[Moriarty]

	Originally Posted by Antares To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Well, if we place trust in Einstein's theory of Relativity, it predicts that all laws would break down at infinity (indeed, you can't do math with infinity), and therefore there might not be any laws before the universe.

Off topic, but every time I try to visualize the concept of all the matter rolled into a ball of singularity...my head hurts. It took me months to visualize what the true likely shape of the universe is. Going back to the beginning (big bang) is a whole new set of headaches.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Antares]

	Originally Posted by Moriarty To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Off topic, but every time I try to visualize the concept of all the matter rolled into a ball of singularity...my head hurts. It took me months to visualize what the true likely shape of the universe is. Going back to the beginning (big bang) is a whole new set of headaches. To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Haha. It gives me headaches too. I've been trying to visualize the conjuration of the universe and potential parallel universes, and as one netizen suggested, universes packed together in hexagonal polyhedrons, like a honeycomb. Then for the sake of my sanity, I wandered back to Earth.

[Moriarty]

Bubble theory is easier for me to visualize, presumably because I see bubbles every day. What *really* bakes me is the concept of a multiverse existing in the same overlapping multi-dimentional space.

The other me is sitting in the same chair as I am right now...only the other me is surfing pr0n instead. Since I'm surfing the INTJ forum, I'm unaware of the other me and he's unaware of me.

Gah.

[Antares]

	Originally Posted by Moriarty To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Bubble theory is easier for me to visualize, presumably because I see bubbles every day. What *really* bakes me is the concept of a multiverse existing in the same overlapping multi-dimentional space. The other me is sitting in the same chair as I am right now...only the other me is surfing pr0n instead. Since I'm surfing the INTJ forum, I'm unaware of the other me and he's unaware of me. Gah.

	The other me is sitting in the same chair as I am right now...only the other me is surfing pr0n instead. Since I'm surfing the INTJ forum, I'm unaware of the other me and he's unaware of me.

Well, the fact that you're talking about him shows that you accept the possibility of his hypothetical existence, and if he really did, I think he'd think of you too xD The other me might be in the Maldives diving with the sharks, if, in the parallel universe, my dad got a break and took me there (I'm on Spring break). Or she might be in France right now because she decided to go on the French trip to Nice. Or she might be in a Chinese public school about to die in a test.

What really gets to me is the curving of space-time. I can never visualise something like this. At best, I visualize a transparent, rectangular block of jelly with pictures of stars that bends... Space-time indeed. Did you ever hear the theory that everything with mass bends space? Just... Imagine that. I've heard that gravity works like a trampoline, a heavier object makes a noticeable dent, thereby creating a slope, drawing the lighter object towards it. Now think 3-D! Argh.

[Moriarty]

Understanding space-time bending is easy. Just think of what happens to light as is passes thru a thick atmosphere.

To visualize the stretching of spacetime, grab a deflated rubber balloon. Make some dots on it with a marker. These dots represent..well...everything material in the universe.

Now, stretch the balloon. Observe how the matter is moving *further* apart, but is not actually moving *through* space in order to accomplish the distance....it's moving *with* space.


The theory that everything with mass bends spacetime is a small part of relativity. This'll smoke your mind: general and special relativity, at least in part, have been put to the test...and they passed.

Look up the Voyager Space Probe and the Atomic Clock/ Space Shuttle experiments.

[SickFish]

I've had headaches over trying to visualize nothing. Nothing as in the absence of existence of anything infinitely in all directions in all dimensions.

I've done some thinking on space-time and that doesn't bother me to much. I haven't had enough information on multi verses and the like to attempt visualization.

[Moriarty]

Good luck, sickfish. That's about the only positive thing i can say about it.

I'm not a physicist, so I don't delve deeply into the details of cosmology or quantum mechanics. It doesn't appear to make a difference tho since the general opinion among that community of professionals is that it's a race to see who can properly misunderstand quantum mechanical theory first.

[IgnoranceIsKind]

	Originally Posted by SickFish To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I've had headaches over trying to visualize nothing. Nothing as in the absence of existence of anything infinitely in all directions in all dimensions.

I used to do that when I was about 8 or 9
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Everytime after I take a shower, I'd stand in front of the mirror and close my eyes. And imagined how the universe would be if nothing existed.. needless to say, being young and absolutely air-headed, it really really freaked me out.

[nemo]

I'm generally cautious of the interpretations of quantum mechanics et al. because of the lunatic mathematics involved. To me it's more of a mathematical theory; as Feynman observed, it's like asking the Mayans "why" their method of counting beads predicted when Venus was in the sky when they had no knowledge of how the planets orbited the sun.

[thod]

How about time not being a universal constant but relative to observers. The man on the rocket is experiencing time at a slower rate and it as valid as any other frame of reference.

[thegnat]

	Originally Posted by nemo To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I'm generally cautious of the interpretations of quantum mechanics et al. because of the lunatic mathematics involved. To me it's more of a mathematical theory; as Feynman observed, it's like asking the Mayans "why" their method of counting beads predicted when Venus was in the sky when they had no knowledge of how the planets orbited the sun.

Well, there is *some* empirical evidence for quantum mechanical theories. The photo-electric effect was found experimentally, wave-particle duality for matter was also found experimentally. Quantum dots also exist which confirm some other principles (too lazy to explain so:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
). They're really interesting. I read a nice paper on them.

Spectroscopic instruments also use quantum mechanical principles (ie Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR), Infrared (IR) Spectroscopy). A lot of chemistry depends on spectroscopy to confirm the molecules made or the results found. Slight problem if those machines ended up being inaccurate...

But yes, it's still a lot of theory and difficult to visualize, grasp your mind around because we just don't see these effects in every day life. And of course we don't understand everything about it. But as my physics prof said, "Planck's constant is too small and the speed of light is too large [to see the effects of QM and relativity, respectively]!" You really have to think outside the box.