+ Post New Thread
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 75
General Chat Thread, BBC News - Black Hole's 'Big Meal' Could Spark Fireworks in General; Originally Posted by jinnantonnixx Tell her that suppose she had a perfect telescope and looked at a planet which was ...
  1. #46


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,278
    Thank Post
    290
    Thanked 883 Times in 661 Posts
    Rep Power
    339
    Quote Originally Posted by jinnantonnixx View Post
    Tell her that suppose she had a perfect telescope and looked at a planet which was hundreds of thousands of light years away. Suppose that on this planet was a mirror. Ignoring planetary alignment, she would see a refection of earth, but she wouldn't see herself, she would see dinosaurs walking the earth.
    She would need to be looking at a mirror between 32.5 and 115 million light years away if she wanted to see dinosaurs.

  2. #47

    jinnantonnixx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    In the Calamatorium.
    Posts
    2,025
    Thank Post
    118
    Thanked 512 Times in 346 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    288
    Quote Originally Posted by pcstru View Post
    She would need to be looking at a mirror between 32.5 and 115 million light years away if she wanted to see dinosaurs.
    Sorry, I meant to say 6,000 years ago.
    Last edited by jinnantonnixx; 13th January 2014 at 01:13 PM.

  3. #48

    jinnantonnixx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    In the Calamatorium.
    Posts
    2,025
    Thank Post
    118
    Thanked 512 Times in 346 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    288
    Quote Originally Posted by CHR1S View Post
    Your assuming time has a start, middle and end.....


    Only a conscious observer can perceive the flow of time. A clock doesn't measure time's flow any more than a ruler measures distances between points. The question 'how fast does time flow' is nonsense- a second per second? There is no external, objective reference for this.

    This link is one of the most astounding articles I have ever read. It's by Paul Davies, and appeared in the 2002 'Time' special edition of Scientific American. It introduced me to the idea of the block universe theory. I've bored others with this before, so I won't do it again unless provoked.
    http://www.nikhef.nl/pub/services/bi...am14327034.pdf

  4. #49
    Hefferzzzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Posts
    440
    Thank Post
    33
    Thanked 134 Times in 64 Posts
    Rep Power
    43
    Nope. This thread makes not sense on a Monday either.

  5. 2 Thanks to Hefferzzzz:

    CHR1S (13th January 2014), Garacesh (13th January 2014)

  6. #50


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,278
    Thank Post
    290
    Thanked 883 Times in 661 Posts
    Rep Power
    339
    Quote Originally Posted by jinnantonnixx View Post
    This link is one of the most astounding articles I have ever read. It's by Paul Davies, and appeared in the 2002 'Time' special edition of Scientific American. It introduced me to the idea of the block universe theory. I've bored others with this before, so I won't do it again unless provoked. http://www.nikhef.nl/pub/services/bi...am14327034.pdf
    I'd call it a philosophical view rather than a scientific theory since it doesn't seem to make any useful predictions, nor can it be falsified. Or have I missed something?

  7. #51


    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    51.403651, -0.515458
    Posts
    9,390
    Thank Post
    241
    Thanked 2,817 Times in 2,078 Posts
    Rep Power
    813
    Quote Originally Posted by fairm010 View Post
    what would happen at the point time started?
    There may not have even been a beginning at all.

    In a "Rainbow" Universe Time May Have No Beginning

    Awad and his colleagues found two possible beginnings to the universe based on slightly different interpretations of the ramifications of rainbow gravity. In one scenario, if you retrace time backward, the universe gets denser and denser, approaching an infinite density but never quite reaching it. In the other picture the universe reaches an extremely high, but finite, density as you look back in time and then plateaus. In neither case is there a singularity—a point in time when the universe is infinitely dense—or in other words, a big bang. "This was, of course, an interesting result, because in most cosmological models, we have singularities," Awad says. The result suggests perhaps the universe had no beginning at all, and that time can be traced back infinitely far.

  8. #52

    CHR1S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Birmingham
    Posts
    4,532
    Thank Post
    1,622
    Thanked 500 Times in 307 Posts
    Rep Power
    220
    Ursprung Paradoxon Simpsons Universe - YouTube

    Excuse the poor quality... but... what if the Simpsons got it right?

  9. #53


    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    6,813
    Thank Post
    231
    Thanked 886 Times in 762 Posts
    Rep Power
    301
    Quote Originally Posted by pcstru View Post
    Something has to be yes, but if that is the case, then think how improbable intelligent life is. The universe is already 13.8 billion years old with at least a hundred billion galaxies, each with an average hundred billion stars perhaps each of them with multiple orbiting planetary bodies. If we are the first, then intelligent life is extremely improbable and we might just be the last.
    true but its taken 4 billion years (ish) since the creation of out solar system to make us so 13 billion is only 3 and a bit times that so compared to the age of the universe the solar system isnt that new and the first few billion years stars were too big iirc so diddnt last long at all so not enough chance for anything to develop.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arthur View Post
    There may not have even been a beginning at all.

    In a "Rainbow" Universe Time May Have No Beginning
    that assumes the laws of physics have never changed its possible that they were "created" in the first microscopic unit of time after the big bang and all we can ever see is up to the point where the laws of physics applied not to mention that before it happended there was no time lol

  10. #54

    LosOjos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    West Midlands
    Posts
    5,563
    Thank Post
    1,469
    Thanked 1,222 Times in 831 Posts
    Rep Power
    752
    Quote Originally Posted by sted View Post
    true but its taken 4 billion years (ish) since the creation of out solar system to make us so 13 billion is only 3 and a bit times that so compared to the age of the universe the solar system isnt that new and the first few billion years stars were too big iirc so diddnt last long at all so not enough chance for anything to develop.
    Intelligent life doesn't mean human level intelligence. There is debate on what exactly constitues "intelligence" but in a nut shell, something capable of decision making, ie.e more complex than bacteria.

  11. #55

    CHR1S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Birmingham
    Posts
    4,532
    Thank Post
    1,622
    Thanked 500 Times in 307 Posts
    Rep Power
    220
    Quote Originally Posted by sted View Post
    all we can ever see is up to the point where the laws of physics applied not to mention that before it happened there was no time lol
    So if there was a point they didn't exist, surely that would mean they could be broken or manipulated in some way.

  12. #56


    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    6,813
    Thank Post
    231
    Thanked 886 Times in 762 Posts
    Rep Power
    301
    Quote Originally Posted by LosOjos View Post
    Intelligent life doesn't mean human level intelligence. There is debate on what exactly constitues "intelligence" but in a nut shell, something capable of decision making, ie.e more complex than bacteria.
    true but the chances of detecting some form of life that dosent have radio are much lower than finding ones that do

  13. #57

    ICTDirect_Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Ribchester
    Posts
    1,828
    Thank Post
    332
    Thanked 332 Times in 264 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    161
    Of course all of these figures and stats are only in relation to the Observable Universe (100Bn Galaxies etc...) when we take into account that this is just a tiny part of the actual universe (best guess so far is anywhere from 250 x bigger to infinitely bigger (big margin of error there)) it seems rather hard to belive that we're the only life (intelligent or otherwise) We might well be the only life in our observable section of the universe (although I doubt it) but the odds of there being life must surely fall dramatically if what we can currently observer is less than 1% of everything that is actually out there right now.

  14. #58


    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    6,813
    Thank Post
    231
    Thanked 886 Times in 762 Posts
    Rep Power
    301
    Quote Originally Posted by ICTDirect_Dave View Post
    Of course all of these figures and stats are only in relation to the Observable Universe (100Bn Galaxies etc...) when we take into account that this is just a tiny part of the actual universe (best guess so far is anywhere from 250 x bigger to infinitely bigger (big margin of error there)) it seems rather hard to belive that we're the only life (intelligent or otherwise) We might well be the only life in our observable section of the universe (although I doubt it) but the odds of there being life must surely fall dramatically if what we can currently observer is less than 1% of everything that is actually out there right now.
    its also possible that there are systems out there we can see that do have life now but we wont see it for a billion years

  15. #59

    ICTDirect_Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Ribchester
    Posts
    1,828
    Thank Post
    332
    Thanked 332 Times in 264 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    161
    Quote Originally Posted by sted View Post
    its also possible that there are systems out there we can see that do have life now but we wont see it for a billion years
    Exactly! I reckon the probabilities are far more likely that we think given the overwhelming scale of the place we exist in.

  16. #60
    Hefferzzzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Posts
    440
    Thank Post
    33
    Thanked 134 Times in 64 Posts
    Rep Power
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by sted View Post
    its also possible that there are systems out there we can see that do have life now but we wont see it for a billion years
    zackerly. They could also be looking at us thinking 'Look at all those stupid creatures with big sharp teeth. Going to get a shock when that asteroid hits!'

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [News] BBC News: Ban packed lunches, head teachers urged
    By Gatt in forum Jokes/Interweb Things
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 12th July 2013, 10:56 AM
  2. [News] BBC News - "MPs call for better porn filters to protect children"
    By sonofsanta in forum Jokes/Interweb Things
    Replies: 186
    Last Post: 29th June 2012, 10:57 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 3rd March 2012, 08:28 AM
  4. BBC News: The words that could unlock your child
    By JJonas in forum General Chat
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 20th April 2011, 04:12 PM
  5. [News] BBC News - Mapping The Growth Of The Internet
    By DaveP in forum Jokes/Interweb Things
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 9th March 2010, 03:47 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •