It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Another Marvel Of Scale

page: 1
18

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 07:11 PM
link   


I enjoy these scale demos and have seen a few but this one is more encompassing and I thought it would be cool to share. It is a crazy complex thing this life is…and I wonder , can it get any smaller or larger, does infinity apply to scale also? Or is it Mandelbrot effect that repeats itself at some point again?


Like a cross between the opening credits of Contact and the Simpson’s Universe couch gag, this video gives us an ever expanding look at how the smallest objects in existence compare in size to the largest.

Starting with the fabric of space-time, we zoom out to the singularity of a black hole, then we zoom out to quarks, protons, atoms, DNA, sperm, grains of sand, lions, tigers, bears, whales, jets, zeppelins, skyscrapers, mountains, moons, planets, stars, black holes, galaxies and so much in between. We’re somewhere in there too, forgetting to put the toilet seat down and trying to decide what to eat for dinner.

Be warned, the narrator of this clip isn’t exactly Neil deGrasse Tyson. The voiceover script is alright and has a few funny bits. But as conversations on this subject tend to do, it veers into too-many-bong-hits territory.

Still, this is the kind of sobering demonstration of our place in the universe that we all need from time-to-time.


Source




posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 08:26 PM
link   
a reply to: waftist


It is a crazy complex thing this life is…and I wonder , can it get any smaller or larger, does infinity apply to scale also? Or is it Mandelbrot effect that repeats itself at some point again?

Mandelbrot is a nice math set, it carries right down to the point at which matter becomes 'invisible' to our instruments, so we don't really know what that looks like.

Like dividing infinity by infinity, the computer graphic is cool enough, but just a graphic.

To answer your question about big as the Universe or small as an atom, yes you can go there after you pass beyond this 3D perspective.

I bring this on occasion, helped me to understand it (after watching it a bunch of times).



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 08:50 PM
link   
Great video thanks for sharing. It be amazing to see some of the varied life forms that must exist in our universe. Sadly won't happen for hundreds of years yet.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:36 PM
link   
I love these scale videos.
This might be the best one I have seen so far because it brings up multiverse theory.

What about the universe where Hitler cured cancer?



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 02:18 AM
link   
a reply to: waftist

AND, if the big bang was caused by a black hole forming then pulling on that tiny point of almost infinitely small space at it's very center - were the center of the mass is not the mass but is surrounded BY the mass of the black hole and so also by it's gravity - (there may have been many big bang's side by side caused at almost the same instant in almost the same space as that space was probably not a definite space) then our universe exists' in a relative volume of that older universe space which is smaller than an atom and somewhere inside the heart of a black hole, surrounded by both an internal event horizon that would provide external gravitational pull on our universe and an external event horizon meaning that between our time space continuum formed from the white hole which was probably birthed by the black hole there is probably two event horizon's which sandwich the singularity (true black hole not just a brown hole) between them and outside this external event horizon is probably another time space continuum that is older than our's, time RELATIVE to the rate of time in our own universe is probably much slower and then if that time space continuum began through a white hole (big bang) that may have been caused by a black hole then outsite that TSC another one and then another and then another and of course any TRUE black holes in our own TSC (Universe) have the potential to have done exactly the same thing.

As quantum evaporation slowly end's the existance of each of these black hole's the time rate relateive in each internal TSC will also even out, also Entropy and specification will have disposed of all matter and energy in those internal TSC and they will then inhabit no more space than the black hole itself had relative to the parent TSC which by that time is also succumbing to the exact same entropic level.

Think of it like this, Linear infinity in a non infinite space through exponential grown in an asymmetric manner, even in the final pico second's of our universe any daughter universe distant descendant's may go through there entire life cycle from big bang to final entropic decay and still through this method like the mandelbrot set the smaller you get even in time the equal the complexity that will remain and like that final instant frozen upon the event horizon the universe will never actually end, just slow down but only out in the older time space continuum's and it may very well have done so somewhere out there beyond the black hole which our universe may owe it's existance too, and beyond the black hole to which that one may owe it's existance too.

So though amazing this video may only represent a tiny part of the actual scale of the TRUE all encompassing everything or universe, that singly song of all creation.

And of course this is without even having to resort to include the parallel universe theory.


Now how could your mind, that of a supposedly happen stance evolution ever have learned to try to understant the universe itself when all it needed to do for evolution was bang a few stone's together and multiply, why?, for what purpose?.

Is there a purpose, a design, a God?

In infinity not only are all possibility's likely but they are infinitely probably and that includes a creator.

And with that we come to another interesting possibility, while parallel reality's may exist and if they do you share information between them, indeed your consciousness may be a result of this parallel processing at a macro universe scale which may also give rise to continuation of consciousness once formed even after the destruction of single parallel element's (Body's and lives in parallel universe) making it potentially immortal if you can call it's very alien state of existence life.
These parallel universe even those slightly out of sync in time with ourselves are just part of our own TSC and time moves in them at the same rate even if it is just before or just after.

Now these other TSC I am talking about which in Superspace terms' are still part of our universe (membrane) may be infinite in number, if so then there may be in that argument about infinite possibility becoming infinite probability other identical universe to our own, they may be far and few between and if we could travel these other TSC we may never find them but time as we moved outward would slow down relative to our own TSC and speed up as we moved into our own TSC daughter continuum's (depending on how many TRUE black holes formed there may be many of them even first generation one's) and if we did find an exact duplicate of our own TSC among them it would be down to pure chance - or design? but there would be unlike the Parallel reality's no link of information between them and us so they for all there similarity would be truly seperate entity's to our own reality.

edit on 13-3-2017 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 06:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: waftist

Correction to second paragraph, don't you just love auto spell correction and really not want to strangle the guy who invented it?.

As quantum evaporation slowly end's the existance of each of these black hole's the time rate relateive in each internal TSC will also even out, also Entropy and SPAGHETTIFICATION (the process were matter is pulled apart as it enter's the edge of a black holes event horizon - actually before it even reaches the event horizon) will have disposed of all matter and energy in those internal TSC and they will then inhabit no more space than the black hole itself had relative to the parent TSC which by that time is also succumbing to the exact same entropic level.



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 07:03 AM
link   
Thanks to all who shared the videos here. They were fun. On the OP, things are on pretty solid footing for much of it, but the speculative nature of it appears both at the very small and at the very large. I have spent much time speculating myself on the very small, and I will post my next thread about that shortly. As for the very large, we can't really experiment with that, but it is good to explore various ideas. And as for quantum philosophy, I've never been a fan of the multiple-universe idea just to keep everything in synch with relativity. It is much easier to go back to Lorentz!



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Invisible to our instruments, yes and what can we speculate beyond that? Is there a formula that is consistent enough to apply to this speculation? Like the Fibonacci model is consistent? Will quantum computing/theory be able to contribute, and if so how? I know, more questions but so it goes in the fringe ends of this spectrum I guess.
Thanks for the vid and I like the oxymoron "finite but boundless." I am not that versed in science so pardon my ignorance, but I will try to grasp as much of this as I can. The vid made me wonder about 4th dimension and how it plays into scales. Then what about the other dimensions beyond 4th? Is there such a thing or is that theory? It is just mind blowing to ponder this stuff and leaves me believing in some kind of designer/creator, whether an entity or force.

Thanks for your perspective, and for now I can just bask in wonder and awe.


a reply to: glend

That is what I was thinking too. Those gigantic planets could have life-forms as big as our sun! Crazy
The minuscule must be teaming with life too.. I think Ii will read a suggested sci-fi book called The Dragon's Egg.


a reply to: SolAquarius

Nice vid and that brings up yet another question…parallel dimensions(multi-verses). How does that play into this scale paradigm? < Scratches head >

Thanks for the replies folks and yea I love this stuff too because it stimulates the imagination and humbles us. It is nice to depart from our current woes for a bit and connect with something so expansive. It's like a ride at the amusement park.

I am reminded of a bit from the movie Animal House where the professor is toking a doobie with some students and they are pondering scale. Somebody says "so we could have an entire universe within a cell in our thumbnail?" Then someone says"and our universe could be a cell in some else's thumbnail…wow!" haha

I can see a new acronym from the excerpt in original article above " too-many-bong-hits territory."…tmbh theories, nya nya



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 05:52 PM
link   
I love these video's, probably the best one I've seen. Plenty of life out there



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 01:19 AM
link   
a reply to: LABTECH767

Ummm, I'll have whatever your smoking please, haha…I kid brother
Thanks for your input LT and you just took my(?) mind to another level, even though I couldn't quite grasp the totality, I get the jist, or at least the potentiality. Yes, it all convinces me that there is a creator and also lends more credit to the simulation notion. Are we just tangled up between ebb and flow of energy, matter and light…entropy and creation, or do we have a purpose. Are we just random result of these process or do we play a part. I would like to believe the latter but for what purpose? Are we something else's' entertainment or just insignificant material in a more complex soup of infinite potential? Can our consciousness affect a Mandelbrot unfolding, or is it result of? I think I need a drink.

Regardless, stuff like this is good to ponder, perturbation leads to growth, which leads to understanding which deepens our purpose perhaps. Maybe the reason we can't know these things yet is because we are simply unaware at this point.



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 01:39 AM
link   
a reply to: delbertlarson

Hey delbert thanks for dropping by. I was unaware of Lorentz and had to use my google fu for some learning. This stuff is a little beyond me but I enjoy diving in for a swim at least. It seems this linear perspective is limiting upon the backdrop of all this folding and unfolding, expanding and contracting. Is it only an analyisis for measurement and product of our mind for deducing? Not that the function does not exist, but there seems to be much more going on, particularly when considering dimensions, but at the same time maybe it is all encapsulated linearly. I respect relativity and it's application and accuracy, but after watching this vid and how much is out(in)there, I can't help but wonder if our perceptions are an insignificant drop in the bucket. At the same time it could be the key to everything and apply to all, even that which we do not yet know. 'I'll admit I really don't know, I just wanted to respond and acknowledge your post.


Shoot me a pm for your thread, I'd like to check it out.



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 04:02 AM
link   
The physical size of the quarks, along with the leptons are not well known, I suspect the author has used some kind of conversion between mass and size OR used production cross section... which is completely incorrect since a cross section determines an interaction probability and not really an objects physical size.

The other possibility is doing something similar to the Classical Electron radius, which, is considered also incorrect.

So... yeah the sizes of the quarks and leptons... pretty much blah.

Multiverses are also not at all required to make relativity do anything, synched or otherwise, it a what if postulation, has always been such. Because people keep hearing buzz words... quantum... relativity... in the same conversations as multiverse, doesn't mean it is related.

Same for string theory, string theory thus far has no predictions that the current standard model doesn't already have, has many places that fall short, and few if any observables that have been proven also. Thus far, it is not looking great for string theory to be a viable tool. Still, always good to develop these ideas.



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: ErosA433



Multiverses are also not at all required to make relativity do anything, synched or otherwise, it a what if postulation, has always been such. Because people keep hearing buzz words... quantum... relativity... in the same conversations as multiverse, doesn't mean it is related.


Where relativity comes into the multiverse theory is with the relativity of time. Once time is relative in the Einsteinian sense, you no longer have a well-defined simultaneity at a distance. That leads to a disallowing of actions-at-a-distance, such as quantum collapse of spatially finite (as opposed to point-like) entities. And it is in quantum collapse that the whole multiverse thing got started by Schrodinger.

If we instead go back to a Lorentzian view with an absolute simultaneity, then we can have instantaneous collapses of finite wave-functions and the quantum collapse can be understood as just playing dice - as Einstein memorably put it.

Certainly relativity does not depend upon the multiverse concept, nor does relativity depend upon quantum mechanics. Relativity came first, in 1905. But relativity was the first nuttiness added to physics, and its been all downhill ever since.



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: waftist

I don't partake myself but this is very topical, scale as well.


I remember the first time I saw a cheech and chong movie, they had been banned because of the subject matter but it was undoubtedly the funniest movie I have ever seen and of course if all reality's are possible these actors are really these guy's in some distant reality.
edit on 14-3-2017 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
18

log in

join