It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by constantwonder
Originally posted by followingpythagoras
reply to post by sputniksteve
It's not nitpicky - everyone has a right to think!
I totally get the point that even though that computer generated picture of our universe resembles the close up of the brain cell - it doesn't mean we're actually living in a huge brain cell of God's. But - to me it proves that we are living in something - if the patterns continue onward and upward, then they are making up something on a bigger scale - physically, right? I mean, why wouldn't they be?
Each thing in the universe adds to the sum total of the universe. But the apparent correlation between geometries of in this case dendrites compared to the large scale universe is not the result of the universe also being the same as the dendrite. It is the result of the laws of geometry that apply the same way at both scales.
Lets take this somewhere else. Lets say we take a tree it's geometry greatly resembles that of a dendrite in the brain. . . Not because the tree and the brain both function in the same way but because natures laws apply to both. The branching of vessels in the lungs resemble rivers, trees fractal coastlines and many other things aswell. Not because they function in the same manner but because they were built using the same set of rules.
Originally posted by Sly1one
reply to post by Arbitrageur
. I tend to think this blue-print exists in our subconscious and we unknowingly replicate it in our creations.
If you could "map" the path of least resistance it would follow that blueprint.
edit on 10-10-2011 by Sly1one because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Jon Matthews
Nature is self-similar. It means that same shapes and forms repeat at different size scales. There's nothing strange or mystical in this. In my research, I deal with individual atoms that spontaneously arrange via self-assembly in various ways depending on the physicochemical properties of the system. I have nice scanning tunneling microscope images that show atomic arrangements that look exactly like air/satellite photos of the terraces of a vineyard.
This brings me to my second point. It would be silly to claim that since my atomic assemblies look like a vineyard, they're actually a vineyard at atomic scale. The geometry might be similar, but these two systems have nothing in common. In other words, even if the structure of the universe is similar to that of a system of brain cells, it doesn't mean that we're "living in a brain". The nature simply prefers certain shapes and forms, because they're energetically favorable.
Originally posted by ArbitrageurAs said earlier in the thread, they aren't even pictures. The image showing the universe is a simulated image of what invisible (dark) matter might look like if it was visible.
2 a: a description so vivid or graphic as to suggest a mental image or give an accurate idea of something
You aren't very good at it. The definition you chose says accurate.
Originally posted by Indecent
p.s. I can be pedantic too.