161–170 of 171 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've always wondered; is there a "last" galaxy in any direction, such that for an observer in that galaxy, no further light or radiation can be detected from that direction? (outside that galaxy) That, must be a terrifying place to live in......
Too late to edit, but I must add that I'm not necessarily asking if there's an "edge" of the Universe.
It actually boggles the mind that a 12-pixel image has more combinations than atoms in the universe (!!!).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can see back as far as the Big Bang, approximately 14 billion years ago, so all matter in the visible Universe is within 14 billion light years of the Earth. However, the space the Universe occupies is only really finite if it's positively curved. If it's flat or negatively curved, the space it occupies is infinite, and if its density is constant, it must contain an infinite amount of matter even though we only s…
Radius of the visible universe is actually 45.7 billion ly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've always wondered; is there a "last" galaxy in any direction, such that for an observer in that galaxy, no further light or radiation can be detected from that direction? (outside that galaxy) That, must be a terrifying place to live in......
I think they would have to be at the edge of their galaxy for this effect to take place ..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The typical way to picture the universe is like the surface of an expanding balloon, a 2-manifold which happens to be embedded in 3-space. If you picture galaxies as spots on the balloon, there's no "last" galaxy, they're all roughly equidistant from their neighbors. Analogously, our Euclidean universe is thought of (in terms of noncompact spatial dimensions) as an expanding 3-manifold. There's no last galaxy there e…
> If you picture galaxies as spots on the balloon, there's no "last" galaxy What about looking "up" and "down?" i.e. into the inside of balloon or away from its surface? I have a hard time wrapping my head around the balloon surface analogy, because galaxies seem to be in all directions of each other..
From this point of view this article is inappropriately comparing two scales. It's nothing more than saying "e^x >> x for big x".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The positrons might be hiding in the protons!
Physics is sufficiently weird that I can't tell if this is just spitballing or an actual theory I haven't heard of before. Edit: holy crap, these people think nucleons are made of muons that are made of electrons and positrons: http://wlsprojects.com/structure-inside-proton.html . Solves the matter vs antimatter problem, I guess.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
O, I get it. There is a basic contradiction in set theory. Called Russell's paradox, there are two ways around it. First is ignoring it, aka everything builds from it's self nothing can become recursive. Or Zer's something or other that basically removed membership and equality and hides in the corner crying. As such infinity is generally assumed not to exit in R. And causes all this all infinite set's map able to ea…
Where did you get all this idea? You know enough terms, yet somehow you have an incorrect understanding of pretty much everything. If you are interested, please read an actual math textbook. (Yes, they can be a giant time sink, but at least you'll learn the correct meanings of sets and functions.)
But, the absurd results are not generalizable outside of their assumptions sorry Axioms. Set theory being one of the most obvious cases.
It's sadly like a religion in many ways, follow enough false statements and you can prove anything. Yet, if you find a contradiction then don't actually accept at least one of your assumptions are false.
This again reminds me how science today is no different than religion. Of course there is nothing wrong with having the number based on assumptions , but take it out of the field of study and suddenly it is a fact :)
Like in this article and the discussion in HN where its just the number and its name, and the fact that this him be is just somebody's wild guess is totally ignored. Same with Jesus , he exists and he loves you and the fact that it was just somebody's idea is totally left out.