Australian Student Uncovers the Universe’s Missing Mass

page: 3
187
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 25 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Thill
 


I've heard that there are more neuronal interconnections in the human brain than there are MOLECULES in the entire universe. Talk about COMPLEXITY!




posted on May, 25 2011 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Thill
 


If the physical universe is a fragment of God's imagination, I think I am good with that. I guess even God's got a sense of humor...

edit on 25-5-2011 by summerbreeze.ddp because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Interesting Post S&F



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   
The reason there now appears to be a contradiction between the new "clumpy universe" and "expanding universe" is simple: The universe is not expanding.

Their methods for measuring the "expansion" of the universe are based on a fundamentally flawed assumption concerning the properties of light, which is, that light waves remain constant across vast amounts of time and space.

Once they understand that light naturally "red shifts" as it ages/crosses space, then they'll realize that the universe is neither inflating nor contracting; it's basically static.
edit on 25-5-2011 by Cryptonomicon because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 
So just exactly what does this mean to us earthlings? Not much as far as I can tell. Its not going to change anything in the forseeable future as far as I can tell. Interesting theory though.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by yrwehere1
reply to post by XPLodER
 
So just exactly what does this mean to us earthlings? Not much as far as I can tell. Its not going to change anything in the forseeable future as far as I can tell. Interesting theory though.

I don't know about that, I think it does make a difference knowing the Universe is 150 billion years old rather than 13.7 billion years old.

It has profound implications concerning our existence and primarily for the odds of there being other life "out there".

True this isn't going to change the price of gas, but it could shift the way the entire worlds thinks about reality. The results of which we will have yet to see.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


Very interesting, on the matter /energy side, however, the whole big-bang thing is being pretty well covered in this thread
I will be looking into this, only the first statement that 'the mysterious, unseen dark matter was not there (in the void)' had me ROTFL--If it was unseen matter, how could they tell it wasn't there? How could they tell it was there in the first place? It's different for a black hole or a brown dwarf, you can spot the gravitational effects they produce, but not from a filament.
Also, they have been doing x-ray surveys of the skies for decades, but they only just spotted it now?
As for the electron being the culprit, i would not think so, they are pretty slow, heavy particles
but i would think maybe a mass of sub-nuclear particles (hadrons?) could well fit the bill.
Having said that, the electron is still a truly remarkable object, & i suspect that we humans (as usual) have got the wrong end of the stick. String theory (also posted by above poster) could possibly explain the matter/energy relation better than any right now.
My personal theory is that we are looking at part of the ZPE/aether/string phenomenon, which is far greater than the lowly 4 dimensions we have here....

S&F anyway.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Cryptonomicon
 


It is not only expanding, it's accelerating.
Think deep thoughts my freind....



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
More evidence that fits in with my theory of matter, that I have been telling people about for over twenty years.

These filaments are mostly made of electrons, which are long and curved like a thread or a strand of hair. Electrons tangle together to form these long filaments, which hold everything together.

What we see as light is the vibration of these threads.
edit on 25-5-2011 by poet1b because: add a f



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 03:31 PM
link   
Great thread! And I think that they might find that the BBT is correct and that universes are created just that fast!



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 03:34 PM
link   
If, by dark, we mean this matter does not emit light and is therefore not visible. Could we not also refer to this material as "space dust"?

Not trying to degrade it's importance in any way. I am just trying to put it into terms which could be more easily identifiable by the common man.

From the pics shown it would seem rather fitting. It would also explain how pervasive this matter is without being so easily seen.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Textreply to post by XPLodER
 


Time itself marches along in no straight path of course but none the least marches forward yes? Time follows no conformity...I say that to say this- It's believed by some astronomers that within our little galaxy that we have distorted preception of what time and matter is within the cosmos. The suggestion is made that planets such as Saturn, Jupiter and mars that are close to the size of our own planet, and that these planets that we think we are viewing in real time are actually echos of our own planet but in the past???


I've since found something interesting on Google Earth which I think most of the ATS contingency would like to have a gander here are the

coordinates: RA 6h 39m 48.58s
-13 18'09.01"

-Invisible Crown-



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cryptonomicon
Their methods for measuring the "expansion" of the universe are based on a fundamentally flawed assumption concerning the properties of light, which is, that light waves remain constant across vast amounts of time and space.

Once they understand that light naturally "red shifts" as it ages/crosses space, then they'll realize that the universe is neither inflating nor contracting; it's basically static.
edit on 25-5-2011 by Cryptonomicon because: (no reason given)


I thought the concept of red-shift was well understood and used to gauge distance in Astronomy?

Either that, or I misunderstand your post, but you seem to be pointing out the blatantly obvious that was discovered 50 odd years ago, if not more.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 03:48 PM
link   


Maybe our brains mimic the universe, or maybe our brains are the tiny versions or pieces of the larger brain.. Just a thought.

"As Above, So Below" doesn't get any truer though.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


Thats not even possible because every neural connector would be made up of multiple molecules so how does your statement make sense it doesn't!

There are definitely way more molecules and/or atoms in the universe than there are neural interconnections in the brain i can guarantee you this.

You're statement sort of contradicts common sense! Because each neural connector would be made of many molecules...
edit on 25-5-2011 by TheUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 03:58 PM
link   
The student didn't uncover anything. A may be isn't a fact. I'm so tired of articles about supposed scientific discoveries filled with we believe, may have, MAY BE. That's not real science!! I love science but speculation isn't it. We have only our limited comprehension to use.
edit on 25-5-2011 by soaringhawk because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by jessejamesxx


Maybe our brains mimic the universe, or maybe our brains are the tiny versions or pieces of the larger brain.. Just a thought.

"As Above, So Below" doesn't get any truer though.


I was just thinking the same thing when I was looking at the pictures. Maybe we live inside the brain of a larger being, who lives inside the brain of even a larger being. Inside our brain are tiny universes. As Above, So Below. Perhaps we live in a fractal universe :-)



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost375
A month or two ago, I was talking to my physics professor and he mentioned how the whole 'dark energy' theory is probably wrong. This is an interesting theory that could account for the missing mass. the dark energy theory was proposed to account for the missing mass.


My question has always been....why does there NEED to be missing mass? Is it just because OF the 'Big Bang" theory which is a bunch of BS anyway? Some scientists/physicists can not comprehend that space is actually void of any substance or matter. That is not that hard to comprehend really. There are isotopes and neutrinos everywhere buzzing around, these could account for the "appearance" of low density "matter" but in reality there really is nothing there of any "substance".



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 05:10 PM
link   
"My fathers mansion has many rooms."

THAT'S putting it lightly..

More stars than grains of sand on the face of the earth....


What awe inspiring FUN if life is an eternal exploratory process of impressions wherein "death" has no meaning..



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by ThreeNF
 


I also think it's important to bear in mind that the newtonian materialist monist POV is no longer valid, but that instead, we live in a non-local, holographic universe, and if that is the case, then what is "local" in terms of our experience, and the import and export of all our thoughts and actions, matters and in fact might mean everything and impact the entire spectrum of all being and becoming, where nothing may be considered insignificant, and no action without the farthest reaching implications. Puts a whole new spin on the Christ story and the work of the cross within the relative framework of human being..





new topics
 
187
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join