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.

 

The Way of the Universe?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 10:30 PM
link   
Me and a few friends talked it over and actually think we figured out a good way of explaining the universe.

We all know bout the big bang and junk. Here's a timeline of events.

-Big Bang: Universe is created.
-Universe expands
-Universe starts contracting
-Universe collapses on itself and consumes itself, leaving nothing but leftover energy. Since mass=unused energy and atoms=charged particles, energy forms atoms. And since it begins from NOTHING only 1 way the universe can be recreated.
-Universe expands again. EVERYTHING IS RECREATED EXACTLY. Therefore the is reincarnation. And since we always do what we think is best, whether we think about it for long or not, we will do exactly the same things. We are essentially reincarnated.
-Dark matter (clumps of created atoms that haven't dispersed, having huge mass in little volume have so much gravity that the universe collapses again.

And so on and so forth. Therefore, fi this is correct, I have posted this trillions of times, I just don't know it. I have also been completely ignored trillions of times. I know it, but I just don't know to what extent.

The twist?

We figured this out in 47 minutes of art class. CHEW ON THAT ARISTOTLE!




posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 11:19 PM
link   
well i for one know i was re-incarnated... i was Cleopatra in my last life.



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darkpr0
Me and a few friends talked it over and actually think we figured out a good way of explaining the universe.

We all know bout the big bang and junk. Here's a timeline of events.

-Big Bang: Universe is created.
-Universe expands
-Universe starts contracting


ok, lets stop here for a sec.
Why does it start contracting?

And what is meant by "Universe" exactly?
Do you mean the "Space" or the stuff that fills it, or both??


-Universe collapses on itself and consumes itself, leaving nothing but leftover energy.


So where does it leave this leftover energy if it's not within the Universe which has just collapsed??


Since mass=unused energy and atoms=charged particles, energy forms atoms. And since it begins from NOTHING only 1 way the universe can be recreated.
-Universe expands again. EVERYTHING IS RECREATED EXACTLY. Therefore the is reincarnation. And since we always do what we think is best, whether we think about it for long or not, we will do exactly the same things. We are essentially reincarnated.
-Dark matter (clumps of created atoms that haven't dispersed, having huge mass in little volume have so much gravity that the universe collapses again.

And so on and so forth. Therefore, fi this is correct, I have posted this trillions of times, I just don't know it. I have also been completely ignored trillions of times. I know it, but I just don't know to what extent.

The twist?

We figured this out in 47 minutes of art class. CHEW ON THAT ARISTOTLE!



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darkpr0
We figured this out in 47 minutes of art class. CHEW ON THAT ARISTOTLE!



So let me get this straight: you and some buddies were in art class and in 47 mintutes--with zero data--have discovered how the universe was created, how it will end, how it will begin again, confirmed the existence of reincarnation, and effectively wriiten off the need for a higher power in the creation of the universe. Yes, I'm sure Aristotle would be heartbroken.

However...
What you have brilliantly come up with, known as "The Big Crunch" was proposed long ago and has since been written off by the top scientist in the field of Cosmology (people who spend more than 47 minutes studying the science and coming up with theories).

I'm not intending to be rude, but when you come off as cocky as you have, obviously without doing any research at all, well, it is to be expected. I am happy that you and your friends are discussing such interesting topics though. Just try researching first, then have a talk about it and see what you can come up with.

Here's a link for you: first google result



However, recent experimental evidence (namely the observation of distant supernovae as standard candles, and the well-resolved mapping of the cosmic microwave background) have - to most scientists' considerable surprise - shown that the expansion of the universe is not being slowed down by gravity, but instead, accelerating, suggesting that the universe will not end with a "Big Crunch", but will instead expand forever. (The evidence of an accelerating universe is considered conclusive by most cosmologists since 2002.)



[EDIT]: gave the deserving capital 'C' to Cosmology.

[edit on 24-6-2005 by backtoreality]



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 07:32 AM
link   
Great post!

Aristotle was a n00b. You owned him by "figuring out" big-crunch theory from the 1970s which has since been discredited by inflationary theory, the acclerating expansion of space, and a good deal of astronomic data.

For some reason this reminds me of the urban legend that Einstien was bad at math that was made to make kids feel better that they sucked at it. Despite the fact that Einstien was better at math in the 1910s than most people ever will be today. He was just bad at math for being such a genius in other respects.

Please do not take credit for old failed theories. Or else i call dibs on electric ether!



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 07:38 AM
link   
i think budhists also belive its a neverending circle of expanding and contracting....much like inhaling and exhaling



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 07:43 AM
link   
OK Prove the big bang for starters cos i'm not sure i even buy into that

I did have a theory once but gave up on it.

I.E There is only nothing and mass like a chess board with black and white squares and MASS was like a disease taking over the massless.
Like the black squares on a chess borad turning white with mass.
Once all the squares were white i.e The whole Universe is MASS
Then the process would just reverse and MASSLESS would start to consume MASS but gave up there LOL



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by andersonr
OK Prove the big bang for starters cos i'm not sure i even buy into that

Based on what? Data, or personal opinion?





I.E There is only nothing and mass like a chess board with black and white squares and MASS was like a disease taking over the massless.
Like the black squares on a chess borad turning white with mass.
Once all the squares were white i.e The whole Universe is MASS
Then the process would just reverse and MASSLESS would start to consume MASS but gave up there LOL

Entertaining theory, but there is just one problem: evidence.


It's great to see that people are thinking about this kind of stuff, but just do a little research. I assure you the professionals do a great job.



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 08:45 AM
link   
I see all your points, and I know I'm full of crap. I'm not a scientist and I'm not a genius. And I'm not really a universe geek either, I like aircraft. Me and a few friends just sat down and talked, and this is what we came up with. But lets just play with the thought that I'm right, which we all know I'm not, but it would give Plato a pretty good run. I'll clear up a few things.

Dark Matter=to my knowledge its a form of matter that has little volume but huge gravity. Its whats holding the universe together. If all these atoms were created by leftover energy, then they would be squished into a small area, because of the gravity of the squished body they are a part of. The sheer gravity of this body of dark matter would be able to "catch" the universe as it expands, and resist that expansion.

When I refer to the universe I refer to everything within it. (Note: we think we got an idea of what the edge of the universe may look like. Since it neither creates nor reflects energy (?) it would look just black)

Like I said I'm not a professional and I didn't do any research to prove my theory. I'm not even sure evidence to prove it exists. But I'm a guy who sat down with friends and talked with them. It wasn't much, but I just wanted to show the community to see what people thought of it. Go ahead and deny my theory; that's what theories are for



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darkpr0
I see all your points, and I know I'm full of crap. I'm not a scientist and I'm not a genius... But lets just play with the thought that I'm right, which we all know I'm not...

Why should we play with this thought if we know it to be completely wrong?




Go ahead and deny my theory; that's what theories are for

Done. Check my first post.





p.s. I think Aristotle just spit it out.



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 09:19 AM
link   
Sounds like you and your friend watched K-PAX rather than discussing the universe.

The "Big Crunch" isn't thought about much anymore, really. Common thought is that the universe will continue expanding.



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 12:28 PM
link   
Backtoreality

Thats just my point it is only a theory hence no evidence

Show me the evidence for a big bang - Data or Personal opinion
It doesn't matter cos there isn't any either - It's just the most sensible Theory -


I never doubted the professionals in the first place.
But even professionals can be wrong !!



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Discover Magazine recently had an article about how the universe may expand and then collapse....

In fact, it would appear that Darkpro or one of his friends read this same article and are now claiming that this information was derived from their own immense intelligence.



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 10:38 PM
link   
why are you guys ripping on this kid so bad? Yes, this is the "big crunch theory", but it dosnt really sound like he knew that, and im almost positive he isnt trying to take credit for it! All you should have said is, "this is already a theory, sorry" messaged a mod and hoped for a locked thread. When people have theories they want to know everyones reaction on it, good or bad. NOBODY can find evedince on ALL their theories, if so then there would be little einsteins EVERYWHERE! He was just trying to see whats up and get a few reactions, its stuff like this that make people stop thinking of new theories cause they are bullied into thinking they are dumb. Just let him be, oh and kid, keep on coming up with new ones, yes its already a theory, but build on it some more.



posted on Jun, 26 2005 @ 12:14 AM
link   
OK, but I think what he's trying to do is explain the theory of reincarnation, using the Big Bang and Big Crunch as a base. The topic of this thread is misleading, because there is no proof for the way of the universe as the universe has been found to be unpredictible based on probabilities, etc.

Like a spring expanding and contracting.

Big Bang
Big Crunch
Big Bang
Big Crunch
Big Bang
Big Crunch
Big Bang
Big Crunch

One could argue that it's simple harmonic motion, which would signify there being an end to the universe.

The real question would be does god throw dice? The answer is again based on probabilities.

So the whole universe is just a probability that an event happens.



posted on Jun, 26 2005 @ 12:17 AM
link   
tyvm for your support. I don't take credit for this theory. Heck, its not even my theory. Its mostly just a piecing together of theories to show how they ineract and spport one another. I built on this alil bit and htought.

What if one particle survived, containg a memory? What if it was a memor of one... say.. Jesus, or another prophet. It would explain why they are worshipped so. Not only that, this theory shows that reincarnation happens (well not really shows so much as supports). it also explains the creation, not for facy but for theory. Remind you of any well nkown churches? It could show that the Church is actually right, though not in a way they'd suspect. Its just a thought, but nonetheles... Its a thought that probly deserves a lil more thought. oh and I swear upon what was once my honor that I never read that article, and I don't even know what the heck show that is. I have 24 channels. All of which are crappy, aside from Tech TV.



posted on Jun, 26 2005 @ 08:45 AM
link   
Been doin more thinking. This theory can show the fate/free will thing. Check it out.

Everyone does what they do because they think its the BEST thing to do, even if they act impulsively (or if whatever's controlling them, like a virus feels is best). Also we have the reincarnation theory, we are exactly the same every time. Therefore our versions of "best" are exactly the same. Basically this means that we have free will, but we make it act like fate cuz we do the same thing every time. Lol you gotta admit thats a really kinda "proper" solution to that with the irony and all.



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 01:42 AM
link   
To me the universe is scary, often i think the universe will eventually die out and nothing will happen. No recreation, no big bang ,no big crunch, just emptiness.



posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 10:45 AM
link   
Since this is kind of on-subject, I'd like to ask what proof we have of the expansion of the universe. I have heard we know this from the constant red-shifting of everything, but wouldn't that mean everything was moving away from us? It agree with them; I don't like us very much either



posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 11:44 AM
link   
backtoreality, what you might find interesting is the theory that the universe is not going to continue expanding forever, but that it will go through a big tear in which spacetime rips apart. Think of it like a giant bubble with dark energy inside, accelerating the growth of the bubble until at some point it just 'pops'. One version also has it that the 'bubble' comes from a matrix of some sort that creates and releases the bubbles, some like out universe, some where the laws of physics are completely different, some with more dimensions (by this I mean that in our universe, it's thought by some that the big bang split the universe into a 6 dimensional one and a 4 dimensional one, and that the 4 dimensional universe 'won' in a sense and the 6 other dimensions curled up into a tiny invisible ball. In some other 'bubbles', it's possible that the 4 dimensions are curled up into a ball, and the 6 dimensions are the ones we would live in). Guess that you could also picture God as the universal 'bubble blower'
.I'll try to find the source layer today, it was somewhere in Discover magazine. I'm just in a hurry to go to the beach soon, such a beautiful day here in Boston.

edit: Darkpr0, hopefully someone can back this up for me, but I believe that the observation of distant galaxies by the Chandra telescope shows that the universe is accelerating its expansion.


[edit on 10-7-2005 by zhangmaster]







 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join