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.

 

My questions: Where was primeval atom located? How fast are we travling away from that location?

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 08:25 AM
link   
OP --

It may help to consider this: According to the Big bang Theory, the universe did not expand/radiate out from a single "place". Rather, it expanded out from everywhere at the same time.

I realize the Big bang talks about a singularity, but you can't say that singularity was at any specific location in universe -- because the singularity WAS the universe. It could not be sitting in 3D space, waiting to radiate outward, because there was no such place as 3D space for it to "be sitting".


edit on 1/17/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by TheOneElectric
 



The current belief is that the Universe is not infinite, but roughly 14 billion years old, but part of a larger muliverse where universe are being born, expanding and dying every day.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by truthinfact

Originally posted by LilDudeissocool

Is movement through space cause time to occur?






Yes, movement through space, Cause time to occur.



For real the big bang is just a theory. One that quite frankly has never made much sense to anyone.


To be more precise, Time is actually a measure of Entropy.

Entropy - The arrow of time



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZeussusZ
reply to post by LilDudeissocool
 


If the universe in infinite, then you can have a center wherever you want to put it, and then go outwards from that point. I'm the center of my universe, just as you are the center of yours.
maybe


Relative to our travel outward with the rest of the observable universe what general direction from our position was primeval atom located? That's what I am asking. Not the center point of where the observation is taking place.

I can look out from my where I am standing and see everything around me from my observation point, but I do know that the center of the Earth is directly below me from where ever I am standing. As Arbitrageur says later on this post Dr. Kaku believes the Universe is spherical as of course he believes in a multi universe where there are variations of this universe until all possibilities are represented in a sort of marble jar filled with those variations. The center of that "marble jar" I'm sure has no center as a center is a part of a 3D world. A multiverse would have to include higher dimensional planes in order to be connected to one another. Each marble, each copy having degeneration like copying a copy in a copy machine or using a board that has been cut to cut another board and so on until there is no length left. This would be in a multiverse sense of the imagination slight variations on the amount of total energy within each universe affecting outcome of events in changing the linked events during the lifespan of each universe. All events that have and ever will occur in this universe is linked to the first event that created the Big Bang. Does this mean "predetermination" is a fact? I for one think so. Chaos theory is unprovable. Predetermination is!

With that digression stated, and now getting back to what center I am asking about, it's real simple. Where was the primeval atom located relative to our position? I just asking for a general direction. If you are still confused, let me put it in nautical navigation terms. If we are like a ship sailing across the sea from a port, where is the port of departure? Or "embark" for those sailing fanatics.

Are we on the same page now?

----
PS
I know I am going to be hit with the idea that Chaos Theory has been proven, even though it's only a theory, and only a handful of people on the planet can understand the math. That we should just believe those who claim to understand the math involved, but I know it's BS based on the notion that infinity is impossible other than the abstract concept of a line of infinite 9s.

So if I may say, Predetermination is like in this analogy of the USD economy where there is a popular belief that the FED creates money out of nothing. Supposedly the FED is too complicated to understand except for the experts on the subject. Thing is I know that It's a truly reserve currency. That is there are savings held in reserves to manage its value. These savings have already been accounted for in the USD economy usually, the majority of deposits, accounted for in crude being sold on the open market in USDs. These accounted for values in the form of USDs are then deposited in FED member banks to either be held in reserve or loaned out at the Discount Window. Never ever has more been loaned out by the FED than held in reserves. The lessor the rate of inflation the less has to be held in reverse, the higher the rate of inflation the more that have to be held in reserves. Get the general formula? However from billionaire talking heads on TV, fund managers, to pseudo economists like Ron Paul will claim that the FED simply creates money like gold certificates were issued in the middle ages. Btw these are the same folks who want to create a gold standard. When people requests proof that the FED is creating money out of nothing the critics of the FED simply and conveniently say there is no transparency of the FED, and it needs to be audited even though if the FED was engaging in such activity the USD would have a run away inflation rate that would be in the 1000% range.

The FED has repeatedly explained this on their information outlets and press releases, but the critics simply claim the FED is lying, and people believe they are because "no one knows how it all works except the so called experts," supposedly. Same with Chaos Theory, and I call BS on that theory because it's the same MO that folks use to deceive people into believing the FED creates money out of nothing, and I know that one is BS for sure.

An infinite row of 9s can not and does not exist in this universe physically. Not all the atoms in the Universe, nor all that can be created out of the energy contained within the Universe come close to an infinite row of 9s... Nor all the actions that can and will occur in the Universe in energy transmissions from one form to another.

The total amount of energy in this universe is finite! That's a FACT. So Chaos Theory has to be bunk by default.





edit on 17-1-2012 by LilDudeissocool because: I added a PS



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by rom12345
As far as Big Bang cosmology goes here is an article about this :

The favorite analogy used by lecturers to simplify the concept of a universe having no center is that of the behavior of dots on the surface of an expanding balloon; for as we know, the Universe is expanding. If we imagine the dots to be galaxies, we can visualize the Universe’s expansion by observing how the dots are brought away from one another as air is slowly blown into the balloon.





Okay, regarding your article that you posted a link to, relatively speaking the primeval atom was not as big as a firecracker compared to an explosion of a firecracker. The primeval atom was the size of an elementary particle. A super tiny battery of all the energy contained within our entire universe.

The Big Bang event that released the energy contained within it to be separated and later to create matter out of some of it is in fact a location somewhere. Given Dr. Kaku's theory that this universe is spherical there is a down direction that can be pointed from any position in the Universe where the Big bang event occurred just like you can stand anywhere on planet Earth and point directly down to the center of the Earth.

Now where is down? What do we need to observe in establishing relative points, positions, and use them in a theorem to establish at least the general direction of down in the Universe?



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by LilDudeissocool
 


There is no center of the universe in the same way that there is no center of the surface of the Earth. The universe expands everywhere equally, like a surface of an inflating baloon:

www.astro.ucla.edu...


Looks like Arbitrageur has answered your post. I have nothing to add.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
OP --

It may help to consider this: According to the Big bang Theory, the universe did not expand/radiate out from a single "place". Rather, it expanded out from everywhere at the same time.

I realize the Big bang talks about a singularity, but you can't say that singularity was at any specific location in universe -- because the singularity WAS the universe. It could not be sitting in 3D space, waiting to radiate outward, because there was no such place as 3D space for it to "be sitting".


edit on 1/17/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)


Is this the spin on the Big bang theory that time expands at the same rate as the Universe? This is where we can observe the Universe expanding because we travel across it at a lessor rate than the speed of light. That if you traveled at the speed of light you could no longer observe the Universe expanding. So really what we are observing is an illusion of expansion. This means the universe is still the same size as the primeval atom. The constant in this all being the speed of light. The only observation point that can be used to see the true size of everything.

If I am offtrack with what you are saying, I'll need you to articulate more in what you are conveying.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by OsirisIndigo
reply to post by TheOneElectric
 



The current belief is that the Universe is not infinite, but roughly 14 billion years old, but part of a larger muliverse where universe are being born, expanding and dying every day.


I read Dr. Kaku's stuff. I see what you're saying. All variations of this universe with different values of total energy within them creating different copies of this one which are being born and dying at the same time. Now the same time using the observation frame of reference of light speed.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blarneystoner

Originally posted by truthinfact

Originally posted by LilDudeissocool

Is movement through space cause time to occur?






Yes, movement through space, Cause time to occur.



For real the big bang is just a theory. One that quite frankly has never made much sense to anyone.


To be more precise, Time is actually a measure of Entropy.

Entropy - The arrow of time


Right that's who events can occur within our universe.


Two ingredients have to be available. Convertible energy, and time. Otherwise there would only be a primeval atom with no movement of its energy and thus no time.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   
Li'l Dude....Where ever the Hubble Space Telescope points in any direction all around us...it will see Galaxies until a cetain point. At that distance over 13.4 Billion Light Years....we see Background Radiation that was generated by the Big Bang aprox. 379,000 years after the Big Bang occured.

Since this wall of Background Radiation exists everywhere we point the Hubble Telescope in every direction...and we cannot see past this...it provides a Cosmic Topography that is either an Invervted Sphere or my personal favorite...The HOMER SIMPSON TOPOGRAPHY OF OUR UNIVERSE....THE DONUT!

As far as you question...where was the pimeval atom located....at the point that the Big Bang cooled enough for simple Elements such s Hydrogen and Helium to exist....these atoms existed EVERYWHERE. So there is no Silver Bullet. Split Infinity....ps...Where you just busting me with the Hero Worship? LOL?



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 



Okay well, I think if the Greeks in the BCs can figure out that the Earth round then, we certainly can figure the same thing out about the Universe. en.wikipedia.org...

Hero warship is earned. You earn it with your brightness over these past few years in reading your posts. Nothing can be worshiped if it's not bright enough to be seen like the brightest star in the heavens above.

That's why you are on my friends list.



edit on 17-1-2012 by LilDudeissocool because: I dumped a quote box that was redundant.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


I just thought of something. Nah I actually thought of this before and had posted this on the old History boards. The red and blue shifts from our observation point could be used in the same way like the Hellenistic astronmers established that the Earth was spherical in their day by using some reference points and doing some basic theorem work. In the Wik link I provided it states, "Laertius, "[ Pythagoras ] was the first [Greek] who called the earth round;" Now what did he do to determine that? Can we follow his example and replicate it? He knew nothing more relatively speaking about the shape of the Earth than we know collectively today about the shape of the Universe before he figured out that the Earth was indeed spherical.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by LilDudeissocool
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


I just thought of something. Nah I actually thought of this before and had posted this on the old History boards. The red and blue shifts from our observation point could be used in the same way like the Hellenistic astronmers established that the Earth was spherical in their day by using some reference points and doing some basic theorem work. In the Wik link I provided it states, "Laertius, "[ Pythagoras ] was the first [Greek] who called the earth round;" Now what did he do to determine that? Can we follow his example and replicate it? He knew nothing more relatively speaking about the shape of the Earth than we know collectively today about the shape of the Universe before he figured out that the Earth was indeed spherical.


From what I understand...he got the idea that the Earth was round by watching the Moon go through it's lunar cycles and if a person looks with just heir eyes...it is very easy to discern that the moon is round from the shadows of a half. quarter or crescent moon. Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 

Can you explain to a dummy (me) how the universe can have a "shape"? A shape implies an outline or border. Does the universe have a "border" and, if so, what is beyond?



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


I thought he used his thorium in observing light shining down in two different wells at the same time of day, high noon, in determining the distance of the sun from the Earth and in doing so also discovered that the Earth was spherical. Or is that more lore than anything?



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 07:26 PM
link   
reply to post by LilDudeissocool
 

Dude...Thank you for the kind words. It was very nice of you to say that. Because of this kindness I will try to help you with your questions about the Universe or in actuality a Multiverse.
Whatever we see with the Hubble Telescope is the way things were back in time by the quantity of Light Years distant something is from us. The thing is...there is our perception of the shape and construct of the Universe and the REALITY od what reallly is Space/Time.

Here is an example to catch a glimpse of what I am talking about. We recieve data through our Human Senses and any Mechanical embelishment of these senses. The thing is...our perception is based on a specific set of rules of which boundries we do not yet have the mental ability to penetrate. One of these boundries is our ability to percieve Space/Time.

A Humming Bird percieves Space/Time differently than A Human...as this bird moves it's wings and changes directions faster than the Human Mind can adequately compute the data from our eyes....yet both Humans and Humming Birds recieve reflected light at the same rate...but the Humming Bird can process this data as well as other spacial data to manuver faster than a Human can decide to make our hand move. Thus a Humming Bird sees Humans moving in Slow Motion as we see a Humming Bird moving like a tape on Fast Forward.

Thus a Day is a lot longer for a Humming Bird than it is for a Human. Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 10:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by LilDudeissocool
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


I thought he used his thorium in observing light shining down in two different wells at the same time of day, high noon, in determining the distance of the sun from the Earth and in doing so also discovered that the Earth was spherical. Or is that more lore than anything?


That is the official reason but using a proof has to be a concept considered on how to deduct in a way something that you have already considered to be a truth. Sort of like any of Histories men of greatness using Math or a physical example to prove a theory correct. How did they come up with the idea that something was or is?

A Human Mind first needs a form of reference to decide that something is a possibility before thay develop a method or Formula to prove that it is so. In his and many other historical proof...an observtion of a natural occurace had to be seen or percieved first before they decided to work out a way to prove it.

Although this man was credited with proving the world was round...I am certain that there were many people before him that had a fairly good idea that the Earth was round as well as the Moon and the Sun and Planets. If I had never been told that the Earth was round or the Moon was also round...just from simple observations of visualy seeing a Shadow curving across the Lunar surface and even with Human eyes...it is possible to see how areas of the Moon that have great craters or mountains...when in partial light and shadow...allows a person to deduct that it is round.

Also...since we se the Moon and other Planets and the Sun at sunrise and set as a round disc...it is not a great leap of intellect to guess that they are not just round flat discs but are round ball like. The fact that the sun before actual sunrise or sunset illuminates our atmosphere to the point that it is light out to the point of a person being able to se very clearly....challenges the Earth being a flat disc as the edge would not allow this diffusion of light over the horizon. Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by LilDudeissocool
 

Dude...Thank you for the kind words. It was very nice of you to say that. Because of this kindness I will try to help you with your questions about the Universe or in actuality a Multiverse.
Whatever we see with the Hubble Telescope is the way things were back in time by the quantity of Light Years distant something is from us. The thing is...there is our perception of the shape and construct of the Universe and the REALITY od what reallly is Space/Time.

Here is an example to catch a glimpse of what I am talking about. We recieve data through our Human Senses and any Mechanical embelishment of these senses. The thing is...our perception is based on a specific set of rules of which boundries we do not yet have the mental ability to penetrate. One of these boundries is our ability to percieve Space/Time.

A Humming Bird percieves Space/Time differently than A Human...as this bird moves it's wings and changes directions faster than the Human Mind can adequately compute the data from our eyes....yet both Humans and Humming Birds recieve reflected light at the same rate...but the Humming Bird can process this data as well as other spacial data to manuver faster than a Human can decide to make our hand move. Thus a Humming Bird sees Humans moving in Slow Motion as we see a Humming Bird moving like a tape on Fast Forward.

Thus a Day is a lot longer for a Humming Bird than it is for a Human. Split Infinity




I know that time is the forth dimension. We slice through it one frame at a time. We only perceive every umpteenth frame what ever it is. Even the highest speed film can't capture a moment in time. It's a composite of many that is developed into a final photo. A nanosecond is still only measures many frames of time.

With that said perception can be overcome mathematically with time dilation formulas l'=l*sqr(1-v²/c²) whatever the bleep that means.

So movement across space relative to something else traveling at a different rate across space gives a differential in time speed. And if rate of travel across space affects the rate of time means they are tied to one another like a counter balancing scale. With the rate of travel we can travel in any direction and have found the faster something travels the slower it moves through time relative to a slower moving position. Just as one can run up a down escalator a person can reach a stationary position relative to his or her surroundings. This is the same if someone reaches light speed in travel across the universe in any direction. You could try ti spin to the speed of light, but the mass generated would be crushing to the point the atoms would break apart, separate, into energy. Making a type of imploding nk det. (sorry for the silly abbreviations, but this is America) Same with matter reaching light speed in a straight line of travel. The energy required would be the total amount of energy contained within the entire Universe for a single atom to travel at light speed, and there is not enough matter in the Universe to store all the kinetic energy needed, including the energy that would be contained within all matter, to make the speed of light happen as the mass builds in a type of counter balance scale of speed vs mass making the attempt impossible. So we will never be able to conduct an experiment to determine this idea for fact sure.

Anyway, I think perception of time and actual time dilation are entirely separate.

Or am I missing your point entirely?

edit on 18-1-2012 by LilDudeissocool because: I think I might be missing Split's point, and thought I should ask. HAHAHA



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity

Originally posted by LilDudeissocool
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


I thought he used his thorium in observing light shining down in two different wells at the same time of day, high noon, in determining the distance of the sun from the Earth and in doing so also discovered that the Earth was spherical. Or is that more lore than anything?


That is the official reason but using a proof has to be a concept considered on how to deduct in a way something that you have already considered to be a truth. Sort of like any of Histories men of greatness using Math or a physical example to prove a theory correct. How did they come up with the idea that something was or is?

A Human Mind first needs a form of reference to decide that something is a possibility before thay develop a method or Formula to prove that it is so. In his and many other historical proof...an observtion of a natural occurace had to be seen or percieved first before they decided to work out a way to prove it.

Although this man was credited with proving the world was round...I am certain that there were many people before him that had a fairly good idea that the Earth was round as well as the Moon and the Sun and Planets. If I had never been told that the Earth was round or the Moon was also round...just from simple observations of visualy seeing a Shadow curving across the Lunar surface and even with Human eyes...it is possible to see how areas of the Moon that have great craters or mountains...when in partial light and shadow...allows a person to deduct that it is round.

Also...since we se the Moon and other Planets and the Sun at sunrise and set as a round disc...it is not a great leap of intellect to guess that they are not just round flat discs but are round ball like. The fact that the sun before actual sunrise or sunset illuminates our atmosphere to the point that it is light out to the point of a person being able to se very clearly....challenges the Earth being a flat disc as the edge would not allow this diffusion of light over the horizon. Split Infinity



But like Arbitrageur said the observable universe is not large enough to make the same assumptions. Just like looking across a field in BC Greece was not enough for Pythagoras in his day. What is the Moon, horizon and water wells in looking across the observable universe? I say could it be blue and red shifts.

I say we should ask
www.history.com...-dimensions


Remember their old board?



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 12:51 AM
link   
My point is that time is a matter of perception and is relative. There is a good line from a Star Trek movie in which Data says he considered the Borg Queens offer for a moment. Picard asks...how long of a moment? Data answers .4 seconds...a Life Time for an Android. This is the heart of what i am getting at.
Split Infinity



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join