Googol-sized Particles Larger Than Thousands of Galaxies Fill the Universe -New Discovery, page 4
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 63 times


reply posted on 13-6-2009 @ 03:48 AM by tobiascore
Originally posted by mikesingh
Mind boggling science fiction!! The theories that scientists come up with! Jeeez! So, we can't ever see those nutrinos, can't ever hear them, can't ever feel them, but hey, they exist somewhere out there! Oh yeah. We're probably living inside one right now and what we're seeing with our eyes and those giant telescopes is not the actual universe, not reality but some weird holographic projection or a faint reflection of reality that exists within our little nutrino! (They must come in all sizes! )

And then this theory relies upon another THEORY that the universe started off with a big bang. Because of the so called doppler red shift, we conveniently deduce that the universe is expanding only to collapse again to produce another huge big bang! Huh?

Is it scientifically prudent to base ones theories on still other theories that have not been scientifically proved? This nutrino theory relies on the theory of the expanding universe which may not be the case at all! Let the scientists prove that first before going ahead with such bizarre concepts!

I don't dig this though it's top-of-the-rung science fiction stuff! Wish Arthur C Clarke were around!

Cheers!



[edit on 13-6-2009 by mikesingh]


Agreed. Isaac Asimov basically wrote a story describing this story in "The Last Question". It's purely doesn not describe the data. It is a poor human description of the universe that does not hold any...weight. hahah

seedmagazine.com...

Physicist David Bohm has the most logical theory on QM. But he has been shunned. These modern theories of the universe are old and boring.


reply posted on 13-6-2009 @ 05:14 AM by DangerDeath
reply to post by Romantic Rights



From here: plato.stanford.edu...


Yet since I can predict either x1 or p1 without interfering with the system No. 1 and since system No. 1, like a scholar in an examination, cannot possibly know which of the two questions I am going to ask first: it so seems that our scholar is prepared to give the right answer to the first question he is asked, anyhow. Therefore he must know both answers; which is an amazing knowledge; quite irrespective of the fact that after having given his first answer our scholar is invariably so disconcerted or tired out, that all the following answers are ‘wrong.’

What Schrödinger showed was that if two particles are prepared in a quantum state such that there is a matching correlation between two ‘canonically conjugate’ dynamical quantities — quantities like position and momentum whose values suffice to specify all the properties of a classical system — then there are infinitely many dynamical quantities of the two particles for which there exist similar matching correlations: every function of the canonically conjugate pair of the first particle matches with the same function of the canonically conjugate pair of the second particle. Thus (Schrödinger, p. 559) system No. 1 ‘does not only know these two answers but a vast number of others, and that with no mnemotechnical help whatsoever, at least with none that we know of.’

Schrödinger coined the term ‘entanglement’ to describe this peculiar connection between quantum systems (Schrödinger, 1935; p. 555):


It seems to me that the "problem" is that this experiment shows there is no causality in time/space continuum. In order to determine spin of an electron you rather have to "decide" what its spin is. Only when you "know" the spin of one electron, then you can know the spin of the other one (it is the opposite of the first one's spin).

So this element of decision is confusing those who believe there is an eternal logic behind all phenomena in the Universe.

Einstein didn't accept this conclusion and he said that "God doesn't play dice". For him, everything was determined from the beginning and there was no "chance". In my opinion, this experiment proves that a decision making is "free". It is not "determined".

The observer must decide what he observes, and only from that point things "start happening" in a logical way.

So, "objectivity" is preceded by "subjectivity". Tricky thing which destroys the concept of the empiric, because the reliable knowledge exists before it has been observed.


reply posted on 13-6-2009 @ 05:21 AM by DangerDeath
Originally posted by synyster.
reply to
post by shortest man walking



its called entanglement theory, to answer your question.



And this is a pretty amazing find... tons of subatomic particles stretched to the point where they are almost as big as the universe themselves.


I wonder how this applies to multi-dimensions?


To stretch something that is just a point (neutrino) is actually talking about the "principle" of space. Space, as principle, has no size. It is just a "potential". And existing in space is by means of movement. Movement simply means difference, discerning (principle of reflection). In this "neutrino" there is no differentiation, so its size can be anything (immeasurable, not simply "huge").

The same applies to concepts of "bending space" and such. How can one bend a principle? Scientists often freak out when it comes to understanding something in a metaphysical way. Then they come out with these silly ideas that "space is objective" or that "vacuum exists objectively".

They are trying to apply their perception (which is differentiating of objects) to something which is a singularity. It cannot be done. One must make a "quantum leap" to understand this. It cannot be deduced from the "observable".

Since they have "observed" the "potential", I must say that they are actually talking about neutrinos as of the force itself. Force is the immeasurable potential without which nothing physical can move, yet force is not physical (has no physical properties). All physical world cannot exist without this metaphysical principle which cannot be observed directly. All science of physics is very ambivalent

[edit on 13-6-2009 by DangerDeath]



reply posted on 13-6-2009 @ 09:18 AM by ::.mika.::
that study is matching the ummo theory about the additional dimension with infinite mass

WAAM - WAAM The WAAM -

WAAM, translation: pluri-cosmos. To understand this vision of the universe, we should quickly discard all our S.F. novels (even though the Ummite file can be compared to the world's greatest role playing game). In fact, it is not a question of a multitude of parallel universes, but rather of universes with different physical properties.
These properties being related closely to the orientations of the multiple vectors of the IBOZOO UU. We recommend you read and understand this concept before going any further in " the exploration " of the cosmos. Thus to some extent, the WAAM resembles Hawking's theory on "bubble-universes" (see the Champs / Flamarion collection for a simplified explanation) but he did not build a logical system that would make such universes possible...

Returning to WAAM-WAAM, the Oummites say that we are plunged in a multidimensional universe which exists in multiple combinations within its structure. But for the Ummite, dimension is not a vector or scalar, dimension is a three-dimensional frame in which properties specific to that frame EXIST, these properties being related to the orientation of the vector axes of the IBOZOO UU. First example, since you may already be overwhelmed, a positron does not exist in a natural state within our three-dimensional frame (it is a position, not a demonstration), but is in its natural state in another three-dimensional frame, and its specificity in the latter is the same one as the electron within our frame. WAAM- WAAM consists of an infinite number of three-dimensional frames with two well defined limits,which will be developed further. The difference with our concepts lies in the definition of dimension. We saw in the chapter on the IBOZOO UU that everything we call particles or waves is defined by the angular variation of the axes of the vectors of two dependent IBOZOO UU. A photon, an electron, a " graviton ", can thus be defined by the amount of variation of the orientations of the vectors of the I.U. Space-time plunges us into a 4-dimensional frame, or 4 vectors, in Ummite terms..

The IBOZOO UU has 10 vectors. Our frame or our dimension is defined by the orientation of its vectors, and since there are an infinite number of possible angular orientations of these vectors, there is an infinite number of tetra-dimensional frames. It's now easier to understand why one cannot really speak about parallel universes, but could draw an analogy between the universe (the WAAM - WAAM) in the diversity of its frames, and the different possible physical states of water (gas, liquid, solid); all these states coexist, but it always remains a substance made up of H2O molecules. We live in water in its gaseous state, but other beings can only exist in water in its solid state...(it is an analogy!). Another example: any image on a monitor is made up of three constutuent signals: Red, Green and Blue. If the whole screen is green, you will not be able to see a single green point. On the other hand, if your screen is yellow, you will be able to distinguish a single green point on this background...It is all just a question of one reference frame defined by another reference frame, the RGB signal. It is not about the distance between the various universes, about time, or other things; it is a question of the specific characteristics of the IBOZOO UU which define these universes.

The oummites say to have been able to" plunge themselves " into ten different frameworks by means of a a simple variation of THEIR IBOZOO UU (which ones????) but the framework that is more interesting to us is the U-WAAM or anti-universe ; it differs only by the vector which characterizes the mass; it is thus symmetrical to us, mathematically speaking. One of its effects would be to contain our galaxy in a kind of cocoon and to thus counteract the effect of centrifugal force not compensated for by the famous "missing mass" which always eludes observation. In the same way, this universe " skirts " ours in its pluri-geometry, and its uniqueness lies in the fact that the speed of the light in its centre could be 50 times higher than in our universe, thus providing the possibility of traveling very quickly from one point to another in our space at very high speed. We would no longer need hundreds of years to go to the nearest star. (This is what astronomers such as Ribes proclaim, at least that is his official position).

We spoke to you about the boundary universes, which they are in terms of the state of their IBOZOO UU. These universes are the BUAWA and BUAWE BIAEI. On one hand, the universe of Souls ( or spirits), on the other, the universe of the Souls' souls.

Their defining characteristics are:

* BUAWA Universe: zero mass, photon velocity zero, time is thus "frozen", and a constantly expanding radius.

* BUAWE BIAEI Universe: infinite mass, photon velocity infinite, constantly expanding radius. It is surprising to see how much those who revealed these texts have integrated physically what for us is nothing but pure speculation...The oummites have no reason to manufacture religion since they have modeled our intuitions.

In this respect, such a society is inherently stable. At least from this point of view. Once again, we would say that we only observe the universe from our seat....PLATO! Here is the man who should have been listened to in the sciences, PLATO and his cave....Pure objectification!



feastofhateandfear.com...

[edit on 13-6-2009 by ::.mika.::]



reply posted on 13-6-2009 @ 01:02 PM by DangerDeath
reply to post by debunky





No relativity here. The only decisionmaking is in the units, and those are and must be arbitary. They don't enter into the principle.


That is what I am saying. Arbitrarily comes when calibration of senses is decided, or else we'd be lost in an endless Mandelbrot-like infinity without beginning or end.

Since the Force is what affects matter, it can only affect it after calibration, which means the force is relative, adapted to the "measures". The act of creation is calibration, the "logos".

It is not for nothing that some famous Greek said: Man is the measure of all things, and Niels Bohr said: Nothing exists until it's measured.

Force itself, has no physical properties.
No color.
No size.
No weight.
No tangibility.
etc...

Force can not be perceived directly. It can only be known, because force is knowledge. That's how it operates, it knows.

The saying: Force is knowledge, is true.


reply posted on 13-6-2009 @ 04:21 PM by jkrog08
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People



I was thinking that too, maybe these super neutrinos are actually what many thought were world volume membranes all along?


reply posted on 13-6-2009 @ 04:39 PM by masqua
Neutrino's are created by our own sun.

The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) results have provided revolutionary insight into the properties of neutrinos and the core of the sun. The detector, shown in the artist's conception below, was built 6800 feet under ground, in INCO's Creighton mine near Sudbury, Ontario, Canada. SNO was a heavy-water Cherenkov detector designed to detect neutrinos produced by fusion reactions in the sun.

www.sno.phy.queensu.ca...


From another page on the same site:

You could argue that all the experiments are simply wrong, but this is highly unlikely. The different experiments all use diverse detection techniques, overseen by large collaborations, and have been calibrated with a variety of sources. *

Now is a good time to introduce another fact about neutrinos; there are actually three types of neutrinos (six types if you count the anti-neutrinos). The three types (called flavours) are the electron-neutrino (ne ), the muon-neutrino (nu ) and the tau-neutrino (nt ); they correspond to the three known "generations" of particles that make up the known roster of elementary particles. Normal "earthly" matter is made from first generation particles, protons, neutrons and electrons. The higher generation particles can be created in particle accelerators (that is how they were discovered), but they rapidly decay back to the first generation due to their larger mass.

www.sno.phy.queensu.ca...


*bolding mine

The findings in the OP are interesting in that neurtrinos created when the universe began are so stretched that they have become gargantuan (love that word).

Fascinating stuff.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^



Newfound "super-Earth"
  Posted 9 days ago with 56 member flags
Enceladus Backlit by Saturn
  Posted 3 days ago with 50 member flags
Toronto teens send Lego man into space: video
  Posted 17 days ago with 28 member flags
Current Potential Habitable Worlds - Update February 2012
  Posted 1 days ago with 24 member flags
Amazing new photo of Earth. The Blue Marble 2012
  Posted 13 days ago with 22 member flags
NASA Probe Captures 1st Video of Moon\'s Far Side
  Posted 10 days ago with 19 member flags

ATS Live North America is broadcasting in 52 minutes.
Today's Show: ATS Live: 96: Super powers, Falklands Woes, Stan Deyo Interview, Syria, Telepathy, The Devils Chord.