We Only Understand Four Percent of the Universe

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:17 AM
link   
I was reading this interview with astrophysicist Steve Kuhlmann when he said:


In a very real sense, we only understand four percent of the universe.


He's talking about science trying to understand the nature of dark energy and dark matter, but I couldn't help but think how humbling that statement is. I'm an avid ATS reader, and I am always a little "taken aback" by those who are so rigid in their beliefs. It doesn't matter of it's science, religion, or politics, we have developed these belief systems based on knowledge acquired primarily over the last six thousand years and still we don't understand ninety-six percent of what is going on around us. What if conventional science, religion, and politics are based on false assumptions?

To me, the fact that science admits how much it doesn't know should make everyone begin to act with a little more tolerance to the views and opinions of others. We don't know everything. In fact, we know very little and I for one find that humbling.

phys.org...

(Mods, if you feel this tread is in the wrong forum, please feel free to change it.)




posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:25 AM
link   
4% hahahahahah that's a laugh

try .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000004%

closer.. but still far off
edit on 18-9-2012 by 0mage because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-9-2012 by 0mage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by 0mage
4% hahahahahah that's a laugh

try .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000004%

closer.. but still far off
edit on 18-9-2012 by 0mage because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-9-2012 by 0mage because: (no reason given)


I was thinking the same thing.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by 1questioner
 


It's true; while i'm sitting in my astronomy class, why do people find it so hard to fathom that this universe, or multiverse has been around for eternity? There was no beginning or "big bang"; in our 3rd dimensional reality, we have the physical illusion of life and death. The universe exceeds at LEAST 37 dimensional realities, and yet our egos get so caught up with worldly knowledge and issues.

Remember, matter cannot be created nor destroyed; not only a scientific law but a universal law too.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by 1questioner
 


I know I don't know nearly as much as many of those here at ATS.

This being said, I can't help but also ask...

Where does he get the 4% stuff ?

Does he have some "gauge" by which he can tell just how much of the universe we don't yet understand because we have seen and experienced so much of it already ?

I don't think we yet understand much more than about a third of the earth and how it works. Surely there is far much more to learn about the whole universe than we have any idea is out there.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   
edit
edit on 18-9-2012 by operation mindcrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by 1questioner
 


Frankly, I'm surprised he thinks it's that high.

My bet is it isn't even close.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by 0mage
4% hahahahahah that's a laugh

try .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000004%

closer.. but still far off
edit on 18-9-2012 by 0mage because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-9-2012 by 0mage because: (no reason given)


IMHO, I think this is what we know of our own little slice of the pie let alone the galaxy or universe for that matter. Look at how amazed we are when we see comets slamming into Jupiter or we see massive solar flares. To quote Shakespeare:

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 12:00 PM
link   
edit
edit on 18-9-2012 by operation mindcrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by hdutton
 


It's most likely about calculations, how big they estimate the Universe is to how much they've studied. I don't think the number is as big as 4%. He must've got the numbers for Earth and Space mixed up.

It's good to hear someone admit we know so little.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedShirt73
To quote Shakespeare:

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."


To quote science:

"Yes, but we're working on it."

It saddens me that people can be so amused by how little we know to the point of even gloating sometimes. If we know even 0.2% I'm proud. Less than 500 years ago we didn't even know how to fly.

Besides that:


One of the most fundamental questions that scientists face is to try to figure out what the universe is made of. We know that dark energy is the largest component of the universe, accounting for about 74 percent of the mass and energy that exists combined. If we want to understand the components of the universe, we have to understand dark energy. Dark matter makes up another 22 percent, and that's not well understood, either. In a very real sense, we only understand four percent of the universe. To basic scientists like us, that's a crime—that's not allowed.


Source

In context the person is describing the percentage of components the universe is made of that we understand. I don't think it applies to the whole thingo. 74% + 22% = 96%. 4% left ...



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   
the math is simple. let me show u.

pie.. is 3.14159 26535 89793 23846 26433 83279 50288 41971 69399 37510 58209 74944 59230 78164 06286 20899 86280 34825 34211 70679 ... on to infinity. basically it never stops. which means it is constantly expanding and changing.

to find out how much we know.. simply take the value we can work with and place it over the total to get the equation.

we can work with "rounded" decimals so.. 3.14 divided by pi(infinite version) and there.. u will have the fraction for how much we really understand.

if u can follow what im drawing across here very vaguely and unarguementatively what im saying is..

no matter how mnay decimals points u round off to.. coul dbe 100 places after the point.. the fraction of what uve got is still "insignificant" compared to the socalled "insignificant places" that were "rounded" after the decimal.

we know diddly squat.
edit on 18-9-2012 by 0mage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by sgspecial19
reply to post by 1questioner
 
Remember, matter cannot be created nor destroyed; not only a scientific law but a universal law too.


This statement is incorrect, matter and energy are the same thing, matter can be effectively destroyed and turned into to energy, it has been observed, and is a fundamental part of how the universe works and indeed how the sun generates its power.

He is referring to the observables, typically science only observes objects and events in the visible spectrum. We push out to radio, infra red... up to UV, xray and gamma, though these are less common. The nature of the universe being composed mainly of Dark matter and so called Dark energy compounds this in that we do perhaps only understand about 4-5% of the composition of the universe, because the rest we have not observed directly yet.

What i find also very interesting is given we know so little, why science funding is so pitiful, and why is the general public's attitude towards science in general "What shiny new product will this give me, if it doesnt give me something, then it is a waste of time and money" When truth be told, the research into understanding the universe at its most fundamental, is an extremely cheap venture on the grand scheme of things government spends money on



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by 1questioner
 


iv always questioned what we 'know' about the universe outside our solar system. what if the laws of physics behave differently in different parts of the universe, we don't know if those rules are constant or not, we assume they are



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pinke

To quote science:

"Yes, but we're working on it."



Lol, I will humbly concede your point



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by 0mage
4% hahahahahah that's a laugh

try .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000004%

closer.. but still far off
edit on 18-9-2012 by 0mage because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-9-2012 by 0mage because: (no reason given)


I believe laughing at scientists are considered blesphamy on this site. The followers dont like it.


- "Please provide evidence of this claim!"
- "A scientist said it!"
- "Ah ok. Sorry about that. Didnt know he was a scientist."

edit on 18-9-2012 by Bodhi911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 03:04 PM
link   
Can laugh at whoever you like, though scientists have at least made it their life long task to experiment and test see what the results say, fit them into theories and what not. It should be respected in my opinion.

And to me is certainly more honest and realistic than a lot of people who believe the know what is really going on because they sit around and look try and believe so hard they cannot fathom simple concepts that where solved centuries ago.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   
we're manipulating energy.. matter is energy. this stuff is like legos. Toys.

y do i laugh at scientists? ill be straight.. im only laughing at a particular sort of scientist.. the ones that claim there is no spiritual nature.. the ones who assume that man is a robot to be programmed and enslaved. the kind that think so conceitedly that they think they can recreate a man from scratch as God did..

had they performed a science of spirituality they would actually discover evidence.. the problem tho is that the evidence is personal as it is only detected by conscious thinking entities. a machine will NEVER find it. much less control it.

to address above: "energy cannot be created nor destroyed... by man"

^someone created it right?

for science to say that it was always there and not created by any being who could deserve the title and address of "GOD" means that there is a way for something to exist always and have never been created.. hypocritical dont u think? that is certainly not a logical hypothesis.. yet science would lean on it to get u to shut up and stop asking questions.

who created energy, how do u create energy? when science figures that out (they never will) ill stop laughing.

the mystics, that is to say.. the true mystics already know how it is done. thought is invisible.. yet conscious.. no?

prove to me the thought of another man's mind exists.. science is lost. the beast!



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 04:15 PM
link   
The above statement just reminds me of the performance poem by Tim Minchin : Storm



Science will attempt and fail at many many things, the most interesting and ground breaking discoveries over the whole of human history have been when we proved things wrong. Scientists love to be wrong, because being wrong makes us sit back and think what could be the most probable cause.

Since you asked me a question and then backed it up by stating the there is no way i can or anyone else can answer it in a way you are satisfied with, I can say that your question is not really understood by the author either. It is like sitting on a problem that is of your own creation without solution though saying because science cant answer an impossible question, meaning all science is wrong.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 04:26 PM
link   
We only understand 4% of the Universe we can detect. We have no test instruments that can observe into the infinite future, the infinite past, the infinitesimal duration present, the infinite expanse (dimension of height), the one infinitely kinetic, infinitesimal Singularity (dimension of depth), the totality of the collective result of the "flight path" of where the Singularity exists (dimension of width), nor the totality of the collective result of the "flight path" of where the Singularity "IS NOT", which is the infinite null (infinite impedence) that causes the "present" to exist at all.

Never mind all the observable matter and energy contained within this spectacular playground.





top topics
 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join