The Limits Of Probability

page: 3
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaFungi
my last question is,,, does space exist within a black hole, like space exists interstellarly?
or are the conditions so strenuous,, the energy and matter levels so high and dense,,, there is no room for space as we (dont) know it?

The density of the black hole isn't uniform. At its center called "singularity," the density is said to be infinite and that creates a problem for cosmological theories. In the "less dense" regions there is really no space with physical properties resembling the space created by the absence of matter, like the void between star systems. It's impossible to monitor what's going on beyond the event horizon of the black hole, because no radiation can escape from there and stuff can be only theorized.


also galaxies moves through interstellar space -time?

Galaxies cannot move trough interstellar space, but through intergalactic space.


lets imagine a galaxy moving a million light years........ does the supermassive black hole ever "touch" spacetime that surrounds the galaxy,,, as it moves,,,,, or is it as a contained center/nucleus,,, in which interstellar space could never approach or enter it?

I'm not sure what you are asking. Does your question relate to the question whether a black hole at the center of a galaxy can eventually swallow the whole matter, dark or visible, that the rest of the galaxy is made of?




posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by tremex

Originally posted by ImaFungi
my last question is,,, does space exist within a black hole, like space exists interstellarly?
or are the conditions so strenuous,, the energy and matter levels so high and dense,,, there is no room for space as we (dont) know it?

The density of the black hole isn't uniform. At its center called "singularity," the density is said to be infinite and that creates a problem for cosmological theories. In the "less dense" regions there is really no space with physical properties resembling the space created by the absence of matter, like the void between star systems. It's impossible to monitor what's going on beyond the event horizon of the black hole, because no radiation can escape from there and stuff can be only theorized.


also galaxies moves through interstellar space -time?

Galaxies cannot move trough interstellar space, but through intergalactic space.


lets imagine a galaxy moving a million light years........ does the supermassive black hole ever "touch" spacetime that surrounds the galaxy,,, as it moves,,,,, or is it as a contained center/nucleus,,, in which interstellar space could never approach or enter it?

I'm not sure what you are asking. Does your question relate to the question whether a black hole at the center of a galaxy can eventually swallow the whole matter, dark or visible, that the rest of the galaxy is made of?


thanks for the reply,.,.,.

and sorry i confused interstellar for intergalactic,,.,.., i meant intergalactic,.,.,.

Im wondering if when a galaxy travels through intergalactic space,.,.,. does the new intergalactic space it reaches each moment in travel,, "seep" into the galactic system,, and subsequently the supermassive black hole....... or are the masses and energies of the galaxy as a whole a sturdy contained system in which the vacuum of intergalactic space can have no effect on the black hole ,,, i think i am wrongly thinking of space and by its nature does not even exist physically in any way.. so there is nothing there to seep into the black hole ..
so now it comes down to comprehending what the arena of dimensional intergalactic space is,, if it is the opposite of something?,,,, where and how in total it exists? and all galaxies down to the quantum mechanical realm ( which seems to be the primary expression and existence of "reality") are just the common event of something,, that came from somewhere,,, somewhen,, somehow.,.., other then that,,, it is completely baffling,, nonsensical,,incredulous, and awe inspiring.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 02:21 AM
link   
I think you are thinking to much in the aspect of "time". Remember there is infinite space too,

space that goes on forever and ever, don't you think at some point in INFINITY, we will begin to see similar things such as earth and earth-like life forms?

Remember, Infinity makes the seemingly impossible almost certain - this is not only true for time but of SPACE.

There could be another Earth existing RIGHT NOW except everything on it still looks like the 70's. In infinity, that is an infinite amount of Earth-like planets AND Non-Earth-like planets of INFINITE combinations...

What if your MIND is the key to traveling infinite space? And when we think of different things we are seeing ACTUAL REALITY from this infinite space?

Just a couple of thoughts...
edit on 6-10-2012 by arpgme because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImaFungi
,,, it is completely baffling,, nonsensical,,incredulous, and awe inspiring.

You can also try this: Imagine a complete physical nothing represented by space that doesn't have any boundary. There is no way that the physical nothing would change its composition so some events would take place in there, like the emergence of matter. That means some matter always had to exist in the space our universe is expanding into. If the space is infinite in size and time, then it took almost infinite amount of time for the gravitational influences to scoop the very rare matter in the space into a point, the singularity that expanded through Big Bang into our universe. Under this scenario, there is no other universe in the space except ours.
edit on 6-10-2012 by tremex because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by tremex

Originally posted by ImaFungi
,,, it is completely baffling,, nonsensical,,incredulous, and awe inspiring.

You can also try this: Imagine a complete physical nothing represented by space that doesn't have any boundary. There is no way that the physical nothing would change its composition so some events would take place in there, like the emergence of matter. That means some matter always had to exist in the space our universe is expanding into. If the space is infinite in size and time, then it took almost infinite amount of time for the gravitational influences to scoop the very rare matter in the space into a point, the singularity that expanded through Big Bang into our universe. Under this scenario, there is no other universe in the space except ours.
edit on 6-10-2012 by tremex because: (no reason given)


ok,, that is true and cool,,, and i have thought of that scenario before,..,.,.,

but then i think.,.,., how odd it may be.,.., that in eternal infinity .,,.,.., in the only realm that is and can ever be..... that this is whats going on,,, this is the way it is going on,,, this is all there can be,,,. this is the style it is in,,, it had no choice to be in this style but its the most default "natural" way for "matter" to format itself....

im familiar with the concept of something not being able to come from nothing,,,, therefore something always has to have existed,,,which leads to an infinite past...if energy can never be destroyed i guess it leads to an infinite future as well,..,,.,.,.,. this then leads me to question,,, if there is an infinite past,,, this universe we perceive ourselves in,, can potentially be anything,,,



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by tremex
 



You can also try this: Imagine a complete physical nothing represented by space that doesn't have any boundary.

Except... if you're talking about empty space as "nothing", you'd be wrong. Empty space is not nothing, it's the very fabric from which all energy is derived, quantum vacuum fluctuations gives rise to everything we see. The proposition that the energy of our Universe has always been here is completely absurd and wrong.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by tremex
 



. The proposition that the energy of our Universe has always been here is completely absurd and wrong.


energy cannot be created or destroyed...

something cannot come from nothing,.,.,.

Where did the energy of our universe come from if it has not always been "here"?





edit on 6-10-2012 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaFungi
 



energy cannot be created or destroyed...

something cannot come from nothing,.,.,.

I love how it always comes back to this point.

I'm not going to argue this... just research it, this is modern physics.

The most promosing explenation to explain where all the energy came from, is vacuum fluctuations. Look at the latest theories being put out by Stephen Hawking. Watch this lecture by Lawrence Krauss. Do some research on cosmology and quantum theory. The Universe was spawned from vacuum energy.

Until recently we only had the big bang to explain what happened to that energy when space started expanding, but we never had an explanation for where that energy came from. Now we do... theorists always knew that the energy had to come from some where, the logic of a system which starts with existing energy simply doesn't work.

Typically energy cannot be created or destroyed, but the initial moments before and during the big bang is a completely different story... we are talking about the origins of the Universe, there was a time near the beginning of the big bang when most of the laws of physics didn't even exist as we know them. Let me leave you with these quotes.


We were taught that you never get something for nothing. But now, after a life time of work, I think that in fact you can get a whole Universe for free.

~ Stephen Hawking



The Universe must be flat. Why? Well there are two reasons... there's the one I normally say, which is it's the only mathematically beautiful Universe... which is true. But there's another reason I don't usually talk about, but I'll talk about here. It turns out, that in a flat Universe the total energy of the Universe is precisely zero, because gravity can have negative energy, so the negative energy of gravity balances out the positive energy of matter. What's so beautiful about a Universe with a total energy of zero? Well only such a Universe can begin from nothing... and that is remarkable. Because the laws of physics allow the Universe to begin from nothing. You don't need a diety. You have nothing, zero total energy and quantum fluctuations can produce a Universe.

The Universe is flat. It has zero total energy and it could have begun from nothing. And I've written a piece, of course I got a lot of hate mail, saying that in my mind this answers the crazy question that religious people always keep throwing out, which is - "why is there something rather than nothing". The answer is there had to be... if you have nothing in quantum mechanics you'll always get something. It's that simple.

~ Lawrence Krauss



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


"Until recently we only had the big bang to explain what happened to that energy when space started expanding, but we never had an explanation for where that energy came from. Now we do... theorists always knew that the energy had to come from some where, the logic of a system which starts with existing energy simply doesn't work.

Typically energy cannot be created or destroyed, but the initial moments before and during the big bang is a completely different story... we are talking about the origins of the Universe, there was a time near the beginning of the big bang when most of the laws of physics didn't even exist as we know them. Let me leave you with these quotes. "


quantum fluctuations are some type of energy which are caused by something.,,.. if quantum fluctuations did create all the energy in the universe,,, then once again,, all the energy in the universe was always around.,..

im not saying i believe anything you say,, i take it all with a grain of salt and try to understand the views and opinions best i can,,, you can state it like it is dogma and i admire you for having faith in your beliefs,, but i dont trust your knowledge of the true nature of reality enough to hop on that bandwagon,.,,.

so now many multiple quantum fluctuations created the singularity of big bang?



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaFungi
 



quantum fluctuations are some type of energy which are caused by something.,,.. if quantum fluctuations did create all the energy in the universe,,, then once again,, all the energy in the universe was always around.,..
Quantum fluctuations are essentially space-time turbulence. At the quantum scale space-time experiences turbulence/fluctuation due to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. These fluctuations exist for an extremely brief period of time before neutralizing. The neutral state of space-time has a zero energy level, but the Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle causes random turbulence to occur, energy which has not always existed, the turbulence is the energy, it's the potential difference from the neutral state.


im not saying i believe anything you say,, i take it all with a grain of salt and try to understand the views and opinions best i can,,, you can state it like it is dogma and i admire you for having faith in your beliefs,, but i dont trust your knowledge of the true nature of reality enough to hop on that bandwagon,.,,.
There is no reason you should jump in the bandwagon, just research this stuff and draw your own conclusion. I am just arguing my point that energy has to come from some where using the knowledge I have about this topic. I believe it because all the physics fits together perfectly and supports the observations we have made so far.
edit on 6/10/2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


"Quantum fluctuations are essentially space-time turbulence. At the quantum scale space-time experiences turbulence/fluctuation due to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. These fluctuations exist for an extremely brief period of time before neutralizing. The neutral state of space-time has a zero energy level, but the Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle causes random turbulence to occur, energy which has not always existed, the turbulence is the energy, it's the potential difference from the neutral state. "

you dont know this...... Space - time is not composed of particles,.,..,.. if scientists have an instrument located in space - time,,, and they detect turbulence/ fluctuation ,,, this turbulence/ fluctuation is not a quality of space - time itself,, it is a quality of particles which exist in the volume of space - time.......
unless you can prove to me that every plancks length of space is taken up by particles at all time,, and that no such thing as matterless/energyless space exists.... then i will always conclude that energy/matter is a seperate phenomena from the space it resides in.....



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaFungi
 



you dont know this...... Space - time is not composed of particles,.,..,.. if scientists have an instrument located in space - time,,, and they detect turbulence/ fluctuation ,,, this turbulence/ fluctuation is not a quality of space - time itself,, it is a quality of particles which exist in the volume of space - time.......
It's not a quality of space-time, it's a quality of quantum mechanics. Space-time, on the quantum scale, simply inherits that quality due to the Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, as do all quantum objects. You are right in a certain sense that the energy is in the form of particles, but they are virtual particles. Quantum fluctuations are basically virtual particles. They exist all throughout space-time, constantly appearing then disappearing. We know these virtual particles exist and that they come from the vacuum of space because we have forced virtual particles to become real in recent experiments (Scientists create light from vacuum), virtual particles also help explain why black holes emit radiation (see Hawking Radiation theory).

So this obviously suggests something about the nature of energy and matter... that it may merely be a form of space-time. Cutting edge theories such as Loop Quantum Gravity define energy and particles as a form of space-time... essentially particles are described as braided knots of space-time. Different configurations of space-time braiding results in different types of fundamental particles. In essence there is no such thing as a particle, it's merely an illusion created by certain configurations of space-time.
edit on 6/10/2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


so then there is no such thing as empty space? what is a vacuum,, and how can particles virtual or not come from them? what are virtual particles,, what do they exist as?

if there is any such thing as particleless space,, empty space.., then that means there is a definite difference between what space is ,,,, and what "physical", quantifiable, measurable matter is...



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaFungi
 



so then there is no such thing as empty space? what is a vacuum,, and how can particles virtual or not come from them? what are virtual particles,, what do they exist as?

Well... empty space is not really empty, simply because it is alive with quantum activity... but amid that activity there are certainly "empty" parts. Some parts are empty one moment and not empty the next. The quantum vacuum is simply a term to describe space-time at the quantum level. Classical physics told us the vacuum - or so called empty space - should be empty... but that's not the case, quantum mechanics actually describes the behavior of the vacuum more accurately. And as I said... virtual particles are vacuum fluctuations. And I believe Loop Quantum Gravity explains the nature of them perfectly. All matter and energy is just braided and highly condensed space-time imo... but there's no reason you should believe that, it's just one theory which I happen to believe fits the evidence better than any other theory.
edit on 6/10/2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrderIn fact there would be an infinite number of copies of you out there. There would even be copies of our Universe out there.



i have pondered on his exact subject for years.
I've gotten to the point where I've settled on a few things..

1) that there isn't infinite copies of everything.. there ARE a set amount of them.. based on probability. (not possibility) ie.. what is most LIKELY to happen - mostly based on choice...and logic.

2) some of these abstract almost rediculous sounding scenarios may come into being because a group of scientifically advanced beings REALIZE what you're saying.. and they go ahead and MAKE a unicorn creature planet BECAUSE they realize it CAN exist but only exist because someone needs to go through the cause and effect of geo-forming the planet, and genetically engineering unicorn beings.. and them raising them intelligently in order for them to rule their planet...
meaning.. it's more probable that that would be the cause of unicorn planet, rather than it happening completely on it's own through random settling of molecules into that order...
this perspective argues against evolution and promotes intelligent design obviously.



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
Except... if you're talking about empty space as "nothing", you'd be wrong. Empty space is not nothing, it's the very fabric from which all energy is derived, quantum vacuum fluctuations gives rise to everything we see. The proposition that the energy of our Universe has always been here is completely absurd and wrong.

I never made any proposition like that. I was talking about matter in the space. Energy is a result of various interaction of matter.
You can take an empty box and wish for a banana in there. What is the probability that the banana materialize?
edit on 7-10-2012 by tremex because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join