and time never changes or waivers.... As I see it this idea is far more possible due to the idea that it also fits into the natural order of things which would be time relativity as well as natural properties of recycling everything.... If you consider also that the particals speed up as they get smaller this idea also fits this model....

    If you look at the diagrams of atoms you'll first notice the different types of atom designs and then compare those to diagrams of solar systems, galaxies you'll notice that they do have some similarities which are uncanny.... Some atoms have just 4 electrons orbiting the nucleus and some atoms have many more and I have read where articles have said that some solar systems have as few as 4 orbiting planets and some have more.... And what we see on a stary night would be the energies these produce.... But I beleive that in every atom exist an entire universe.... Thus making the universe far more vast than we could ever imagine.....

    Now what we need to do as a maximum effort is to deeply explore the workings of the atom. "I say this basically because atoms exist everywhere" you might travel in the universe and a better understanding of the energies within the atoms and their parts, reactions to one another as well as how they change here on earth will help us better understand what we see out there.... I know many scientist are working this very subject this very minute but we need a much deeper understanding of the energies that atoms produce, what their reactions are "as a unit" "when clumped together" Inertia has kept the planets floating around our sun for 4 billion years.... There are forces at work which need "require" further exploration and the clue is in "atoms"

    I do hope this article presents a better understanding on my thinking on this subject that I hold this in very high regards as to our existence....


    Last edited by warthog213; January 29th, 2013 at 06:25 PM.
    (warthog) an ugly little animal in Africa that is hunted, killed and eaten by lions.

    Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things....

    Every dream i've dreamed isn't the life I live in....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    My idea about our universe is simple, all particles such as atoms and parts which make up an atom are all made of even smaller parts which we know as electrons, protons, neutrons and the nucleus. And what I am saying is that these particles are made of even smaller parts (building blocks with names unknown)
    Well, in the case of protons and neutrons, we know from observation that they are made of other particles (quarks).

    In the case of other particles, despite a lot of research, there is no evidence of anything smaller. One example of this is "preon theory" (Preon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). You can choose to believe that this is true despite the lack of evidence, but that is not the way science works.

    Another attempt to "rationalise" all the different particles as having a common cause is string theory.

    If you look at the diagrams of atoms you'll first notice the different types of atom designs and then compare those to diagrams of solar systems, galaxies you'll notice that they do have similarities which are uncanny.... Solar systems would be the atom itself ...
    Our modern understanding of what atoms "look like" beras no relation at all to the solar system. (This is a very old idea but doesn't really have any basis in fact despite its apparent intuitive appeal.)


    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quantum physics imposes a natural limit on how small things can get ( the Planck scale ). Below that limit many of our normal notions about space and time simply no longer apply.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    warthog, your idea of atoms made up of smaller things and solar systems and galaxies being the equivalent at the next scale up, and so on in both directions, is a commonplace thought among adolescents and 1930s science fiction writers. It is imaginative to a degree, but has no significant evidence to support it in any way. So, it is an amusing thought, but offers nothing of spiritual, scientific, social or literary value. I advise you to consign it to the scrapbook of personal history.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    1 Ugly MoFo warthog213's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    147


    There absolutely can never possibly be any resemblance at all.....
    Just because the view from where you are is one way doesn't mean that the outside view is indentically the same....
    (warthog) an ugly little animal in Africa that is hunted, killed and eaten by lions.

    Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things....

    Every dream i've dreamed isn't the life I live in....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post


    There absolutely can never possibly be any resemblance at all.....
    Just because the view from where you are is one way doesn't mean that the outside view is indentically the same....
    These pictures are based on the old Bohr model of the atom, which has long since been superseded. Electrons are not little balls circling the nucleus on well defined orbits, like planets do.
    adelady and Flick Montana like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    Just because the view from where you are is one way doesn't mean that the outside view is indentically the same....
    As I said, our modern understanding of what atoms "look like" bears no relation at all to the solar system.
    orbitals.jpg

    Also, electrons can move from one energy level to another by absorbing or emitting photons. When did you last see a planet do that and spit out a giant ball of light.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    1 Ugly MoFo warthog213's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    147
    clip_image002_009.jpg
    • 1 electric field (wave) 1 magnetic field (wave)
    • Each field (wave) is perpendicular to the other and both are perpendicular to the direction of movement (see below image)

    emsAnatomy_mainContent_electric-field_magnetic-field.pngIn the 1860's and 1870's, a Scottish scientist named James Clerk Maxwell developed a scientific theory to explain electromagnetic waves. He noticed that electrical fields and magnetic fields can couple together to form electromagnetic waves. He summarized this relationship between electricity and magnetism into what are now referred to as "Maxwell's Equations."

    emsAnatomy_mainContent_EMwave.pngA
    All light has both particle-like and wave-like properties. How an instrument is
    designed to sense the light influences which of these properties are observed.


    Wave lengths of an atom vs the wave lengths received from space in graph form....
    Attached Images
    (warthog) an ugly little animal in Africa that is hunted, killed and eaten by lions.

    Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things....

    Every dream i've dreamed isn't the life I live in....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Would you care to explain the relevance of this diversion into the nature of electromagnetic radiation?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    1 Ugly MoFo warthog213's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    147

    The Nature of Electromagnetic Radiation

    Unlike convection or conduction, heat transfer by electromagnetic radiation requires no intervening medium to transmit it. Electromagnetic radiation travels through space in the form of waves. It's hard to imagine radiation moving as waves through empty space without a medium to transfer the wave form. The waves created when you drop a rock into a pool require molecules of water to propagate them, but not so for radiation.
    Energy as electromagnetic waves

    The quantity of energy carried in a wave is associated with the height or amplitude of the wave. Everything else being equal, the amount of energy carried in a wave is directly proportional to the amplitude of the wave. The type or "quality" of radiation depends on the wavelength, the distance between successive crests. The greater the distance between wave crests, the longer the wavelength.
    Figure 4.2 Wave properties
    Any body that has a temperature is emitting electromagnetic radiation. There are an infinite number of wavelengths that make up the electromagnetic spectrum though we group them into a number of bands (Figure 4.3). The shortest wavelengths fall into the gamma rays, the electromagnetic radiation we can see with our eyes and processed by our brains falls into the visible band, and radio waves are comprised of the longest wavelengths.
    Figure 4.3 The Solar radiation spectrum
    The maximum wavelength at which a body emits radiation depends on its temperature. Wein's (pronounced "weens") Law states that the peak wavelength of radiation emission is inversely related to the temperature of the emitting body. That is, the hotter the body, the shorter the wavelength of peak emission. Figure 4.4 shows the wavelengths over which the Sun and Earth emit most of their radiation. The Sun being a much hotter body emits most of its radiation in the shortwave end and the Earth in the longwave end of the spectrum. The division between shortwave and longwave radiation occurs at about 3 micrometers.
    Figure 4.4 Comparison of solar and earth radiation spectra
    Radiation as particles

    It's hard to imagine radiation moving as waves through empty space without a medium to transfer the wave form. For instance, the waves created when you drop a rock into a pool of water require molecules of H2O to propagate them. Though we describe electromagnetic radiation as invisible waves of energy, at the smallest scale it behaves as a particle, like when light is emitted by a single atom or molecule. When energy is given off there is a change in the orbital pattern of the electrons that surround the nucleus of an atom. As the orbit changes, a bundle of energy called a "photon" is released. However, particles of light differ from particles of matter: they have no mass, occupy no space, and travel at the speed of light, 2.9998 X 108m s-1. The amount of energy carried by a photon varies inversely with wavelength, the shorter the wavelength, the more energetic the photon.

    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________

    And you still don't find it fascinating that these same signals which come from atoms come from deep space.... We know that thing change and are different just as you and I are.... But we have things in common such as we both eat, both rest, both breath.... The same is true all across the universe in relation to earth.... Thats like the gravity thing in another thread:::: I said that the rings of Saturn was a perfect example ( A visual example) of gravity with particals flying around and the whole nine yards.... The astrioids that make up its rings are held in check from its north and south poles thus proving his theory that push pull gravity exist.... The reason for which it exist is the fact that atoms have both negative and positive particals in even portions for simple fact that they made of matter....

    And everyone keeps running on and on about the Big Bang Theory and so fourth and I do hope that everyone uses what we know explosions and applies this to a model in which to give us an idea in where to search for this evidence that this occured.... Things like this are common sense to most us though somtimes I wonder about some of us here in humanity.... Natures design is perfect in all its form.... It also works hand in hand with any concept of time and there are to many possible cominations which occur in nature that it is all too easy to get lost in its glory.... Before man existed there was nature and when man is gone there will still be nature.... Common sense will tell you that time never began because it always has been and always will be which means it must loop and return with in itself and all things just exist until they evolve as time passes.... So I will not get lost in the complexities of natures accidents and combinations.... Instead I will concentrate on its simpler workings and just be facinated by its dance....
    If I could choose anything in the universe in which to be I would still choose man.... Man has the freedom to move about, the freedom to think and the freedom dream "now I don't know about you but that is all anyone could ask for"
    (warthog) an ugly little animal in Africa that is hunted, killed and eaten by lions.

    Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things....

    Every dream i've dreamed isn't the life I live in....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    And you still don't find it fascinating that these same signals which come from atoms come from deep space.... We know that thing change and are different just as you and I are.... But we have things in common such as we both eat, both rest, both breath.... The same is true all across the universe in relation to earth.... Thats like the gravity thing in another thread:::: I said that the rings of Saturn was a perfect example ( A visual example) of gravity with particals flying around and the whole nine yards.... The astrioids that make up its rings are held in check from its north and south poles thus proving his theory that push pull gravity exist.... The reason for which it exist is the fact that atoms have both negative and positive particals in even portions for simple fact that they made of matter....
    You're truly amazing. You talk about things you know nothing about, inventing what you think are facts all by your fancy, then spew them out as if something is wrong with everyone else for not seeing it your way.
    This is compounded by your sig line:
    "Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things...."

    No, your daffy words about 'positive and negative particles' in atoms in 'even portions' simply because they are 'made of matter' does not prove 'push-pull gravity.' They are not in "even portions." "Made of matter" is irrelevant and none of it in any way demonstrates (Much less 'proves) your assertions- it's totally unrelated.
    It doesn't even qualify as word salad.
    Word salad at least has some kind of dressing. It usually at least looks good...
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    And everyone keeps running on and on about the Big Bang Theory and so fourth and I do hope that everyone uses what we know explosions and applies this to a model
    "What we know Explosions?"
    WHAT?!
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    in which to give us an idea in where to search for this evidence that this occured....
    Clearly, you are utterly clueless about the COBE and WMAP data and observations which support the Lambda CDM model. You probably never heard of any of it. You probably think BBT is "Just a theory."
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    Things like this are common sense to most us
    Scary. Common sense. Right.
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    Natures design is perfect in all its form....
    You're adept at saying nonsense.
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    It also works hand in hand with any concept of time and there are to many possible cominations which occur in nature that it is all too easy to get lost in its glory.... Before man existed there was nature and when man is gone there will still be nature.... Common sense will tell you that time never began because it always has been and always will be which means it must loop and return with in itself and all things just exist until they evolve as time passes.... So I will not get lost in the complexities of natures accidents and combinations.... Instead I will concentrate on its simpler workings and just be facinated by its dance....
    The only Dance going on here is you dancing around reality.

    If you think I'm harsh- it's built up over a period of time reading the utter garbage in your many posts.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,895
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    [COLOR=#333333][CENTER]
    [TABLE] [TR] [TD="width: 682"]The Nature of Electromagnetic Radiation

    [LEFT]Unlike convection or conduction, heat transfer by electromagnetic radiation requires no intervening medium to transmit it. Electromagnetic radiation travels through space in the form of waves. It's hard to imagine radiation moving as waves through empty space without a medium to transfer the wave form. ...
    Many things that are "hard to imagine" are nonetheless true. Why should the universe conform to your imagination? Shouldn't you ought to consider that your imagination is simply too limited to appreciate the way the universe works? Or are you so freakin' brilliant that, without having studied the subject even superficially (as is painfully evident), you are able to discern truths that elude all others? Your appeal to "common sense" is ridiculous. Look at how little the human race accomplished with just common sense as a guide. Aristotle was full of...common sense. Following his "obvious" truths held back human civilization for well over a millennium. The scientific method has proven to be the best way yet devised to discover how the universe works. Much of what has been discovered is distinctly beyond "common sense." Don't impose your own cognitive limitations on the universe. Go with the evidence. And for Pete's sake, study the subject. Your posts are aggressively ignorant.
    John Galt and Neverfly like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    Natures design is perfect in all its form.... It also works hand in hand with any concept of time and there are to many possible cominations which occur in nature that it is all too easy to get lost in its glory.
    Riiiight. Perfect design. Perhaps you've never met a woman - or at least a menstruating woman or a pregnant woman or a menopausal woman.

    Perfect? Phoooey. The human female reproductive system works despite its design - not because of it. (Just check maternal mortality rates before modern medicine found ways to help.)
    Strange, tk421 and Neverfly like this.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    First, please make an effort to communicate clearly. For example, I assume most of the text in that post is copied from somewhere. But (a) It isn't clear what is copied and what is your own words (I assume the bits that make sense are copied and the nonsense is yours, but that may be unfair); and (b) you should credit whatever source you are copying from.

    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    And you still don't find it fascinating that these same signals which come from atoms come from deep space....
    Who says we don't find this fascinating? But you do realise that the light we see coming from space also comes from atoms?

    Apart from a tiny amount of background "noise" which comes from the big bang.

    The astrioids that make up its rings are held in check from its north and south poles thus proving his theory that push pull gravity exist....
    Nonsense. All this proves is that you don't have a clue.

    I do hope that everyone uses what we know explosions
    I have no idea what this paragraph is about. It is totally incoherent. But the big bang was not an explosion.

    Common sense will tell you ...
    It will tell you all sorts of things that turn out to be wrong. That is why we have made so much more progress in medicine, technology, etc. since we adopted science instead of "common sense".
    Neverfly likes this.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    Natures design is perfect in all its form
    Given that nature is essentially trial and error, I find that statement a bit odd.

    Nature is chaos. Nature doesn't care what nomenclature we create to define it or rules we set aside to encompass it. Nature just is. Simply because we found ways to define portions of it that make sense to us doesn't mean nature has a clue what it's doing.
    warthog213 likes this.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    Hello everyone, Warthog213 here. (not a scientist)
    (Warning this is an idea) and by no means proven to be a fact....

    My idea about our universe is simple, all particles such as atoms and parts which make up an atom are all made of even smaller parts which we know as electrons, protons, neutrons and the nucleus. And what I am saying is that these particles are made of even smaller parts (building blocks with names unknown) These parts of these atoms are not hollow and can not be made of just nothing and because we can not see them doesn't mean that they do not exist.... Atoms make up everything here on earth and I think its silly to discredit the fact that it is possibly the way our whole universe is made as nature has designed it. I think this continues on and on in both directions, that building blocks keep getting smaller and even smaller and that our entire universe as we see it is just a smaller part of a larger object that we are just tiny particals with-in a larger something and that goes on into infinity, in both directions as well. My idea is that time would relative to that smaller or larger space meaning that we are a small speck of time in that larger object just as an atoms time in our space is just a speck of time here in our space. As I see it this idea lends proof to the idea because it also fits into the natural order of things which would be time relativity as well as natural properties of recycling everything.... If you look at the diagrams of atoms you'll first notice the different types of atom designs and then compare those to diagrams of solar systems, galaxies you'll notice that they do have similarities which are uncanny.... Solar systems would be the atom itself and the galaxy would be the compound in which its contained and space would be the area between these "as we see it" The universe would then become the object that these compounds make up.... And what we see on a stary night is the energies these produce....

    I do hope this article presents a better understanding on my thinking on this subject that I hold this in very high regards as to our existence....
    Read nassim Haramein theory it has similarities.I believe it is accurate.
    warthog213 likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    1 Ugly MoFo warthog213's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    Natures design is perfect in all its form

    Given that nature is essentially trial and error, I find that statement a bit odd.

    Nature is chaos. Nature doesn't care what nomenclature we create to define it or rules we set aside to encompass it. Nature just is. Simply because we found ways to define portions of it that make sense to us doesn't mean nature has a clue what it's doing.
    What I meant was nature creates the motion and the opportunities, things collide and thus we get different forms created by nature through atomic and cellular changes over time.... And nature has been working as long as time has ever been there.... And that man thinks he controls nature because he can do that to a point here on earth.... Man is too fascinated by all the things which nature creates that he doesn't see that it all can be broken down into its simplest elements and processes then described in general form....
    (warthog) an ugly little animal in Africa that is hunted, killed and eaten by lions.

    Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things....

    Every dream i've dreamed isn't the life I live in....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    I'm not sure I understand your point. Sorry.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,868
    Quote Originally Posted by lightspeed View Post
    Read nassim Haramein theory it has similarities.
    You mean "He's a crank too"?
    Strange likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by lightspeed View Post
    Read nassim Haramein theory it has similarities.
    You mean "He's a crank too"?
    Perfect. I was wondering how to respond to that.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    1 Ugly MoFo warthog213's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by lightspeed View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    Hello everyone, Warthog213 here. (not a scientist)
    (Warning this is an idea) and by no means proven to be a fact....

    My idea about our universe is simple, all particles such as atoms and parts which make up an atom are all made of even smaller parts which we know as electrons, protons, neutrons and the nucleus. And what I am saying is that these particles are made of even smaller parts (building blocks with names unknown) These parts of these atoms are not hollow and can not be made of just nothing and because we can not see them doesn't mean that they do not exist.... Atoms make up everything here on earth and I think its silly to discredit the fact that it is possibly the way our whole universe is made as nature has designed it. I think this continues on and on in both directions, that building blocks keep getting smaller and even smaller and that our entire universe as we see it is just a smaller part of a larger object that we are just tiny particals with-in a larger something and that goes on into infinity, in both directions as well. My idea is that time would relative to that smaller or larger space meaning that we are a small speck of time in that larger object just as an atoms time in our space is just a speck of time here in our space. As I see it this idea lends proof to the idea because it also fits into the natural order of things which would be time relativity as well as natural properties of recycling everything.... If you look at the diagrams of atoms you'll first notice the different types of atom designs and then compare those to diagrams of solar systems, galaxies you'll notice that they do have similarities which are uncanny.... Solar systems would be the atom itself and the galaxy would be the compound in which its contained and space would be the area between these "as we see it" The universe would then become the object that these compounds make up.... And what we see on a stary night is the energies these produce....

    I do hope this article presents a better understanding on my thinking on this subject that I hold this in very high regards as to our existence....
    Read nassim Haramein theory it has similarities.I believe it is accurate.
    6:40 into his quote and I completely understand what he is saying..... Excuse me while I watch some more....
    (warthog) an ugly little animal in Africa that is hunted, killed and eaten by lions.

    Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things....

    Every dream i've dreamed isn't the life I live in....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    1 Ugly MoFo warthog213's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by lightspeed View Post
    Read nassim Haramein theory it has similarities.
    You mean "He's a crank too"?
    How dare him have an opinion outside of mathematics and the scientific realm..... "HUH"
    (warthog) an ugly little animal in Africa that is hunted, killed and eaten by lions.

    Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things....

    Every dream i've dreamed isn't the life I live in....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,868
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    How dare him have an opinion outside of mathematics and the scientific realm..... "HUH"
    Wrong.
    It's more of a case of "How can he have the chutzpah to spout his unmitigated crap in public?"
    He's a self-promoting fraud and a liar.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    How dare him have an opinion outside of mathematics and the scientific realm
    Anyone can have their opinions about colours they like/dislike or flavours they prefer and no-one can gainsay them, but if they say something about maths or science they'd better be prepared to back their statements up ...... with maths and/or science.
    KALSTER, Markus Hanke and Neverfly like this.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    How dare him have an opinion outside of mathematics and the scientific realm..... "HUH"
    So you agree that all he has is opinions outside of science and mathematics.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    1 Ugly MoFo warthog213's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    How dare him have an opinion outside of mathematics and the scientific realm..... "HUH"
    So you agree that all he has is opinions outside of science and mathematics.
    He does claim he has done the math....
    I just realized that you have made 14 post a day about much of nothing exept opinion....
    (warthog) an ugly little animal in Africa that is hunted, killed and eaten by lions.

    Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things....

    Every dream i've dreamed isn't the life I live in....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    1 Ugly MoFo warthog213's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    147
    Universal Blue Print.jpg
    This blue print is exactly how I see our universe explaining how it changes and goes through cycles of change
    on an atomic level over and over again.... Now if this form of thinking "makes me a crank" then i'll gladly be
    a crank because this make a lot sense.... And I hardly think that there's any coincidence that the entire existence
    of virtually everything hinges on the atomic structure....

    I beleive in 1590 that Hans Lippershey and Zacharias Janssen didn't know what they discovered, but i'm pretty sure
    that their minds run rampant with ideas for its uses.... But I think when they first looked through the microscope
    they discovered the truth about the universe.... That larger things are made of smaller things........
    (warthog) an ugly little animal in Africa that is hunted, killed and eaten by lions.

    Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things....

    Every dream i've dreamed isn't the life I live in....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    1 Ugly MoFo warthog213's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    147
    <font size="6"><img style="margin: 1px;" id="vbattach_1730" class="previewthumb" alt="" src="attachment.php?attachmentid=1730&amp;stc=1" attachmentid="1730"></font><br>This blue print is exactly how I see our universe explaining how it changes and goes through cycles of change<br> on an atomic level over and over again.... Now if this form of thinking "makes me a crank"&nbsp; then i'll gladly be <br>a crank because this make a lot sense....&nbsp; And I hardly think that there's any coincidence that the entire existence<br>of virtually everything hinges on the atomic structure....<br><br>I beleive in 1590 that Hans Lippershey and Zacharias Janssen didn't know what they discovered, but i'm pretty sure <br>that their minds run rampant with ideas for its uses.... But I think when they first looked through the microscope<br>they discovered the truth&nbsp;about the universe....&nbsp; That larger things are made of smaller things........


    Universal Blue Print.jpg
    (warthog) an ugly little animal in Africa that is hunted, killed and eaten by lions.

    Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things....

    Every dream i've dreamed isn't the life I live in....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    122
    Lambda CDM model. You probably never heard of any of it. You probably think BBT is "Just a theory."
    neverfly you keep mentioning this lambda cdm model it is a load of poop. there is no direct evidence for the big bang, that is just one interpretation. every single piece of "evidence" claimed for the big bang can be explained by alternative models. name a piece of evidence and I would be able to go online and find an alternative explanation. this paper here for example counters everything the big bang claims http://arxiv.org/pdf/1009.0953.pdf
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by nsbm ranger View Post
    neverfly you keep mentioning this lambda cdm model it is a load of poop. there is no direct evidence for the big bang, that is just one interpretation. every single piece of "evidence" claimed for the big bang can be explained by alternative models. name a piece of evidence and I would be able to go online and find an alternative explanation. this paper here for example counters everything the big bang claims http://arxiv.org/pdf/1009.0953.pdf
    This is a good post. You've provided a reliable peer reviewed source, expressed your views concisely and backed it up. Try to continue doing this, instead of starting countless threads over and over and saying very little within them.

    Quickly; yes, some of the evidence is interpreted to align with observation, but no 'alternative' theory matches all the data and observation as the Lambda CDM model does.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    This blue print is exactly how I see our universe explaining how it changes and goes through cycles of change
    on an atomic level over and over again.... Now if this form of thinking "makes me a crank" then i'll gladly be
    a crank because this make a lot sense....
    There are scientific theories (well, hypotheses really) which consider the big bang as just one of a cycle of endless expansion and collapse. But ...

    1. These are scientific theories; i.e. they rely on data and mathematics not "it makes sense to me"

    2. If such a collapse and re-bang occurred it would not be at the atomic level, we are confident enough in our theories to know that at the early stages of the universe (even if cyclic) there were no atoms, not even the sub-atomic particles that make up atoms.

    3. Current observational evidence tends to suggest the universe isn't like this

    Note that, "it makes sense" is the worst possible thing to base a theory on.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by nsbm ranger View Post
    every single piece of "evidence" claimed for the big bang can be explained by alternative models.
    Even if that is true, shouldn't we prefer the theory that can explain all the evidence rather than an ad-hoc mish-mash of different (and possibly contradictory) theories?
    Flick Montana likes this.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    every single piece of "evidence" claimed for the big bang can be explained by alternative models. name a piece of evidence and I would be able to go online and find an alternative explanation.
    Can you provide a model which fits all the observations, while still being in accordance with basic physical principles ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    1 Ugly MoFo warthog213's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by nsbm ranger View Post
    Lambda CDM model. You probably never heard of any of it. You probably think BBT is "Just a theory."
    neverfly you keep mentioning this lambda cdm model it is a load of poop. there is no direct evidence for the big bang, that is just one interpretation. every single piece of "evidence" claimed for the big bang can be explained by alternative models. name a piece of evidence and I would be able to go online and find an alternative explanation. this paper here for example counters everything the big bang claims http://arxiv.org/pdf/1009.0953.pdf
    The Lambda theory doesn't hold any water to either idea, you and I know this nsbm ranger....
    I'll say just once more on this thread.... The true make up of universe must at least in part be present here on earth....
    (warthog) an ugly little animal in Africa that is hunted, killed and eaten by lions.

    Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things....

    Every dream i've dreamed isn't the life I live in....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    1 Ugly MoFo warthog213's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    This blue print is exactly how I see our universe explaining how it changes and goes through cycles of change
    on an atomic level over and over again.... Now if this form of thinking "makes me a crank" then i'll gladly be
    a crank because this make a lot sense....
    There are scientific theories (well, hypotheses really) which consider the big bang as just one of a cycle of endless expansion and collapse. But ...

    1. These are scientific theories; i.e. they rely on data and mathematics not "it makes sense to me"

    2. If such a collapse and re-bang occurred it would not be at the atomic level, we are confident enough in our theories to know that at the early stages of the universe (even if cyclic) there were no atoms, not even the sub-atomic particles that make up atoms.

    3. Current observational evidence tends to suggest the universe isn't like this

    Note that, "it makes sense" is the worst possible thing to base a theory on.
    The power of brains is to twist things so that you can understand them, what I am saying is the atoms change within the entire stretch of the universes existence recycling over trillions of years into a whole new universe reforming the matter itself.... This period of time may be every two weeks or it may be every 13.772 0.059 billion years.... This will happen here on earth one day as it will also happen to the sun, mars, venus, jupiter, the milky way and so fourth and so on until the universe has all changed from what it is now.... And this will happen down to last existing atom here in the universe....
    Now the
    black holes, white dwarfs, dark matter and so on are types of reactions which we can see and detect and the back ground radiation are all due to atomic changes in our universe due to the makeup and changes in the atoms in those systems "an amazing amount of comfort is used in stating this too" Because in 200 years you know that 75% of our thoughts now about such things will have our great, great, great, great grandchildren laughing their asses off while we rot in our graves "seriously" Just as we are amazed by some of the info our forefathers thought to be true "like the earth being flat or man being the center of the universe".... You and I also know that the data gathered today will be very useful in the future and that our "thoughts" about such things will be mostly invalid.... Now in the next 20 years as we venture into space man will learn more for sure.... If you take the 118 elements of the earth "some of which are man made" there are 118 to the 118th power possibilities of combinations avalible on earth alone that we know of.... We have no way of knowing how many more elements the universe contains let alone their reactions to other elements.... No matter "no pun intended" where you go in the universe everything comes down to the atom....

    Sorry man, i'm not busting your chops.... I'm just letting you know i'm not as much of moron/crank as you think....
    (warthog) an ugly little animal in Africa that is hunted, killed and eaten by lions.

    Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things....

    Every dream i've dreamed isn't the life I live in....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    what I am saying is the atoms change within the entire stretch of the universes existence recycling over trillions of years into a whole new universe reforming the matter itself.... This period of time may be every two weeks or it may be every [B]13.772 0.059 billion years.... This will happen here on earth one day as it will also happen to the sun, mars, venus, jupiter, the milky way and so fourth and so on until the universe has all changed from what it is now.... And this will happen down to last existing atom here in the universe....
    You say that with great certainty. But how do you know that this will occur? YOU DON'T.
    Where is the evidence? THERE ISN'T ANY.

    It is just a nice fairy story that you made up, but it ain't science. (And it obviously doesn't happen every two weeks or we might notice. Sheesh.)

    Because in 200 years you know that 75% of our thoughts now about such things will have our great, great, great, great grandchildren laughing their asses off while we rot in our graves "seriously"
    Bollocks. 400 years ago some guy called Newton came up with some ideas that we still use and are pretty damned impressed by. So "history of science" is another subject we can put you down as being totally ignorant about.

    Just as we are amazed by some of the info our forefathers thought to be true "like the earth being flat
    When was that again? Oh yes, I remember: NEVER.

    If you take the 118 elements of the earth "some of which are man made" there are 118 to the 118th power possibilities of combinations avalible on earth alone that we know of....
    So we can also add chemistry to the list of subjects you don't have a fricking clue about.

    We have no way of knowing how many more elements the universe contains let alone their reactions to other elements....
    Actually, we do. Well, over 100 years ago a guy called Mendeleyev worked it out. If only you weren't so totally ignorant.

    I'm just letting you know i'm not as much of moron/crank as you think....
    As all you have done is demonstrate even greater depths of ignorance, I'm afraid that failed.
    KALSTER and Neverfly like this.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    every single piece of "evidence" claimed for the big bang can be explained by alternative models. name a piece of evidence and I would be able to go online and find an alternative explanation.
    Can you provide a model which fits all the observations, while still being in accordance with basic physical principles ?
    big bang contradicts many basic physical principles, hint look up first law of thermodynamics, the law of conservation of energy.
    warthog213 likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,895
    Quote Originally Posted by nsbm ranger View Post
    big bang contradicts many basic physical principles, hint look up first law of thermodynamics, the law of conservation of energy.
    No. There's no First Law violation.

    Please stop posting until you've actually learned something about the theory you dislike so much. You just sound progressively more idiotic with each unschooled assertion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    The Lambda theory doesn't hold any water to either idea, you and I know this nsbm ranger....
    Correction : you believe this...
    Do you see the difference ?
    Strange likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by nsbm ranger View Post
    big bang contradicts many basic physical principles, hint look up first law of thermodynamics, the law of conservation of energy.
    Don't you think that a few scientists might have noticed if that were true?
    Flick Montana likes this.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    1 Ugly MoFo warthog213's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    My idea about our universe is simple, all particles such as atoms and parts which make up an atom are all made of even smaller parts which we know as electrons, protons, neutrons and the nucleus. And what I am saying is that these particles are made of even smaller parts (building blocks with names unknown)
    Well, in the case of protons and neutrons, we know from observation that they are made of other particles (quarks).

    In the case of other particles, despite a lot of research, there is no evidence of anything smaller. One example of this is "preon theory" (Preon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). You can choose to believe that this is true despite the lack of evidence, but that is not the way science works.

    Another attempt to "rationalise" all the different particles as having a common cause is string theory.

    If you look at the diagrams of atoms you'll first notice the different types of atom designs and then compare those to diagrams of solar systems, galaxies you'll notice that they do have similarities which are uncanny.... Solar systems would be the atom itself ...
    Our modern understanding of what atoms "look like" beras no relation at all to the solar system. (This is a very old idea but doesn't really have any basis in fact despite its apparent intuitive appeal.)
    And you don't find it odd at all that nature has designed things in this way.... That particals keep getting smaller.... We are talking really small parts there all within an atom.... I'll bet thats not the smallest yet, and that they keep getting even smaller.... I'll say this again:::: The atom is the key to the entire universe.... It produces an energy which builds upon one another in massive forms "when clumped together.... Which puts them into motion.... thus creating change....
    (warthog) an ugly little animal in Africa that is hunted, killed and eaten by lions.

    Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things....

    Every dream i've dreamed isn't the life I live in....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    We are talking really small parts there all within an atom....
    So why do you think atoms are key, and not the smaller particles?

    I'll bet thats not the smallest yet, and that they keep getting even smaller....
    Maybe. But there is no evidence for that. So maybe not.

    The atom is the key to the entire universe.... It produces an energy which builds upon one another in massive forms "when clumped together
    What energy does the atom produce?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    1 Ugly MoFo warthog213's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post


    There absolutely can never possibly be any resemblance at all.....
    Just because the view from where you are is one way doesn't mean that the outside view is indentically the same....
    These pictures are based on the old Bohr model of the atom, which has long since been superseded. Electrons are not little balls circling the nucleus on well defined orbits, like planets do.
    What i'm saying is that it is truely funny that nature has designed both with some similarities.... Now I have no clue as to how this idea would play out.... We see more space between galaxies, so maybe the galaxy would be one step in the scale.... Possibly a galaxy being the whole atom or perhaps the whole visable universe being the atom.... Which i'm leaning towards the universe being the contents of an atom which may explain why we can detect nothing beyond that.... Just a visual concept though....
    (warthog) an ugly little animal in Africa that is hunted, killed and eaten by lions.

    Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things....

    Every dream i've dreamed isn't the life I live in....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    What i'm saying is that it is truely funny that nature has designed both with some similarities.
    And what everyone else is saying is that they don't really have any similarities (except, apparently, in your imagination).
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,868
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    What i'm saying is that it is truely funny that nature has designed both with some similarities.
    The only "similarity" is that they both exist.

    Possibly a galaxy being the whole atom or perhaps the whole visable universe being the atom.
    What arrant nonsense.
    So far as we can tell no planet is a duplicate of any other, whereas any two electrons (for example) are completely indistinguishable from one another. That's one place your contention falls down.
    Flick Montana likes this.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    Possibly a galaxy being the whole atom or perhaps the whole visable universe being the atom....
    I'm with Daffy on this one. You're comparing things that aren't comparable. We're quite a long ways past the idea of the atom 'looking' like a solar system. Comparing the two requires working with a debunked atomic model.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    I think it's time for this thread to gently slide into the trash.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    1 Ugly MoFo warthog213's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    What i'm saying is that it is truely funny that nature has designed both with some similarities.
    The only "similarity" is that they both exist.

    Possibly a galaxy being the whole atom or perhaps the whole visable universe being the atom.
    What arrant nonsense.
    So far as we can tell no planet is a duplicate of any other, whereas any two electrons (for example) are completely indistinguishable from one another. That's one place your contention falls down.
    Ok so an atom doesn't have a center core with particals orbiting it right.... And thats not at all similar to anything in the universe....
    (warthog) an ugly little animal in Africa that is hunted, killed and eaten by lions.

    Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things....

    Every dream i've dreamed isn't the life I live in....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    57
    My pinky is pretty similar to a worm. I mean, they're both phallic-like.
    John Galt likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post
    Ok so an atom doesn't have a center core with particals orbiting it right.... And thats not at all similar to anything in the universe....
    Correct. Phew.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by beefpatty View Post
    My pinky is pretty similar to a worm. I mean, they're both phallic-like.
    That's certainly honest, though perhaps more information than I was looking for.
    warthog213 likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by warthog213 View Post

    Ok so an atom doesn't have a center core with particals orbiting it right.... And thats not at all similar to anything in the universe....
    You lost me at the word "orbit". Electrons exist in clouds around the nucleus. They are not on paths like planets orbiting a star.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Well, Venus is cloudy ...
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,868
    So is England!
    OMG England is an atom!
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    You lost me at the word "orbit". Electrons exist in clouds around the nucleus. They are not on paths like planets orbiting a star.
    And those 'clouds' are probability functions, not tangible entities. The solar system is as close an analogy to an atom as is a corned beef sandwich. (On rye.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Forum Bachelors Degree Kerling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    440
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quantum physics imposes a natural limit on how small things can get ( the Planck scale ). Below that limit many of our normal notions about space and time simply no longer apply.
    That is not entirely true. Space-time doesn't change. However they are no longer observable. And hence indeed you don't need to look there.
    In the information age ignorance is a choice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    That is not entirely true. Space-time doesn't change.
    Quantum foam...?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. how is existence possible?
    By I.B.1.Dance in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: September 2nd, 2013, 07:28 AM
  2. I dont think non-existence is possible.
    By Raziell in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: January 27th, 2013, 07:15 AM
  3. Existence and math
    By randynewman666 in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: August 30th, 2008, 06:49 AM
  4. Existence
    By Aye in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: October 10th, 2006, 06:37 AM
  5. et or alien existence
    By canugetdjkunz in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: March 6th, 2006, 04:09 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •