Mind=blown

I am actually not familiar with that! Is it saying that dark matter is the matter in black holes or is the matter responsible for the oscillations of the universe? I am not sure what you mean
 
I'm sure you're familiar with the big bang theory and the cyclic theory. For those who aren't, the big bang theory states that a really long time ago (approx 13.7 billion years), all the matter that currently exists in the universe today was squished into this tiny space as small as/smaller than an atom. The extreme friction caused by these squeezing together caused such tremendous heat/release of energy that it sent everything blasting outwards at ~the speed of light and that's when time and space began, and the universe has been expanding ever since and will continue to expand either a) forever or b) until the "great rip" or "great freeze" or whatever (both have been outlined earlier in this thread). The cyclic theory is similar, except that it says that the great expansion we experienced ~13.7 billion years ago was merely the most recent in a chain of great expansions that have been going on for eternity, and that after every great expansion, the universe expands for billions and billions of years until it reaches a peak size and contracts upon itself, and once it gets back to that super small sub-atomic size again the entire process repeats itself. That's both of those in a nutshell. The former of the two is more widely accepted, and for the reason I'm about to discuss. The main criticism of the cyclic theory comes at the idea that the universe will at some point reach a limit of its expansion and begin to contract. This implies that the edges of the universe would have to be pulled back inward by some extremely powerful gravitational force, but as far as our telescopes can gather, there are no objects massive enough to generate a gravitational force powerful enough to pull the universe back together. Some people have hypothesized that there may be enough mass within black holes towards the center of the universe, but there is no concrete evidence to support this hypothesis. I guess it's vaguely possible that the universe's dark matter could be responsible for a "great contraction," although that's mostly speculation on my part.
More on the cyclic theory here:
http://www.physics.princeton.edu/~steinh/vaasrev.pdf

 
Not going to quote all that and scroll bomb ^^ :p I had a conversation with one of my physics teachers about cyclic theory and he said he doesn't think it's valid because it is contradicting one of the laws of thermodynamics (which I am not by any means familiar with). He told me something along the lines of the universe would have to expand to be a larger size with each oscillation. \

So if we extrapolate that in reverse, that means with each successive universe we look back the size and duration of the universe would approach zero. That is how I always understood it and why I didn't think it was valid either. He did far a lot better job explaining it than I ever could
 
5130506_460s.jpg
 
time related mind fucks;

The difference in time between when Tyrannosaurus Rex and Stegosaurus lived is greater than the difference in time between Tyrannosaurus Rex and now

The Great Pyramid was built circa 2560 BC, and Cleopatra lived 69 BC – 30 BC, and the first Moon landing was in 1969, AD. which means Cleopatra lived closer to the Moon landing than she did to the building of the Great Pyramid.

the wright brothers flew for the first time in 1903. we landed on the moon in 1969. it only took 66 years.

The Ottoman Empire still existed the last time the Chicago Cubs won a World Series

this is pretty good

enhanced-buzz-10993-1347390691-5.jpg


may have been posted before

and this probably has been too but its worth the repost for those who havent seen it

enhanced-buzz-12287-1347391065-1.jpg


a Blue Whale's heart is so big, a small child can swim through the veins

enhanced-buzz-10821-1347571368-0.jpg


hopefully that was mostly new stuff
 
I figured that one out. I had a feeling the wedding ring had something to do with it since it was on and off throughout the movie. Watched it second time through and paid close attention to the ring. Its crazy how many times they show his hands to try and tell you its the ring. But at the end of the movie, if I remember correctly there is a scene where Cobb and the girl from Juno are in Limbo, they are walking to find Mal in the world Cobb and Mal built. They enter a house and he draws his gun, he has no ring on, IMO meaning he has accepted his Mal is dead. When he turns the corner and sees Mal, the ring is back on. This 1 scene disproved my theory. But then again, I did watch it a few years ago and am not sure the specifics of the scene. Now I'm gonna go watch inception again.

And heres the ring theory, didnt watch tho.
 
beyond the human experience are the things we cannot conceive of only to speculate the deep and most revealing things about our reality on a universal scale.

 
i like putting Doritos in my sandwiches. Fkn Bold BBQ Doritos in a roast beef or turkey coldcut sandwich on a fresh bun with caesar salad dressing. and Orangina to drink. that was my childhood.but putting it in a shaker like that is unnecessary, its like something Taco Bell would advertise.
 
If a hole were put all the way through the earth from one side to another and you threw a ball down it would it just hover in the middle of the core or go out one end then come back through because of gravity?
 
besides the fact that this is impossible for millions of reasons, i think it would fly way past the centre, slow down, come back, fly way past again, slow down, come back etc for a LOOOOOONG ass time, oscillating back and forth past the centre of gravity until it stops. i guess, with an equal force pushing on it from all directions, it would either collapse on itself, or just float there basically suspended in space.
 
this is definitely correct

ive seen some video with a scientist jumping through the earth, might have been neil dt
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top