What space did the universe expand into?

page: 7
11
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swing80s
How does my computer tie into quantum physics? E/I*R is regular physics as far as I remember and everything else that involves circuitry from what I learned in a Physics class that turned out to be nothing but teaching how to make and understand and use computers involved regular physics if I remember correctly.


Do you know what an integrated circuit is?




posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   
As I see it long in the future the Milky Way will collapse in to a super massive black hole.
And at over lode it will blow up. You have a big bang.

The big radio telescopes can see galaxies beyond the edge of the big band!!!
Or would you believe from a total nothingness a super big bang made all of space?

Primitive mad watches the sun die!
And then get reborn.
So he makes up religions about it.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:10 PM
link   
I think before we understand what space is expanding into, we need to identify what exactly the universe is... it is something and it has a purpose... and I don't think it is "us" maybe it just seems that way because it is supporting life of some sort, we just don't understand what design it is exactly because we are inside of it.

Kinda like the guy talking about balloons. there certainly isn't any balloon factory inside of balloons making them so how would we even recognize? Go outside the balloon and realize life outside is much more complicated.

I don't know if on this level we would ever fully understand but if we step back and simply try to identify it, I'm sure a lot of theories are helpful or at least thought provoking.

I could think of various obvious approaches but so far I don't think anyone has identified exactly what purpose it serves or what it is a result of on the much larger scale.

What if we were inside of some kind of reactor, more pure and complex than our own science so we just can't identify it.

I'm undecided on whether it really matters. If it's insurmountable, it seems to not matter. If there was a way to experience what is outside of this dimension and carry both experiences within one current consciousness, then it would matter I think... as a potential obstacle in the quest for controlling one's own reality in full.
edit on 29-9-2012 by NotAnAspie because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by NotAnAspie
 


What if everything is just a manifestation of energy, in different states? Why is all matter capable of producing energy? Is it because it is energy, just in a different state? What is an atom? Is it something tangible, or is it energy? Why is an atom 99.9999999% empty space? Why is the universe 99.999999 empty space? Why does light curve in a vacuum? Is the vacuum of space really nothing? It will be odd if it is, considering it can be bent, and can bend light hmm? Why can 2 photons, under the right conditions create matter out of nothing? How can something be made out of nothing, unless the something that is made, is nothing?
edit on 29-9-2012 by AmatuerSkyWatcher because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Do I know what an integrated circuit is? No I'm clueless about microchips



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Swing80s
 


Thats particle physics.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:21 PM
link   
So what is all the madness about december 21, 2012 all about and why is the sun getting bigger or hotter?

From what I remember reading our solar system belonged to the sagitarius galaxy and that in turn is being sucked into the miky way galaxy. Perhaps this is what causing the sun to swell and ptb making a big deal about climate change aka global warming. Not saying excessive amounts of CO2 is good for life on the planet, but you have to ask yourself who got it correct and to what percentage.

So is it going to be a pole reversal, maybe we will get sucked into a black hole and enter a new universe, attacked by aliens, electromagnetic anomalies, hit by an asteroid, world war 3...all, some or none?? Remote viewers apparently have a tough time seeing beyond that day and the mayan calender ends then too.

Scary stuff could be ahead of us. I try not to worry about things I have no control over! Since we are in a science forum maybe others can shed light here.....



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Yes they do involve sub-atomic e- but how does that tie into QM?



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by AmatuerSkyWatcher
 


Matter is just frozen energy.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Put it this way. On physicsforums, its a banned topic to mention anything about doomsday 2012 because there is ZERO scientific evidence.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ubeenhad
 




Wouldn't it be Ironic if the film 'the matrix', was actually true, they just got the real universe around the wrong way.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Swing80s
 

QM predicts every possible outcome relating to the behavior of the chip. we can evaluate every possibility in the eventual pattern to be integrated into the system for that particular Function.
edit on 29-9-2012 by ubeenhad because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by ubeenhad
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Put it this way. On physicsforums, its a banned topic to mention anything about doomsday 2012 because there is ZERO scientific evidence.


Yeah it is a touchy subject for obvious and not so obvious reasons, but I still think the sun is swelling up and this is causing rather radical weather patterns to develop; some places are drying up, some are getting drenched, hot and cold extremes, etc.

Electromagnetic anamolies caused by the milky way galaxy pull is probably to blame.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


if the universe itself can expand and create "new" space,..,,.

can you theoretically think of any way a human can "create new space"?

what would that entail? what would it mean?

I know I ask this alot but is space made of anything,, is it physical?

I know the space between you and I is composed of gas,, particles, atoms, molecules...,. but what is the supposed vaccumn of space composed of?

do you think it is possible to have an area of absolute nothing,, in this universe or any,, now or ever?

do you think that area of nothing would be the truest deffiniton of "space",, and that is what would be referred to when one says the universe is expanding./creating new space?



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:39 PM
link   


The fundamental physics roots of this era began with the explosive growth of quantum
mechanics in Europe in the 1920s. The first application of this new theory to solids was
Bloch’s 1928 quantum theory of metals. The foundations of semiconductor physics quickly
followed with Peierls’ 1929 theory of the positive Hall effect due to holes, Brillouin’s 1930
concept that band gaps are related to the Bragg scattering conditions, and Wilson’s 1931 band
theory of semiconductors, including the effects of doping. A major development in the
physics of real materials was Wigner and Seitz’s 1933 approximate method for calculating
band structure. This marked the beginning of a shift from the fundamental studies of the
1920s to the practical solid-state physics which would dominate the second half of the 20th
century.
The experimental roots of semiconductor physics date from the 19th century. In the 1870s, at
almost exactly the same time that Bell was inventing the telephone, physicists working on
selenium, copper oxide, and various metallic sulfides (all materials we know today to be
semiconductors) were discovering diode rectification behavior, the Hall effect,
photoconductivity, and the photovoltaic effect. In fact, even the idea of inventing a solid-state
analog of the vacuum tube had occurred to a number of people during the 1920s and 1930s --
Lilienfeld patented the field-effect concept in 1926 and Brattain and Becker at Bell Labs
contemplated putting a grid into copper oxide rectifiers during the 1930s.
By the late 1930s, solid-state physics was well-established and had the potential for major
applications. In a move reminiscent of earlier eras, Mervin Kelly, Bell Labs’ Director of
Research, sought out the best of the new breed of solid-state physicists to explore the potential
of semiconductors for communications; in 1936 he hired William Shockley from Slater’s
group at MIT. However, the effort to make devices of possible use in communications, e.g.,
solid-state switches or amplifiers, did not start seriously until 1946 when non-military research
resumed at Bell Labs after WW II. Shockley was put in charge of a new solid-state research
group specifically chartered to obtain a fundamental understanding of the device potential of
silicon and germanium, which had been developed into excellent microwave detectors during
the war. One of his first moves was to hire John Bardeen. The subsequent path to success
was as rapid as Arnold’s development of the vacuum-tube amplifier in 1912. The pointcontact
transistor, shown in Fig. 4, was demonstrated within two years, by the end of 1947.
The birth of the transistor is covered in a number of 50th Anniversary reviews (Riordan and
Hoddeson, 1997; Brinkman et al., 1997; Ross, 1998), including one in this volume (Herring
et al., 1999). Therefore, our focus will be to review the relationship of the transistor to the
technology changes that have revolutionized communications over the past 50 years.4
The application of the transistor to
communications occurred in two
phases. The first, during the 1950s,
was simply the replacement of vacuum
tubes in various circuits. The first
commercial use of the transistor in the
Bell System was in 1954; the first fully
“transistorized” product (the E6
repeater) was in 1959. There were
some benefits of size and power
reduction, but the functionality and
design of the telephone system was not
changed. In the second phase, the
transistor made possible digital
transmission and switching -- an
entirely new communications
technology that revolutionized the
industry. The concept of digital voice
communications, known as pulse code
modulation (PCM), was first
demonstrated in 1947 at Bell Labs.
This early demonstration was based on
voice coding ideas developed in the
1930s and telephone encryption
devices used by the military during the
war. Commercial use of PCM,
however, was not possible without
transistors to make the complex circuits
practical. The first digital transmission
system, the so-called T1 carrier, was
introduced in 1962 and carried 24
digital voice channels with an overall
bit rate of 1.5 Mbit/sec. Even though a combined digital switching and transmission system was demonstrated in 1959 at Bell Labs,
the first commercial use of fully digital switching and transmission was not until the
introduction of the 4ESS switch for long-distance traffic in 1976.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by yourmaker
 


Why can't it always have existed??? Really?? Two standards, one for the bangers and one for the creationists.LOL
First argument in the 101 debate is "then where did god come from?" Can't apply the same logic in a "scientific manner" to both?
So lets expand it, where did the original mass come from/ Where did the process/mechanism that allowed a "bang" come from? Oh well, our people will figure it out sooner or later. "Faith" in science...great, they don't even apply the same standards to both "theories".
Off the top, I'd guess they're both wrong.....



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


can you theoretically think of any way a human can "create new space"?



What do you mean by 'new space'? Do you mean add some space onto the existing space, or create a vacuum like space? If the latter, we do it all the time. If you mean the former, then no we can't.

As for the fabric of space being something, it can distort and bend light, an it itself can be distorted and bent. Can nothing be bent and distorted by something, unless the something is nothing?



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


if the universe itself can expand and create "new" space,..,,.

can you theoretically think of any way a human can "create new space"?

what would that entail? what would it mean?

I know I ask this alot but is space made of anything,, is it physical?

I know the space between you and I is composed of gas,, particles, atoms, molecules...,. but what is the supposed vaccumn of space composed of?

do you think it is possible to have an area of absolute nothing,, in this universe or any,, now or ever?

do you think that area of nothing would be the truest deffiniton of "space",, and that is what would be referred to when one says the universe is expanding./creating new space?
About halfway through Thanksgiving dinner when I start feeling full, I usually loosen my belt a notch to make more space for dessert!


But that's the only space I know how to make!


Empty space is anything but empty; it may look like nothing at first glance, but closer examination reveals it's not really empty. Not only does the thinnest vacuum have a couple of hydrogen atoms per cubic meter, but even if they weren't present the empty space apparently contains energy, which we've measured. We've never seen anyplace where "nothing" exists, and it's doubtful we ever will.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


I don't know if it has been mentioned and i don't really feel like going through 7 pages of comments to check but heres my take.

The universe is not expanding into anything. Expanding is really not that great of a word to describe this concept, because people assume it must be expanding into something.

A better word would be stretching, still not entirely accurate, but gives you a better visualization of whats going on (or believed to be going on) I like to visualize a balloon. Help at all?



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by twistedlogic
reply to post by jiggerj
 


I don't know if it has been mentioned and i don't really feel like going through 7 pages of comments to check but heres my take.

The universe is not expanding into anything. Expanding is really not that great of a word to describe this concept, because people assume it must be expanding into something.

A better word would be stretching, still not entirely accurate, but gives you a better visualization of whats going on (or believed to be going on) I like to visualize a balloon. Help at all?


Eh?

So when you are blowing up a balloon, you are stretching it, not expanding it? Your name is very apt...
edit on 29-9-2012 by AmatuerSkyWatcher because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
11
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join