the hubble tele

[PJ]

for those who are interested in space and what not. Check this site out: http://hubblesite.org/

I really love the stars and it just disapoints me that the funding for this is being stripped. Take a look if you have never seen pictures from teh hubble telescope. It makes me feel so small.


edit: I really want people to look at these wonderful pictures. So i even made it easyer for you. Heres a link to the gallery and wallpaper page.

http://hubblesite.org/gallery/

[This_name_sucks]

Nice one PJ. About time someone made an attempt to inject more culture into this clan...beyond Mid's ranting that is.
I too love the stars. There's something mysterious about them. Maybe it's how unreachable they are, or perhaps its how much they have meant to so many cultures. It may even be that they just look pretty, especially nebulae. I watch loads of astronomy programmes. I especially enjoyed the ones on supernovae and HYPERnovae. And yeah, black holes are cool.
It's a damn shame the funding is being stripped. Research like this is useful research, unlike the effects of carrots on how fat you get or some such venture.
Loved the pics PJ...NOW GET BACK ON VENT!

[PooMonkey]

All I have to say is EVE online

[BadAsh]

Nice one PJ. About time someone made an attempt to inject more culture into this clan...beyond Mid's ranting that is.
I too love the stars. There's something mysterious about them. Maybe it's how unreachable they are, or perhaps its how much they have meant to so many cultures. It may even be that they just look pretty, especially nebulae. I watch loads of astronomy programmes. I especially enjoyed the ones on supernovae and HYPERnovae. And yeah, black holes are cool.
It's a damn shame the funding is being stripped. Research like this is useful research, unlike the effects of carrots on how fat you get or some such venture.
Loved the pics PJ...NOW GET BACK ON VENT!

Cept black holes are a mathematical fallacy..... http://www.thunderbolts.info

Check out that site....it's a very interesting read.

Oh yeah....and must also as always plug http://www.eve-online.com

[Yazule]

ok there is a book i am going to have to read, but I have to say that actually black holes have been shown to exist by the measurement of anti-quarks radiating from the event horizon of them. have you read this entire book badash? Being a science geek myself I will look into it. there are a few people out there that are saying they are developing new sciences

i reference this as an example http://www.wolframscience.com/

in the end when people say mathmatically created I kind of chuckle.. mathmatics is a language, like english only its vocabulary is all definable things with no abstracts. the language of logic. We of course have built a 10 based language because we have 10 fingers but you could just as easily build an 11 based or 42 based langage, whatever. This stuff interests me but I will warn you about wolfram's book, it is very dry and he makes some observations that border... scratch that, they ARE ficticious. He says his science will replace todays science, problem is he cant do his science without computers which are a product of todays science, so he cant replace todays science, though he may be able to augment it ... he has interesting revelations on chaos theory that blow ones mind (if they can live through the dry parts of the book)

very interesting stuff, thanks for the link badash.

[Undead_Mercenary]

Although this isn't exactly related to the topic, did anyone see that Discovery show Alien Planet they did on Expedition, the book about the fictional planet Darwin IV? Very interesting indeed. The things found on this planet would literally redefine what we believe are "life forms". I definetly have to find a copy of that book and read it sometime. I know it's only a simulation, but it's mind-blowing that the author could simply invent a planet (I believe he had help with NASA and other science gurus).

I still wonder if I'll be alive the day we actually visit planets outside of our own galaxy. I don't see it happening, especially after hearing how long it would take that hubble telescope to reach Pluto.

[Yazule]

you definitely wont be alive when the first human lands on a planet outside of our galaxy, I doubt your great grand children will be alive when the first humans land on a planet outside of our solar system even. hehe ... we are talking about light years of disance here.

[BadAsh]

ok there is a book i am going to have to read, but I have to say that actually black holes have been shown to exist by the measurement of anti-quarks radiating from the event horizon of them. have you read this entire book badash? Being a science geek myself I will look into it. there are a few people out there that are saying they are developing new sciences

i reference this as an example http://www.wolframscience.com/

in the end when people say mathmatically created I kind of chuckle.. mathmatics is a language, like english only its vocabulary is all definable things with no abstracts. the language of logic. We of course have built a 10 based language because we have 10 fingers but you could just as easily build an 11 based or 42 based langage, whatever. This stuff interests me but I will warn you about wolfram's book, it is very dry and he makes some observations that border... scratch that, they ARE ficticious. He says his science will replace todays science, problem is he cant do his science without computers which are a product of todays science, so he cant replace todays science, though he may be able to augment it ... he has interesting revelations on chaos theory that blow ones mind (if they can live through the dry parts of the book)

very interesting stuff, thanks for the link badash.

Yaz I haven't read the book yet, or seen the dvd as they just came out, but I was more referring to the site in general. Check out the picture of the day archives as they have an interesting little blurb attatched to each one. Also be sure to check out some of the links on the site as there is a bunch more good info.

Also there are other things that have been shown to produce the same effects that do not require a black hole to exist, but they do require cosmologists to admit that electrical force > gravitational force on the large scale of space.

When you read these pages you have try and have an open mind about it.

There is a lot of stuff in those links that have been proven or repeated experimentally to be valid that have been ignored by cosmologits that favor a 100+ year old model.

[Ultra]

hhhmmmm, maybe my great uncle gene coon, who wrote for the early star trek shows had some insight into the stars.....

he did die way before his time... i still remember his tales

[This_name_sucks]

Yaz won't be close minded, they'll just be wrong.

[PJ]

3 light years to the nearest galaxy. We can't even go 10X the speed of sound. And 3 light years= 30 earth years. Acordding to research it's impossible to go the speed of light, so we havn't even taken the first baby step to getting to other galaxies. I can't completely articulate my thoughts as well as i like, but I'll try to explain this. I've discussed this with tns and this what we came up with.

#1 time is a concept, you must understand time doesn't exsit in space.

Theres a hudge mass of molecules all in one area where gravity is pushing harder and harder on a single spot forcing them closer and closer together (black hole). Eventually all molecules and light waves are sucked up by this growing hole becasue the gravity is so great. Then for a instant, theres nothing.... then a boom!

Stars and galaxies are formed (like spinning debris after and explosion). at the middle of these galaxies there are black holes keeping everything in moition using gravity. As galaxies colide and black holes eat up more stars, and eventually growing bigger, and bigger and bigger. Till theres one giant black hole again. So i don't believe in the 'big bang'...maybe more of a cycle. It seems thats just how nature works, theres always a cycle...never ending.

I've thought about what my take place in a black hole. Maybe absolute zero, so there is no motion, no motion = no 'time'. Why do black holes not reflect light? Becasue the gravity is so great that it sucks in the light waves keeping them in with it's incredible gravity. The light may play an important part in the big bang, but i don't know.

Non of this is proven I've just kinda thought this up myself,of course after discussing it with people and changing ideas. I'm sure theres other ideas like this. I thought i would throw this out here, keep the opinions comming. To me space is the most important thing in the world...or.... uh... universe. It is the future.

[This_name_sucks]

The Big Crunch I think it's called. Like the opposite of the Big Bang. It's been theorised before, although me and PJ kinda figured it out for ourselves (so those big shot scientists aren't so smart after all).

I'm currently trying to puzzle out black holes using an x^-1 graph. It kind of looks like the shape made by a heavy mass on the fabric of space, but with a third dimension of a circular equation. If you think about it, then the difference between each moment of time grows progressively bigger. So with every addition of matter to a black hole, it's mass increases and so it's effect on the fabric of space increases too.
So I guess time would slow down towards a black hole, which I think I've heard somewhere before. However, if a particle were to remain proportional with space fabric, then time would remain constant, but the objects would seem larger to an outside spectator, kind of like a magnifying glass.
The whole light thing I reckon is just that you could have a light cycle where light is stuck in perpetual in and out motion with a black hole due to the gravitational effect. However, gravity isn't meant to have an effect on light, and yet light bends around a black hole. It could also be that in a black hole, you end up with super dense materials, which are highly unstable. And yet the energy released from them isn't great enough for an explosion to occur because it's just pulled back in.
Maybe you just need a certain amount of mass to expel it's energy at a certain time in a certain direction for a successful explosion to occur. But that's infinitely unlikely, HOWEVER, the space which the universe occupies and the matter and energy that fills it is also infinte, which means the chances of an explosion occuring is certain. Time becomes meaningless without perception, so everything is possible, just to certain levels of likelihood.
That might be what the big bang was. But they talk about how the Big Crunch isn't happening because the outer universe is still expanding AND accelerating. But of course, that's according to light which has been travelling since the beginning of the universe. So basically all we can see of the outer universe is what happened in the first place, which means we can't see what is happening. The universe could be contracting, but we'd never tell because light travels faster than the objects themselves. I suppose that the red shift would change also, so maybe it is still expanding.
Try stirring a cup of tea or coffee and look at what the foam does. It always forms a circle because the cups a circle. Kind of looks like a galaxy, and you do get arms on it occasionally. What does it? A turning force in the centre of the cup. So that's why they think Galaxies have black holes at their centre. But why are galaxies circular, they don't have some super huge cup around them? Apparently there's more gravity having an effect on the stars of a galaxy than could possibly be generated by the black holes. Enter dark matter and energy into the equation. Not sure what I think of those two, whether they're plausable or not. All I know is I noticed something else with the cup. When I stirred in a small circle, the foam next to the rotating circle also rotated, but in the opposite direction, much like cogs. Perhaps all it needs is one thing to turn and everything else turns. THEN you get into the discussion of what started the first motion, and that's Philosophy and damn Year 9 work on Thomas Aquinas and his 5 truths or something. But that's philosophy and so anything's possible.

Okay I'm just rambling, I could keep going on, but that'd just be confusing.

PS Pink will probably have interesting things to say. He does Physics and could probably make more sense.

[PJ]

I understood it.

and thats what i meant to say....I think.

[This_name_sucks]

GET ON VENT PJ OR AT LEAST MSN!!! I HAVE SO MANY IDEAS TO MAKE YOUR MIND TICK WITH!

[BadAsh]

The Big Crunch I think it's called. Like the opposite of the Big Bang. It's been theorised before, although me and PJ kinda figured it out for ourselves (so those big shot scientists aren't so smart after all).

I'm currently trying to puzzle out black holes using an x^-1 graph. It kind of looks like the shape made by a heavy mass on the fabric of space, but with a third dimension of a circular equation. If you think about it, then the difference between each moment of time grows progressively bigger. So with every addition of matter to a black hole, it's mass increases and so it's effect on the fabric of space increases too.
So I guess time would slow down towards a black hole, which I think I've heard somewhere before. However, if a particle were to remain proportional with space fabric, then time would remain constant, but the objects would seem larger to an outside spectator, kind of like a magnifying glass.
The whole light thing I reckon is just that you could have a light cycle where light is stuck in perpetual in and out motion with a black hole due to the gravitational effect. However, gravity isn't meant to have an effect on light, and yet light bends around a black hole. It could also be that in a black hole, you end up with super dense materials, which are highly unstable. And yet the energy released from them isn't great enough for an explosion to occur because it's just pulled back in.
Maybe you just need a certain amount of mass to expel it's energy at a certain time in a certain direction for a successful explosion to occur. But that's infinitely unlikely, HOWEVER, the space which the universe occupies and the matter and energy that fills it is also infinte, which means the chances of an explosion occuring is certain. Time becomes meaningless without perception, so everything is possible, just to certain levels of likelihood.
That might be what the big bang was. But they talk about how the Big Crunch isn't happening because the outer universe is still expanding AND accelerating. But of course, that's according to light which has been travelling since the beginning of the universe. So basically all we can see of the outer universe is what happened in the first place, which means we can't see what is happening. The universe could be contracting, but we'd never tell because light travels faster than the objects themselves. I suppose that the red shift would change also, so maybe it is still expanding.
Try stirring a cup of tea or coffee and look at what the foam does. It always forms a circle because the cups a circle. Kind of looks like a galaxy, and you do get arms on it occasionally. What does it? A turning force in the centre of the cup. So that's why they think Galaxies have black holes at their centre. But why are galaxies circular, they don't have some super huge cup around them? Apparently there's more gravity having an effect on the stars of a galaxy than could possibly be generated by the black holes. Enter dark matter and energy into the equation. Not sure what I think of those two, whether they're plausable or not. All I know is I noticed something else with the cup. When I stirred in a small circle, the foam next to the rotating circle also rotated, but in the opposite direction, much like cogs. Perhaps all it needs is one thing to turn and everything else turns. THEN you get into the discussion of what started the first motion, and that's Philosophy and damn Year 9 work on Thomas Aquinas and his 5 truths or something. But that's philosophy and so anything's possible.

Okay I'm just rambling, I could keep going on, but that'd just be confusing.

PS Pink will probably have interesting things to say. He does Physics and could probably make more sense.

I was going to try and explain some of the stuff that I've read so far but my memory sucks, and I doubt I could even get a fraction of the stuff in that would help explain, so go to this site: http://www.electric-cosmos.org/ and give it a read....it goes through a lot of what you were talking about and shows a lot of faults in the standard theory as well as giving a rundown of plasma cosmology. It's a really interesting read.