CERN brings the Large Hadron Collider up for First Light tomorrow, as I'm sure many people are aware. Some people have actually sent death threats fearing that it will destroy the world, even though the system at full strength will be far, far less powerful than ordinary cosmic rays.
This did crack me up, though:
http://kuvaton.com/bshit/1220360595652.jpg
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 09, 2008, 06:55:58 PM
CERN brings the Large Hadron Collider up for First Light tomorrow, as I'm sure many people are aware. Some people have actually sent death threats fearing that it will destroy the world, even though the system at full strength will be far, far less powerful than ordinary cosmic rays.
This did crack me up, though:
http://kuvaton.com/bshit/1220360595652.jpg
Doctor Freeman? That's it, we're all gonna get enslaved by alien overlords.
Oh I can handle it, We will be just fine..I believe surely that most things we've humans come so far finding the mysteries of life will lead to one thing mostly either for good or bad,
I know we will make it out alright no matter what
See also:
http://www.hasthelhcdestroyedtheearth.com/
(The page source is worth checking out too)
http://science.slashdot.org/science/08/09/09/2142259.shtml
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 09, 2008, 06:55:58 PM
This did crack me up, though:
http://kuvaton.com/bshit/1220360595652.jpg
... **** ...
****!! Quick, start up an underground railroad system leading people out of major metropolitan areas and into areas outside cities that can get their own power source (without being noticeable) and are easily secured. Also, get orange spray paint cans. I'll start marking the route with Lamda symbols.
AND GIVE THAT SCIENTIST A CROWBAR!
We must prepare for unforeseen consequences...
*prepares an "Implicate Order" Annihilation Field generator*
I may be spagghetified in an infinite amount of time, but by god, I am taking all creation with me!
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 09, 2008, 07:34:14 PM
http://www.hasthelhcdestroyedtheearth.com/
(The page source is worth checking out too)
International Earth-Destruction Advisory Board (http://qntm.org/?board)
'So, this Higgs boson... If you find it... Just what would that mean for science?'
'Oh, it would be really exciting and interesting, I can tell you that at least.'
'And if you don't find it?'
'Oh, that would be just as interesting, if not even more.'
'...'
"This is a type-13 planet in the end of its cycle. They usually destroy themselves through war, or through some scientist trying to determine the mass of the Higgs-Boson, causing the entire planet to collapse into an ultradense particle about the size of a pea." ~ 790, LEXX.
Hey, look on the bright side: tomorrow we'll be one step closer to this guy (http://www.mahq.net/mecha/codegeass/geass-r2/z-01d.htm)!
For those who don't know, that's a Hadron Blaster collapsed on Lancelot's backpack.
We may see a problem after our sun has died...
A brief tour of the LHC (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k8AJFOQ6C8). I don't think I want to know what else is on their playlist.
Quote from: superluser on September 09, 2008, 11:29:08 PM
A brief tour of the LHC (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k8AJFOQ6C8). I don't think I want to know what else is on their playlist.
Tough! :D (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j50ZssEojtM)
Here's hoping for fast-paced and gigantic breakthroughs in science from LHC.
Quote from: Cvstos on September 09, 2008, 11:47:59 PMTough! :D (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j50ZssEojtM)
When I first heard that, I was quite upset that it was not the Stephen Hawking voice.
If they can prove the existence of the Higgs boson it would elucidate so much in particle physics. This could very well be a turning point... or a proverbial flash in the pan, er... accelerator.
I say we throw an end of the world party in celebration!
Quote from: Azlan on September 10, 2008, 12:52:39 AMIf they can prove the existence of the Higgs boson it would elucidate so much in particle physics. This could very well be a turning point... or a proverbial flash in the pan, er... accelerator.
If they don't find the Higgs, someone may want to speak to Gerardus 't Hooft and Martinus J.G. Veltman about that whole 1999 Nobel Prize in Physics thing.
Quote from: Cvstos on September 09, 2008, 08:19:25 PM
AND GIVE THAT SCIENTIST A CROWBAR!
Just for that, I'm going to check the news and see if any of the pictures have him wandering around in the background with a crowbar...
Dunno how I missed this:
Quote from: Cvstos on September 09, 2008, 08:19:25 PMAND GIVE THAT SCIENTIST A CROWBAR!
Done (http://www.redditall.com/2008/08/great-idea-reddit-crowbar-for-cernlhc.html).
Quote from: Ren Gaulen on September 09, 2008, 06:59:08 PM
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 09, 2008, 06:55:58 PM
CERN brings the Large Hadron Collider up for First Light tomorrow, as I'm sure many people are aware. Some people have actually sent death threats fearing that it will destroy the world, even though the system at full strength will be far, far less powerful than ordinary cosmic rays.
This did crack me up, though:
http://kuvaton.com/bshit/1220360595652.jpg
Doctor Freeman? That's it, we're all gonna get enslaved by alien overlords.
I'll only start worrying when the professors are all named Dr. John Bigbooty and Dr. John Smallberries. :B
Somebody give me an overthruster!
...
I need Charline here for the many innuendos that could be made with that statement. :P
"Rise and shine, Mr. Freeman. Rise and shine. Not that I wish to imply you have been sleeping on the job. No-one is more deserving of a rest. And all the effort in the world would have gone to waste until... well, let's just say your hour has come again. The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world. So, wake up, Mr. Freeman. Wake up and smell the ashes. "
.. isn't that?
No, sorry, that's Gordon Frohman. My mistake.
We really don't want Frohman there when they turn the LHC on. I'd like it to not be a lethal disaster of any sort caused by a combine-loving idiot... no matter how amusing they are.
Quote from: Stygian on September 09, 2008, 09:02:13 PM
'So, this Higgs boson... If you find it... Just what would that mean for science?'
'Oh, it would be really exciting and interesting, I can tell you that at least.'
'And if you don't find it?'
'Oh, that would be just as interesting, if not even more.'
'...'
Where did you find this, Stygian? Because, really, it is absolutely amazing. And I agree: whether we prove or disprove the existence of the Higgs Boson particle, it will be extremely interesting. Part of me wants them to disprove it, just to completely screw with all of those TV shows and books that used it as a Deus ex Machina... and also because it would imply - to me at least - that the universe has more secrets to give up. That's science for you: you learn something, no matter what.
And I doubt they'd take that Nobel prize away. Even if the Higgs Boson particle doesn't exist, it was still a great theory that attempted to answer the question.
As for the crowbar, seriously... get that guy one. Get him a special holster for it so he can carry it everywhere.
Meanwhile, hasn't it been spun up by now? Or at least for a test run? Has the world ended yet?
Quote from: Jairus on September 10, 2008, 11:19:04 AMAnd I doubt they'd take that Nobel prize away. Even if the Higgs Boson particle doesn't exist, it was still a great theory that attempted to answer the question.
My point was more that mainstream physics expects the Higgs to exist and has been basing theories around that presumption. If it doesn't exist, it's going to be a much bigger shock, and many of our theories will have to be altered.
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on September 10, 2008, 08:31:14 AMNo, sorry, that's Gordon Frohman. My mistake.
The sausage king of Chicago?
I don't know if anyone saw this (probably), but the LHC is the theme of the most recent xkcd (http://xkcd.com/474/). It's certainly one way to open a conversation.
Quote from: Jairus on September 10, 2008, 02:29:14 PM
I don't know if anyone saw this (probably), but the LHC is the theme of the most recent xkcd (http://xkcd.com/474/). It's certainly one way to open a conversation.
Oh, dear.
Quantum physics enthusiasts will note:
Top, Bottom, Strange, Charm, Up, and Down are all attributes of subatomic particles... making xkcd cleverer than usual, a task worthy of note in itself.
They're the 6 types of quarks theorized to exist.
I seem to have an overabundance of the Strange one. :B
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on September 10, 2008, 02:51:34 PM
Quote from: Jairus on September 10, 2008, 02:29:14 PM
I don't know if anyone saw this (probably), but the LHC is the theme of the most recent xkcd (http://xkcd.com/474/). It's certainly one way to open a conversation.
Oh, dear.
Quantum physics enthusiasts will note:
Top, Bottom, Strange, Charm, Up, and Down are all attributes of subatomic particles... making xkcd cleverer than usual, a task worthy of note in itself.
Wow... that is amazing. Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant. If he made a shirt like that, I'd buy one.
Of course the experiment that will actually COLLIDE the protons doesnt begin til the end of next month. Even the scientists in charge of the experiment say there is a small for tiny blackholes. Though they don't think they will have enough energy to be self-sustaining. Let's hope their calculations in how blackholes work are correct.
Black holes produced by the LHC will simply evaporate because they don't generate enough gravity to hold themselves together, let alone suck up planet earth.
Gravity is a function of mass. More mass, more gravity.
The LHC collides subatomic particles together with such force that a microscopic black hole might exist for a fraction of a microsecond. This black hole has a mass of a few subatomic particles, and that doesn't create enough gravity to pull anything in, let alone sustain a quantum singularity.
Yep. They'd just be itty bitty black holes if they manage to form at all. This type of micro black hole might form naturally all across the universe whereever high-energy particles are ramming together at near the speed of light.
But as Vidar said, they can't last for more than a few microseconds because the don't even have a fraction of a the mass needed to generate the gravity to sustain a singularity.
Which again makes me wonder what triggered the Big Bang, since it would have had to be itself a super-singularity. Hmmm.
:x However, if they're wrong. We're gonna have to move off of Draenor asap D:
Quote from: Alondro on September 12, 2008, 11:39:38 AM
Yep. They'd just be itty bitty black holes if they manage to form at all. This type of micro black hole might form naturally all across the universe whereever high-energy particles are ramming together at near the speed of light.
But as Vidar said, they can't last for more than a few microseconds because the don't even have a fraction of a the mass needed to generate the gravity to sustain a singularity.
Which again makes me wonder what triggered the Big Bang, since it would have had to be itself a super-singularity. Hmmm.
I had a theory on that. That the universe itself is a perpertual motion generator. When it first bursts out, it does so with somemuch force that it creates a super Blackhole. As the universe spread slows down, it'll eventually be sucked back into the singularity until it reaches critical mass and explodes out again, repeating for eternity.
Quote from: Teroniss on September 12, 2008, 12:46:49 PM
I had a theory on that. That the universe itself is a perpertual motion generator. When it first bursts out, it does so with somemuch force that it creates a super Blackhole. As the universe spread slows down, it'll eventually be sucked back into the singularity until it reaches critical mass and explodes out again, repeating for eternity.
It sounds like it could be a real trippy Amusement Park ride.
Nobody knows exactly what kicked off the universe. That's one of the reasons why the LHC was built.
What is knows is what happened from a few thousands of a second after the universe began. That alone is a testament to the power of science.
The name "Big Bang" is not exactly accurate. Just after whatever it was that set the universe in motion, there was a very rapid expansion of spacetime. It wasn't an explosion in the normal sense of the word.
I hope it makes a bunch of little tiny planets and stars that one day wish to figure out how they came to be and create a LHC to recreate the effect. Which in turn creates tiny planets and stars that one day wish to figure out how they came to be and create a LHC to recreate the effect. Which in turn...
Quote from: Teroniss on September 12, 2008, 12:46:49 PM
Quote from: Alondro on September 12, 2008, 11:39:38 AM
Yep. They'd just be itty bitty black holes if they manage to form at all. This type of micro black hole might form naturally all across the universe whereever high-energy particles are ramming together at near the speed of light.
But as Vidar said, they can't last for more than a few microseconds because the don't even have a fraction of a the mass needed to generate the gravity to sustain a singularity.
Which again makes me wonder what triggered the Big Bang, since it would have had to be itself a super-singularity. Hmmm.
I had a theory on that. That the universe itself is a perpertual motion generator. When it first bursts out, it does so with somemuch force that it creates a super Blackhole. As the universe spread slows down, it'll eventually be sucked back into the singularity until it reaches critical mass and explodes out again, repeating for eternity.
Someone else had that theory already. It's the big bang-big chunch model. scientists have already observed that this is not the case in our universe. the expansion of our universe is accelerating. The gravity that all the matter in the universe creates is not enough to lead to a big crunch. Our universe will expand until complete entropy sets in.
Quote from: Vidar on September 12, 2008, 05:58:32 PM
Quote from: Teroniss on September 12, 2008, 12:46:49 PM
Quote from: Alondro on September 12, 2008, 11:39:38 AM
Yep. They'd just be itty bitty black holes if they manage to form at all. This type of micro black hole might form naturally all across the universe whereever high-energy particles are ramming together at near the speed of light.
But as Vidar said, they can't last for more than a few microseconds because the don't even have a fraction of a the mass needed to generate the gravity to sustain a singularity.
Which again makes me wonder what triggered the Big Bang, since it would have had to be itself a super-singularity. Hmmm.
I had a theory on that. That the universe itself is a perpertual motion generator. When it first bursts out, it does so with somemuch force that it creates a super Blackhole. As the universe spread slows down, it'll eventually be sucked back into the singularity until it reaches critical mass and explodes out again, repeating for eternity.
Someone else had that theory already. It's the big bang-big chunch model. scientists have already observed that this is not the case in our universe. the expansion of our universe is accelerating. The gravity that all the matter in the universe creates is not enough to lead to a big crunch. Our universe will expand until complete entropy sets in.
True. However, because the overall nature of dark matter, which drives the acceleration of the universe, is unknown, so to is whether or not that theory is correct as well. Also the Big Crunch only theorize the end of the universe in which there is no continuation. My belief is that the universe is an infinite motion/energy model, not necessarily continuing to expand for all eternity, but expanding and contracting an infinite(by our standards) number of times. Since the overall nature of a blackhole and the event horizon is impossible to observe and therefore gather data on, my theory will forever remain theory.
Quote from: Teroniss on September 12, 2008, 06:09:35 PM
Quote from: Vidar on September 12, 2008, 05:58:32 PM
Quote from: Teroniss on September 12, 2008, 12:46:49 PM
Quote from: Alondro on September 12, 2008, 11:39:38 AM
Yep. They'd just be itty bitty black holes if they manage to form at all. This type of micro black hole might form naturally all across the universe whereever high-energy particles are ramming together at near the speed of light.
But as Vidar said, they can't last for more than a few microseconds because the don't even have a fraction of a the mass needed to generate the gravity to sustain a singularity.
Which again makes me wonder what triggered the Big Bang, since it would have had to be itself a super-singularity. Hmmm.
I had a theory on that. That the universe itself is a perpertual motion generator. When it first bursts out, it does so with somemuch force that it creates a super Blackhole. As the universe spread slows down, it'll eventually be sucked back into the singularity until it reaches critical mass and explodes out again, repeating for eternity.
Someone else had that theory already. It's the big bang-big chunch model. scientists have already observed that this is not the case in our universe. the expansion of our universe is accelerating. The gravity that all the matter in the universe creates is not enough to lead to a big crunch. Our universe will expand until complete entropy sets in.
True. However, because the overall nature of dark matter, which drives the acceleration of the universe, is unknown, so to is whether or not that theory is correct as well. Also the Big Crunch only theorize the end of the universe in which there is no continuation. My belief is that the universe is an infinite motion/energy model, not necessarily continuing to expand for all eternity, but expanding and contracting an infinite(by our standards) number of times. Since the overall nature of a blackhole and the event horizon is impossible to observe and therefore gather data on, my theory will forever remain theory.
A few remarks here.
First of all, it's dark
energy that powers the accelerating expansion of the universe, and nor dark matter. Dark matter and dark energy are completely seperate concepts.
Newer theories on the nature of black holes suggest that there is no true event horizon. We may yet probe the secret sof quantum singularities at some point in the future.
the bang-crunch-bang-crunch cycle theory is a variation of the bang-crunch, and it's still not supported by the evidence.
I wonder if the universe does cycle, just differently than expected. If the acceleration is correct, than the universe will eventually expand past the 'ripping' point of space time and somewhere a teeny little ultra-void will appear.
I wonder if that's what triggers a Big Bang, the super-dimensional structure of a multiverse filling an absolute void with an absolute density, which then instantly expands due to its own properties.
Now that's something impossible to prove, as we'd have to see beyond the edge of our universe to examine what is beyond, and we can't do that. Even if it hadn't already gone past light's ability to travel back to us, all we'd see is utter darkness at apparently absolute zero whether it was all a void or if it was an old burnt out previous universe that had undergone a big rip. And with nothing but utter darkness at absolute zero, we can't know anything about what it is or where it came from, as information is conveyed by energy, which is all gone in a frigid dead universe (and never existed in a total void).
I've heard a bunch of stuff about the universe not contracting (and gets even worst when people take is as a proof of god's existence, saying if it doesn't loop, means someone had to create the big bang) and that does seem bull to me. assuming it won't contract because it's still expanding seems really rash.
I find rather plausible to consider all matter in the universe has a gravity field of unlimited range, yet it's far too weak at long distances to be even measurable, and then, after an unimaginably large amount of time the universe's expansion will halt and begin contracting instead
Quote from: Jack McSlay on September 13, 2008, 01:36:46 AMI find rather plausible to consider all matter in the universe has a gravity field of unlimited range, yet it's far too weak at long distances to be even measurable, and then, after an unimaginably large amount of time the universe's expansion will halt and begin contracting instead
The problem is that gravity is already extraordinarily weak, and we can measure its effects over 10**23 miles. The chances of that happening are extremely remote, and any such effect would be overpowered by the observable effects of gravity and the electroweak force.
Quote from: Vidar on September 12, 2008, 04:11:35 PM
Nobody knows exactly what kicked off the universe.
That was me, sorry, had a bit of... a sneeze there, Nutmeg had made peppercorn strudel.
Time for an astronomy lesson! :D
Dark matter: Dark matter is a concept relating to galaxies, not universal expansion, specifically the way matter orbits within the galaxy. Matter should orbit the center of the galaxy similar to the way planets orbit the sun in our solar system. The foci of the orbits are based around where the average concentration of mass is, and in our solar system, that's just barely at the edge of the sun's surface. This is because while the mass of the planets does factor in, the Sun's mass is so much greater as to render it, for the most part, unimportant. According to Kepler's second law, "A line joining the sun and the planet sweep out equal areas during equal intervals of time." This is derived directly from the law of conservation of angular momentum. This basically means that objects orbiting at a greater distance will orbit more slowly and therefore cover the same area.
In a galaxy, we should see a similar concept play out. Visibly, the majority of mass is deposited in the bulge, or the center of the galaxy. However, orbital velocity, for the most part, remains constant throughout most of the galaxy. This suggests that there is mass we cannot observe via the electromagnetic spectrum (dark matter). And that's what dark matter is, and how it came about.
I'll leave dark energy to somebody else. I'm going to go eat a sandwich.
Dark matter...dark energy...is there also dark space and dark time? :3 No, seriously.
Now, I could be wrong about everything I'm about to say. I'm not even an astronomy or physics major, let alone someone who teaches or whatnot. But I remember learning that the latest Hubble photographs were showing that not only is the universe expanding, but it's expanding at an ever accelerating rate.
Now, if the model that some sort of one time force, AKA a Bing Bang, applied the propulsive force to the universe, then gravity would either make it all contract back to a point or possibly cause the expansion to come at an ever slowing rate until entropy set in. (Complicated mathematic stuff as to which of the above scenario was more likely). Either way, the only way that the universe can expand faster today than it was yesterday is if something is putting energy into the mix. Now, I, for one have no idea what that energy could be, but it does seem like "something" is pumping more energy into the system, or at least converting it from something. A lot of dark matter theories are that somehow this mass is being converted to energy or something.
Bleh. I should keep science to the real experts.
Hubble's Law: The redshift in light coming from distant galaxies is proportional to their distance. Translation: All galaxies are moving away from each other.
According to recent observations, all galaxies are moving away from each other at an accelerating rate. Observations also point out that the geometry of our universe is relatively flat, which would mean the rate of expansion of the universe should be gradually decelerating, contrary to what we see., according to Hubble's law and the gradual decrease in Hubble's constant. So the only real explanation we have for the time being is that there is some invisible energy that we can't detect that's affecting the expanion of the universe. Hence, dark energy.
Aren't scientists wonderfully creative with names? I'm gonna go eat another sandwich.
Sorry if my explanations are bad, my astronomy is not particularly up to par.
Not all galaxies are moving away form each other. For instance, the Andromeda galaxy is on a collision cours with our own, and there are many other instances of galaxies crashing into each other. Do a google search on "interacting galaxies" for pretty pictures of this.
The vast majority of galaxies are moving away from each other with great speed.
There's also a rather bizarre hypothesis about the perceived acceleration of the expansion of the universe. It might actually be that time is running out in the most literal sense of the word.
The idea goes something like this: Time is actually finite. It statred with the big bang, and it will at some point end. The universe is not actually expanding faster, it just looks like that because time is slowing down at the edges of the universe, because there is somehow less of it.
Not that this is just a hypothesis, and in no way has it been tested yet. Don't take this for fact, or scientific theory just yet.
Quote from: Vidar on September 15, 2008, 04:11:33 AMThe idea goes something like this: Time is actually finite. It statred with the big bang, and it will at some point end. The universe is not actually expanding faster, it just looks like that because time is slowing down at the edges of the universe, because there is somehow less of it.
If that were the case, we should be seeing the opposite phenomenon. Remember, when we look into space, we see the past, not the future. Although even that is not technically true, as Relativity precludes the concept of simultaneity. (though, somehow, quantum mechanics requires simultaneity. We're looking into it.)
I'm well aware that gravitational pull over (relatively) short distances exhibits a stronger force than outward expansion. And those are exceptions to the rule, like with every rule.
No need to nitpick, I was just trying to help those who don't know what dark energy is.
All these theories test my mind to the breaking point. I still can't figure out if there's an infinite amount of non-dark matter in the universe or a finite. Because space is (supposedly) infinite, therefore there has the potential to be an infinite amount of matter. However if there is an infinite amount wouldn't it take up all of space? But that would be impossible because space is infinite and therefore has an infinite amount of room but... Gah! My head hurts. :mowdizzy Sorry to drift off topic for a moment but I felt my thought needed to be shared.
Quote from: Rakala on September 17, 2008, 07:29:35 AM
All these theories test my mind to the breaking point. I still can't figure out if there's an infinite amount of non-dark matter in the universe or a finite. Because space is (supposedly) infinite, therefore there has the potential to be an infinite amount of matter. However if there is an infinite amount wouldn't it take up all of space?
AFAIK the current theory is that the universe is finite but unbounded - i.e. if you travelled in a perfectly straight line for long enough, you would 'wrap around' and come back to where you were before.
Truth be told, I'm not honestly convinced by the Big Bang theory. Like epicycles, it feels like there are too many hacks needed to bodge it into working, and I would not be surprised if we discover something that we've missed which gives us a far simpler model.
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 17, 2008, 07:33:55 AM
Quote from: Rakala on September 17, 2008, 07:29:35 AM
All these theories test my mind to the breaking point. I still can't figure out if there's an infinite amount of non-dark matter in the universe or a finite. Because space is (supposedly) infinite, therefore there has the potential to be an infinite amount of matter. However if there is an infinite amount wouldn't it take up all of space?
AFAIK the current theory is that the universe is finite but unbounded - i.e. if you travelled in a perfectly straight line for long enough, you would 'wrap around' and come back to where you were before.
Truth be told, I'm not honestly convinced by the Big Bang theory. Like epicycles, it feels like there are too many hacks needed to bodge it into working, and I would not be surprised if we discover something that we've missed which gives us a far simpler model.
God.
;)
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 17, 2008, 07:33:55 AM
Truth be told, I'm not honestly convinced by the Big Bang theory. Like epicycles, it feels like there are too many hacks needed to bodge it into working, and I would not be surprised if we discover something that we've missed which gives us a far simpler model.
I wouldn't be surprised either. It probably won't be in our lifetimes, but we're learning more about the 'verse every day.
Though part of the reason I like your idea is because it bugs me when science-fiction latches onto the newest buzz-words and uses them to explain everything, only to see science move on and leave them in the dust. Of course, in this case it wouldn't really be SF's fault...
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 17, 2008, 07:33:55 AM
AFAIK the current theory is that the universe is finite but unbounded - i.e. if you travelled in a perfectly straight line for long enough, you would 'wrap around' and come back to where you were before.
So.... the univserse is a sphere? How do you get nothingness into a shape?
Quote from: Rakala on September 17, 2008, 10:55:45 AM
So.... the univserse is a sphere? How do you get nothingness into a shape?
I think it's a bit more convoluted than that, but that's the general idea. IIRC being on the surface of a sphere was what we were taught as an analogy to the true 'shape'.
Picture the universe like the surface of a beach ball, and the big bang is someone blowing it up.
It's close enough, and the places where the analogy misses are places where you'd have difficulty anyway, because it all gets a bit murky and hand-wavey.
Only it's a very very very big beach ball.
then again, there's also the possibility, of multiple explosions, not a single big bang, which would explain the fact there are galaxies apparently moving in arbitrary directions
Quote from: Rakala on September 17, 2008, 10:55:45 AMSo.... the univserse is a sphere? How do you get nothingness into a shape?
Another popular shape is the torus. It's like a ring, but it has a cross-section of two circles, instead of something flatter:
(http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m250/bigtommyboy7/pink_donut.jpg)
I'm not sure what the pink frosting represents...
Quote from: superluser on September 17, 2008, 02:16:56 PM
I'm not sure what the pink frosting represents...
Management.
Quote from: superluser on September 17, 2008, 02:16:56 PM
Quote from: Rakala on September 17, 2008, 10:55:45 AMSo.... the univserse is a sphere? How do you get nothingness into a shape?
Another popular shape is the torus. It's like a ring, but it has a cross-section of two circles, instead of something flatter:
(http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m250/bigtommyboy7/pink_donut.jpg)
I'm not sure what the pink frosting represents...
The pink frosting obviously represents dark matter, which helps to keep the universe stable and makes it so damn tasty. Either that, or Janus is the creator of the universe. Or the donut, I forget which.
Okay, I know have a new theory to the end of the universe. My thought was the frosting represents the amount of the universe that is made up of non-dark matter.
i now feel compelled to bring out my doughnut recipes and see if any of them have a profound understanding of physics other then the connection between active dry yeast and the big bang
Someone make a doughnut recipe thread!
I needs mah periodic deep-fried sugar-glazed confection without ingredients I can't pronounce.
Explaining the expansion of space-time at the big bang is rather difficult since all the analogies have flaws in them. How do you explain the expansion of time itself?
Quote from: Vidar on September 18, 2008, 04:03:14 AM
How do you explain the expansion of time itself?
Did i not JUST say its YEAST!
pay attention, sometimes i feel like i am being purposefully ignored
Quote from: Brunhidden on September 19, 2008, 09:13:06 AM
pay attention, sometimes i feel like i am being purposefully ignored
You are.
I mean, uh, did anyone hear anything? I can't hear a thing... ;-]
(http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:wyGcshibBFtCUM:http://www.toastmonster.com/media/1/20070511-yeast.jpg)
:U YEAST!
Quote from: Jairus on September 17, 2008, 02:21:21 PM
The pink frosting obviously represents dark matter, which helps to keep the universe stable and makes it so damn tasty. Either that, or Janus is the creator of the universe. Or the donut, I forget which.
God of doorways and gateways, beginnings and endings! :3
Back on the subject of the LHC, I've just stumbled across something. Pulled from TVTropes, bottom of the Earth Shattering Kaboom page;
QuoteA lawsuit was filed to keep CERN from turning on the Large Hadron Collider for fear that it would create a black hole and destroy Earth. The lawsuit failed, and the LHC is scheduled to become active on September 10th, 2008. Cross your fingers.
Note that while the LHC is being fired up in September, the actual proton-splitting won't take place until October. And that even if it did create a black hole its effect would depend on whether it evaporates, which itself depends on the existence of as-yet theoretical Hawking radiation. Also, there is concern about a similar strange matter oriented disaster.
On an extremely encouraging note, the name "Large Hadron Collider" was deemed too plain and it has been suggested that the device be renamed. Its new moniker? "Halo".
This (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/earth/2008/09/17/scilhc117.xml) is the page linked that provides the information. I'm not sure if it's a credible or reliable source, since I'm not a newswatcher :B But if it is...
The sheer amount of irony in all this is just nauseating. First, there's the obvious irony. They say it's not going to destroy anything, yet they call it Halo. Then there's how they're attriubuting the meaning of the name:
Quote"Halo conjures visions of radiant beauty, power and wisdom. The circle of light reflects the collider's form; it is a crowning achievement of science and engineering. It also gives more than a nod to the experiment's importance to religious debate."
despite the fact that this name was picked by
popular suggestion, which almost certainy means they completely missed what everyone else had in mind. The third? the mention Half-Life 2 and Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy,
yet they did not mention the namesake.
All in all, they picked what they thought was a good name, while seemingly oblivious to what it means to the rest of us.
Reassuring indeed. *we are doomed!*
Quote from: techmaster-glitch on September 24, 2008, 12:02:53 AMthey call it Halo.
`They' in this case are the Royal Society of Chemistry, who are not CERN.
Forgive my ignorance, but who are these two groups, and why does it matter? :B
I was just bringing up some humorous irony about the LHC's new unofficial nickname...
Quote from: techmaster-glitch on September 24, 2008, 12:41:30 AMForgive my ignorance, but who are these two groups, and why does it matter? :B
I was just bringing up some humorous irony about the LHC's new unofficial nickname...
Sorry.
CERN operates the LHC, and any official nickname would have to come from them.
It would be like if I declared that the LHC would henceforth be called Black Mesa.
I propose the name "Experimental Planetary Annihilator #3". It'll leave the luddites guessing where the other 2 doomsday devices went.
those dang marketing and PR people, why cant we just call it a 'Doomsday Device' anymore? is it copywrited? no, just 'bad publicity' they say
It should be called 'Charles'...
... for reasons that shall soon becme clear! :mwaha
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on September 24, 2008, 09:53:55 AM
Quote from: Alondro on September 24, 2008, 08:25:35 AM
... becme clear! :mwaha
I think they just did. ;-]
*adds the box to his revenge list!* I'll learn ya fer makin fun of my sleep-deprivation-induced spelling errors! >:O
*the very next day, the box finds that he has been used to ship the latest installment of the Limbaugh Letter!*
BWAH HA HA HA!!! :mwaha
Quote from: Alondro on September 24, 2008, 10:11:31 AM
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on September 24, 2008, 09:53:55 AM
Quote from: Alondro on September 24, 2008, 08:25:35 AM
... becme clear! :mwaha
I think they just did. ;-]
*adds the box to his revenge list!* I'll learn ya fer makin fun of my sleep-deprivation-induced spelling errors! >:O
*the very next day, the box finds that he has been used to ship the latest installment of the Limbaugh Letter!*
BWAH HA HA HA!!! :mwaha
It's your own fault for not using the "Spell Check" button.
*has the box returned to sender* :mwaha
Quote from: Alondro on September 24, 2008, 10:11:31 AM
*adds the box to his revenge list!* I'll learn ya fer makin fun of my sleep-deprivation-induced spelling errors! >:O
... You mean I wasn't already on it, several times over?
I feel snubbed. Slighted, even...
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on September 24, 2008, 11:25:54 AM
Quote from: Alondro on September 24, 2008, 10:11:31 AM
*adds the box to his revenge list!* I'll learn ya fer makin fun of my sleep-deprivation-induced spelling errors! >:O
... You mean I wasn't already on it, several times over?
I feel snubbed. Slighted, even...
You weren't considered important enough. >:3
would it be easier if we just changed Aldondo's name to 'Doomsday Device'?