I don't really get Big Bang

Penfold101 said:
...using a computer that relies on our knowledge of quantum mechanics to actually work..
Click to expand...
Educate me please because i was under the impression that quantum effects were/are actively avoided in computers (assume you're talking about processors?).

I'm not aware of quantum effects being put to positive use so I'd be interested in read where, how, when, etc, etc.
 
Murphy said:
Educate me please because i was under the impression that quantum effects were/are actively avoided in computers (assume you're talking about processors?).

I'm not aware of quantum effects being put to positive use so I'd be interested in read where, how, when, etc, etc.
Click to expand...

Whilst current processors don’t USE quantum effects as we know them, from what I’ve read the designers have to aware of it’s effects when creating the chip layouts themselves. This isn’t quantum computing, just a result of everything being so ******* small.

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/11567/is-quantum-physics-used-in-manufacturing-cpus

again, just me regurgitating what I’ve read on the internet.
 
Ah, right. You're talking about unwanted quantum effects, i misinterpreted what you said as them using quantum effects in processors rather than knowing about them in order to avoid them.
 
Don't worry @Raymond Lin even the scientists can't agree about it, and no one will ever really know. It's a great philosophical debate though - my take on it, does it really matter? We (humans) struggle with just being human, let alone trying to understand concepts that are beyond our dreams.
 
i do think we will get somewhere once we have the technology and human brain power to actually understand it.

Researchers think most of the cosmos is made up of matter / energy that cannot be "sensed" with our conventional instruments, leading to the names dark matter and dark energy. Only 5% of the universe is made up of matter such as planets, stars and galaxies.

so we cant even delve into this because we just dont have all the tools and intelligence to do it yet.
 
i do like the cyclic universe theory where somehow all the background radiation left over from all the infinate? black holes evaporating, shrinks down to another little ball of everything and explodes again.

or something pressed an on button,

sorry if a repost
 
If there is such a thing as infinite universes, as in string theory, then in the saying of "what makes you, you" isn't a soul or anything like that then when the universe contracts and re expands again then we all get reincarnated, in a fashion with what "makes you, you" again. :D

Maybe deja vu is a remnant of a universe we were in 43e4533543 universes ago.
 
Maybe it was like a bubble that popped and created the universe. When a bubble pops in water or in general it makes lots of little ones.
 
dunker said:
i do like the cyclic universe theory where somehow all the background radiation left over from all the infinate? black holes evaporating, shrinks down to another little ball of everything and explodes again.

or something pressed an on button,

sorry if a repost
Click to expand...

Just watched this whole video while exercising and I've got to say it was very well made but has left me more confused and is basically saying we can't perceive our reality properly due to evolution and then went off on a tangent about us being in a simulation, potentially like the matrix.

I need to do some more research on the guy creating the patterns towards the end as it might help!

The only thing I would say is, in my opinion, humans are sometimes wrong. We make mistakes. I hate how people say "that's not possible due to the laws of physics" etc. Who made up the laws of physics? Oh yeah, humans did and we might be wrong.

I'm not saying Albert is wrong but he may have come up with different answers if he had the technology of today or even 30 years from now.
 
Nemiyen said:
Just watched this whole video while exercising and I've got to say it was very well made but has left me more confused and is basically saying we can't perceive our reality properly due to evolution and then went off on a tangent about us being in a simulation, potentially like the matrix.

I need to do some more research on the guy creating the patterns towards the end as it might help!

The only thing I would say is, in my opinion, humans are sometimes wrong. We make mistakes. I hate how people say "that's not possible due to the laws of physics" etc. Who made up the laws of physics? Oh yeah, humans did and we might be wrong.

I'm not saying Albert is wrong but he may have come up with different answers if he had the technology of today or even 30 years from now.
Click to expand...

After an explanation has been tested millions or billions of times by many different people in many different ways and passes every test every time and correctly predicts what will happen in the future, it's not really just something made up. It's still possible that it's wrong, but there are degrees of possibility.

Also, scientific laws are very different to scientific theories. Laws explain nothing. They're not meant to. They're just descriptions of things that happen. They're not really just made up either.

Einstein's work correctly predicted outcomes that were impossible to test with the technology that existed at the time. The scenario you outlined (future technology) has already happened.

There's always the possibility of error, but probably not much of one in stuff that's firmly pencilled in after massive amounts of testing and precisely correct predictions of future outcomes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom