Soldato
Nicely animated version of Michio Kaku's theory.Magic_x_uk said:
Earth on the scale of things...
- Thread starter phykell
- Start date
Soldato
Superb thread 5* Really makes you sit and think. Its quite scary in a way when you realise how little we actually know about..well..anything and everything. And anything we do know is quite frankly, insignificant in the grand scale of things!
Really makes you sit and think. Its quite scary in a way when you realise how little we actually know about..well..anything and everything. And anything we do know is quite frankly, insignificant in the grand scale of things!
Soldato
I love these kinds of size comparisons but am I the only person on the planet who feel's queezy looking at the larger planets of the solar system? I get the same feeling in space-sims darting close to the planets. I get the sense that I extemely high up and am about to fall a very, very, long way down.
Soldato
Morlan said:
A couple of Solar Panels and no need for petrol
Anyone got any not so badly compressed pics?
Suspended
Michio Kaku's theory?Raist said:Nicely animated version of Michio Kaku's theory.
Hmph.
Excellent thread, and those pictures really make you think - we totally kick Mars' ass!
But Antares isn't really that big relatively, I've heard it can be considered rather small in the Total Perspective Vortex.
Joking aside.. cool thread and nods head in respect to the maths and physics guys in here who are contributing to my learning and this discussion (respect/envy)
But Antares isn't really that big relatively, I've heard it can be considered rather small in the Total Perspective Vortex.
Joking aside.. cool thread and nods head in respect to the maths and physics guys in here who are contributing to my learning and this discussion (respect/envy)
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 May 2005
- Posts
- 12,631
It is quite scary to think of super massive black holes 100's of times larger than our own sun. the earth would not stand a chance...
Soldato
The Earth wouldn't stand a chance against any black hole, even if it was possible for a planet to stand a chance against one.Dark_Angel said:
Doesn't matter though, the probabilty of us getting swallowed my a blackhole in the next 70 years or so is infinitessimal.
Caporegime
Hmm i have trouble living in a 3 dimensions let alone 4, 6, 9
I reckon 10 would be a laugh.
I reckon 10 would be a laugh.
Good thread, heres a video of the size of things by the powers of ten, it first zooms right out into space then zooms right into an atom.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4i6B7HzijSo
A lot of those theory's about the universe are probably unnecessarily complicated, although the universe is incredibly complex overall.
I think its a bit more simple to start, because its been shown that often out of great simplicity can come great complexity, from the tiniest bits of existence you scale up from (possibly) vibrating energy strings?, subatomic particles, quarks, neutrons, protons and electrons making atoms and them making the things we see and don't see up to the complexity of the brain and scale of those massive stars etc.
A theory i believe could be possible is that in the beginning there was nothing no space or time etc but the thing is its impossible to have nothing and impossible to have something so we have a paradox in which existence and non existence are flashing to and from at a probably incredibly fast rate which is what gives us time, its the start of the singularity with fluctuations.
Now this next part may sound funny but its just a theory and i think it fits quite well with possibility and what a lot of people would believe, anyway out of this and over time developed an awareness from these fluctuations and developed itself from a simple barely consciousness intellect to a great one which went on to start the reaction that created the big bang and the universe with all its complexity, theres more to it that should make a bit more sense but thats the basics and should do for now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4i6B7HzijSo
A lot of those theory's about the universe are probably unnecessarily complicated, although the universe is incredibly complex overall.
I think its a bit more simple to start, because its been shown that often out of great simplicity can come great complexity, from the tiniest bits of existence you scale up from (possibly) vibrating energy strings?, subatomic particles, quarks, neutrons, protons and electrons making atoms and them making the things we see and don't see up to the complexity of the brain and scale of those massive stars etc.
A theory i believe could be possible is that in the beginning there was nothing no space or time etc but the thing is its impossible to have nothing and impossible to have something so we have a paradox in which existence and non existence are flashing to and from at a probably incredibly fast rate which is what gives us time, its the start of the singularity with fluctuations.
Now this next part may sound funny but its just a theory and i think it fits quite well with possibility and what a lot of people would believe, anyway out of this and over time developed an awareness from these fluctuations and developed itself from a simple barely consciousness intellect to a great one which went on to start the reaction that created the big bang and the universe with all its complexity, theres more to it that should make a bit more sense but thats the basics and should do for now.
Man of Honour
No, none of that makes sense. It could be how you've explained it (or notRadiation said:Now this next part may sound funny but its just a theory and i think it fits quite well with possibility and what a lot of people would believe, anyway out of this and over time developed an awareness from these fluctuations and developed itself from a simple barely consciousness intellect to a great one which went on to start the reaction that created the big bang and the universe with all its complexity, theres more to it that should make a bit more sense but thats the basics and should do for now.
)What developed an awareness? Are you saying the Universe is self-aware?
Soldato
MasterMike said:
Sure that sounds wrong... your talking billions of miles... should take longer than 500 years?
Just for comparison, the Earth has a circumference of 24901.463 miles meaning it would take a bit less than 15 days to drive round it at 70mph.
The sun is 2,717,256.22 miles in circumference. To drive round at 70mph it would take 38817.946 hours.... that's 4 years 5 months and 5 days.
Antares has a circumference of 1,803,735,941 miles - ish! At 70mph it would take a cool 25767656.3 hours to get round. Thats about 2,939 and a half years.
But that is just a walk to the corner shop compared to VV Cephei, which is what is believed to be the biggest known star. It has a circumference of about 4,500,000,000 miles (thats makes the star bigger than the orbit of Jupiter). It would take 64285714 hours to drive round at 70mph... think we need a faster star-car! Thats about 7,333 and 3 quarter years! It would take light itself (186,282 miles per second!) 6.7 hours to get round!
Logan09 said:All I can say is WOW!The scale of some of these stars is mindblowing. I knew the sun wasn't the biggest star but hadn't realised how much bigger stars can get.
Anyone care to work out how many times bigger Antares is than Earth? Must be millions.
Antares' circumference is around 45,009 times bigger than that of Earth. That means it would take 71,563 times as long to drive around Antares than it would Earth (and 178,555 times as long to drive round VV Cephei than Earth).
Antares is 4,994,250 times the mass of Earth! The Earth clocks in at 5,973,700,000,000,000,000,000,000 kg by the way.... !
Last edited:
Gilly said:No, none of that makes sense. It could be how you've explained it (or not
What developed an awareness? Are you saying the Universe is self-aware?
Does the first bit about how a singularity could start seem possible?
It's probably how i explained it but the interaction of these fluctuations over a long time is like communication in a basic way, think what is consciousness, is it not just the interaction or communication between things?
The theory maybe unscientific sounding but it supports the possibility for what people call god, i think if we can all be self aware and conscious then perhaps the fluctuations in the singularity could and possibly else where in space at some level, its all a bit like pure information but to keep the information existing in a stable way it has to be constantly interacting and improving itself overtime and discarding anything bad like evolution does.
Science can explain a lot but so much appears to be by design at some level that its hard to see how pure randomness in this fairly chaotic universe could make all of this, i don't think anyone should discount the possibility that at some point things were swung into action by a sort of great intellect, its not really that unscientific to think this because hypothetically we could build a computer to create a universe and in it we could design everything in a way that works and doesn't happen in an unexplainable way.
I think its safe to say things have to work together for anything useful to happen in the universe and on earth, so science is good to explain how things work but it doesn't mean there can't be some intellect that got the grand design going, it just means we haven't got to that point of understanding yet, i don't think many religions are right in their ideas, especially creation but the possibility for a creator? sure.
Soldato
Now that is awesome. It's amazing our sun becomes just a spec by the time we reach the next nearest star, then our entire galaxy becomes just a spec by the time we reach the next nearest galaxy. Just amazing.Radiation said: