Unknown "Structures" Tugging at Universe, Study Says, page 1

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 8 times

Topic started on 6-11-2008 @ 11:14 AM by warrenb

Something may be out there. Way out there.

On the outskirts of creation, unknown, unseen "structures" are tugging on our universe like cosmic magnets, a controversial new study says.

Full Article

So will they finally admit that the universe is electric?

see this thread regarding the Electric Universe

[edit on 6-11-2008 by warrenb]

reply posted on 6-11-2008 @ 11:41 AM by ablue07

Unknown structures. What? Structures do they mean that an engineered structure? I envision some giant spaceships with tractor beams pulling on the Milky Way. Very interesting I'll have to read up on this one. Thanks for the post

reply posted on 6-11-2008 @ 11:51 AM by psychedeliack

maybe its some sort of quantum hologram projector.

Awesome find, thanks for posting!

reply posted on 6-11-2008 @ 11:52 AM by SolarSeaman

HAHA finally they looked out into the Abyss! Now Jesus can come back and the Aliens spring up and the 12th imam and all that!

Ladies and gentlemen, let me introduce you to our friend - Ignorance! I am glad some "credible" therorist have come out and said "we don't understand" the dark stuff. How wise and consoling for the atheistic uprising!

Ya, multiverse is...hmm, transdimensional teleportation is possible as long as the reformation is into a "matter" area, basically. Very long ways to go and such, even in theory. Particle field theory needs to be narrowed and our regular mechanics and etc. shold be refined. But, ya, the universe IS energy so electric is probably true in a sense. We can make absolute zero? Or is that a theory, see cause, if a particle is moving it makes heat and stuff and absolute zero is the absence of heat, or movement.

Correct me if I wrong but this should be spread around the world really fast...even if the other universes are empty they are there, so...

Did the Illuminati know that? I know purist cults know that. LOL

reply posted on 6-11-2008 @ 01:38 PM by stander

Study leader Kashlinsky agrees many questions remain unanswered. For starters: What exactly are these things that are apparently tugging our universe?
"They could be anything. As bizarre as you could imagine—some warped space-time," Kashlinsky said.

Kashlinsky said "bizzare" not "crazy," and that takes care of the Electric Universe explanation.

Did our universe build its own road to move along?

The cosmologists treat our universe as a child who was born without having parents. But there was a proto universe that expanded trillions of years ago in a similar way to the Big Bang. Some of these regions collapsed and big banged on its own, like our universe.

You can see bellow how our universe (blue circle) is expanding, meaning it moves along the spacetime (road) built by the aftermath of the Super Big Bang that took place ions ago, thus causing other universes to come into existence.

reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 10:58 AM by KOGDOG

reply to post by warrenb

I really hate reading this kinda' "stuff". I'm a Liberal Arts person... don't really care for physics, math... Weird science and I are more or less enemies. Reading that our so-called experts might need to readjust today's scientific paradigms scares the heck out of me when I think of what these nut jobs are doing with CERN. Stop playing around with the world. You whack job "scientists" don't know what you are doing. Hawking's was right to attempt to prove that science is dangerous with his "black hole information paradox" theory. Science is superstition to the max. Today's scientific paradigms are indeed tomorrows superstitions. I would sooner put my trust in the local witch doctor than an arrogant scientist who tampers with my world without fully understanding the consequences of their actions. The witch doctor can't destroy the world with his "superstition". I can't even find any honey bees in my garden and I blame weird science for this disturbing trend. Rant off...

reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 11:24 AM by grover

Its tugging at itself.

If space is curved then it must be curved in all directions so ultimately the universe will crash into itself coming the other way as it were. The big bang will end with a big crunch until the pressure becomes too much starting the universe all over again.

But hey... what do I know? I'm a dog.

I only post on here when my master is away.

[edit on 7-11-2008 by grover]

reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 11:52 AM by MurrayTORONTO

Originally posted by KOGDOG
reply to post by warrenb

I really hate reading this kinda' "stuff". I'm a Liberal Arts person... don't really care for physics, math... Weird science and I are more or less enemies. Reading that our so-called experts might need to readjust today's scientific paradigms scares the heck out of me when I think of what these nut jobs are doing with CERN. Stop playing around with the world. You whack job "scientists" don't know what you are doing. Hawking's was right to attempt to prove that science is dangerous with his "black hole information paradox" theory. Science is superstition to the max. Today's scientific paradigms are indeed tomorrows superstitions. I would sooner put my trust in the local witch doctor than an arrogant scientist who tampers with my world without fully understanding the consequences of their actions. The witch doctor can't destroy the world with his "superstition". I can't even find any honey bees in my garden and I blame weird science for this disturbing trend. Rant off...

Well then don't read it.. and we'll continue to do so.. nobody forced you to click this thread, if you don't like it, too bad.

reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 12:13 PM by chickenshoes

Originally posted by SolarSeaman

Correct me if I wrong but this should be spread around the world really fast...even if the other universes are empty they are there, so...

Did the Illuminati know that? I know purist cults know that. LOL

The article the op posted and the above comment put me in the mind of this.

* Thus, as God creates the universe evolves towards higher forms of complexity, consciousness, and finally with humans, personality, because God, who is drawing the universe towards him, is a Person.

In essence, Teillard de Chardin hypothesised that God is this "Omega Point" who is drawing everyone and everything to him to be reunited.

He was a French Jesuit who lived from the late 1800's to 1955. I realize this is more philosophical than scientific, but I felt it had bearing.

reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 12:55 PM by spitefulgod

Please review this amazing pictograph of the way things are

reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 01:35 PM by michael

I will lay this down next to string theory as something beyond my current level of understanding.

reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 02:34 PM by KOGDOG

Originally posted by MurrayTORONTO
Well then don't read it.. and we'll continue to do so.. nobody forced you to click this thread, if you don't like it, too bad.

Now the above confusion illustrates precisely the point of my argument.

You don't get that either... NM.

reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 03:53 PM by The Cyfre

reply to post by KOGDOG

The only confusion comes from the fact that you're reading this, and yet you don't like reading this kind of thing. I don't really like reading about New World Order stuff. Wanna know my secret for avoiding it? I just don't go into the folder. I don't do google searches on it. Works out pretty well for the most part.

Now, to actually address your initial concerns. Yeah, it scares me on one hand to think that scientists are out there testing and theorizing and researching and everything else when they may not know exactly what they're doing. But then again, learning without instruction is a process of trial and error and I would rather take my chances to learn more about our universe than keep my head in the sand and just ignore the things that might be dangerous. Lots of things are dangerous but we continue to explore them.

reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 04:03 PM by themamayada

Isn't that theory called the "oscillating universe theory"?

Originally posted by groverThe big bang will end with a big crunch until the pressure becomes too much starting the universe all over again.

reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 04:48 PM by KOGDOG

Originally posted by The Cyfre
reply to post by KOGDOG

The only confusion comes from the fact that you're reading this, and yet you don't like reading this kind of thing. I don't really like reading about New World Order stuff. Wanna know my secret for avoiding it? I just don't go into the folder. I don't do google searches on it. Works out pretty well for the most part.

Well actually the "confusion" was intentional. It was more or less.... OK... It was a piece of creative writing with the spirit of Sun Tzu embedded between the lines. BTW... It appears to be working.

reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 05:45 PM by constantwonder

Originally posted by KOGDOG

Originally posted by MurrayTORONTO
Well then don't read it.. and we'll continue to do so.. nobody forced you to click this thread, if you don't like it, too bad.

Now the above confusion illustrates precisely the point of my argument.

You don't get that either... NM.

Not everyone is a physics expert and these concepts are quite mind boggling. Your fear of science is no more justified than your anti-intellectual rant.

There is actually a decent discussion of this going on on this thread just down the hall

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The universe is amazing and quite incomprehensible as a whole due to the little problem of us being able to observe the model from outside it barring us from ever obtaining the final "Theory of Everything". (by that i mean a true master equation that describes the entirety of the multiverse if thats what it is). Yet we may still be able to find a theory that does fairly accurately describe what we can observe from our tiny speck.

S&F OP

[edit on 7-11-2008 by constantwonder]

reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 06:05 PM by Unit541

reply to post by KOGDOG

I'd be more scared of our scientists "thinking" they have it all figured out, and being wrong. It's actually a little refreshing to know that we're still trying to validate the "answers" we've already come up with. Chalk one up for the human race every time we actually realize we have been wrong.

We are an arrogant species. Every time we actually own up to not understanding something, we learn a little more. Quit seeking knowledge (as you suggest), and we quit learning. If we quit learning, the Universe catches up and squashes us like bi-ped bugs.

Once upon a time, we thought the world was flat. Had we continued to assume this "common knowledge" was correct, we would have had no need to build long range sea going vessels. Without these vessels, we would have never discovered the new world. CERN is today's ocean liner. We built it to help us learn. To discover new concepts, and either validate or disprove old ones. To fear what you don't understand is ridiculous. You must understand something to know whether or not it should be feared.

reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 06:13 PM by billybobh3

Think about the implications of potentially realizing that our Universe is nothing more than a dustball in the corner of closet, and so on.

You're right, humans are far too arrogant.

reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 06:18 PM by Treacherous

Blah blah blah! (Not you OP) but the scientists behind this kind of research. They've no blardy idea. And why should they? they're little men in off white shirts, with big ears and over excited grey matter inbetween. Nobody really knows anything beyond earth and so very little here and now to that ends. So I take all of this stuff with a pinch of salt but thank you OP, I keep getting drawn to your posts so it seems.

reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 06:27 PM by Allred5923

I personally believe what the scientist are theorizing on is nothing more than the effects of the inertia caused by the expansion of the Universe.
As for it having a type of physical application, that's a bit hard to swallow, but food for thought none the less.

A measure of an object’s resistance to a change in velocity. The force needed to accelerate or decelerate an object is directly proportional to its mass. The torque required to rotationally accelerate or decelerate a cylindrical object is directly proportional to its mass and radius.

www.google.com...:Inertia&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

Pages: << 1 2 >> ^^TOP^^