|
Beyond the Universe
|
Love topics like these as well! Although I don't agree with the "multiverse" or "universal simulation" theories, I always wonder about the size of universal objects compared to Earth and how small, insignificant we and our planet are compared to the vast reaches of the dark realm.
 (05-08-2018, 09:49 AM)Polar Wrote: Love topics like these as well! Although I don't agree with the "multiverse" or "universal simulation" theories, I always wonder about the size of universal objects compared to Earth and how small, insignificant we and our planet are compared to the vast reaches of the dark realm. Experts themselves aren't at agreement with each other! But what fascinates me is how insignificant our belief is, vis-a-vis the actual fact. Before relativity happened the whole scientific community had a wrong concept. Maybe someday in future even it will be proved erroneous! Many people even struggle to visualise time as a dimension... I have been laughed at (initially) when i said Earth's revolution in helical shaped on 4d graph! Nowadays, i try not to have an opinion. What do i know? BTW, this is good simplified explanation. Loved it!
@Rishi,
Yeah, time is a dimension we still don't really understand yet, but it is real. I do think some conspiracy theories are true regarding space (i.e., "NASA is hiding stuff" or "There is life on other planets"), but 90% of them fall flat on actual, concrete scientific proof.
Interesting article about the odd magnetic field of Ganymede and how the field shapes it's land anatomy...
Ganymede: Jupiter’s Biggest Moon Reveals Its Secrets For The First Time In 20 Years (05-08-2018, 10:22 AM)Polar Wrote: @Rishi, This should help. Just imagine how the sun is moving through space as time passes. 
@sanjay
I already knew this video. It is simply sensational ..... a trip in every way. A message for all to develop humility. Humility of attitude, of thought and of knowledge. There are also no words to describe the melody of Mr. Evangelos Odysseas Papathanassiou.  *This image is copyright of its original author If light can travel freely through space, why isn't the Earth perfectly lit all the time? Where does all the light from all the stars get lost?  *This image is copyright of its original author Lee Mosley, Author: The Structure of Space (Amazon) Congratulations! You've discovered Olber’s Paradox Some time ago, scientists believed that the Universe might be infinite in extent and infinitely old. If that were so, they — Olber among them — reasoned that looking out into the night sky, we should see so many hundreds of billions of stars and more stars between them and more between them that all we would see is infinite starlight; a brightly-lit sky in every direction.The paradox is that we did not see such a thing when we believed we should. Now, we have an answer. Actually, several answers… First, the universe is not infinitely old; it’s only thirteen and a half billion years old, so it hasn't had enough time to make enough stars, though there certainly are plenty of them. Second, the universe is not infinite; the universe (for us) extends to a visual limit. We just can’t observe anything past that visual horizon, so the number of stars we see (including all frequencies of radiation) is limited. Third, there is a goodly amount of gas and dust throughout the universe, dimming starlight which passes through it. Fourth, starlight grows dimmer as a natural function of distance. Very distant stars are not visible to the eye and are a challenge to register even on the most sensitive of instruments. Fifth, as we look into the distance, we are also peering into the deep past; into a younger universe that had even less time to make stars. Finally, starlight grows “old.” It dulls into the deep red end of the spectrum, becoming feeble and weaker in energy. So, maybe no paradox after all. But you’re in good company with Olber and with lots of other scientists who wondered exactly the same thing
Proxima Centauri b: The Habitability Question
This is a pretty recent and interesting article about our nearest possible Earth-like planet, Proxima Centauri b in the Proxima Centauri star system. Its water composition could be up to 30% (!!!) compared to Earth's 1% of its total mass, so this Proxima Centauri b should definitely have plenty of water deep under its surface as well. However, the problems are the flares emitted from the sun (it's much closer to its sun than we are), which could possibly tear/have torn up any atmosphere which it once had or that it still continues to have.  
@Rishi wrote:
"Maya actually can be best described as "unreal", not illusion, which can be misinterpreted as hallucination. (Language barrier, can't explain better) Like you don't know while dreaming that everything around you is not real, only when you wake up do you realise. Similarly everything around you now is not real, in the "time before time" the universe was nothing & that's were it'll go back one the hourglass is drained. Think of the internet... one solar flare & everything we think exists could go *poof* Every action one makes is for naught, like a stone in a river, it may cause a turbulence & the water finally flows again as if the stone never existed." Probably you know the funny story with professor George Berkeley and his friend prof X. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Berkeley Irish philosopher George Berkeley had a theory similar to ideas of Vedanta and insisted that external world around us is unreal, it's exist only in our mind and is created by our mind, so if our senses bring wrong information to the brain there is no way to prove the existence of the material world. Prof Berkeley often liked to discuss and argue on the topic with his friend prof X in the Trinity college. One day after similar fierce discussion both men got out of the building of university. Outside was raining really strong. Than George Berkeley opened his umbrella to hide from the pouring rain. Suddenly prof X asked him laughing: - Prof Berkeley, why did you open your umbrella if the rain does not exist according your theory? Berkeley in first moment got confused of such a question but then answered firmly: - You see my friend - the rain for sure does not "exist" only "wets"...  The philosophy of Ancient India is so sophisticated than only few people in the world understand it same as theory of relativity of Einstein physicists say is understand properly only by 50-100 scientists. Its probably the highest point the human speculation has ever reached. (10-05-2018, 12:07 PM)Wolverine Wrote: Berkeley in first moment got confused of such a question but then answered firmly: That's not a good reply. Actually the primary school of thought that opposed this concept, used to argue that the laws of cause & effect wouldn't apply for Maya. You can't kill yourself by jumping of a cliff in your dream or hallucination, but "real" rain wets. Counter-argument is, that's the only form of "dream" humans witness, where the laws don't apply. Some being might have dream where they do hold true... or are different. In that case, the rain in your dream too would wet you (or might burn you), but it'd still be a vision in a sleeping man's head. Like the dreams in inception... That reminds me, watch the 2018 movie "Ghost Stories". That'll definitely help! "Just as a born-blind man cannot imagine a rainbow, can we not comprehend a more real world as long as we are in an unreal one until the maya (dream) shatters." -original quote translated something like this. Forgot source.
(10-05-2018, 01:14 PM)Rishi Wrote: That's not a good reply. For sure is not good, that's why Berkeley was a subject of many jokes... Western civilization is materialistic by nature and Western people tend to trust 100% to their eyes and ears while Indian civilization is a spiritual and Indians were always tending to go beyond the visible things. Look at Taj Mahal - what we see - something almost unreal, kind of mirage or maya, a building who is going in any moment to "evaporate" in the air. Such a building is not possible to be created outside of India.  *This image is copyright of its original author Conseption of "maya" is the soul of India. Recently I red a historian Valdemar Hansen's book "The peacock throne'", he says: "Whatever it is, it seems native to India: an enigma embracing its own history yet curiosly impervious to any moment in time. The Taj suggests an endurance beyond now and then, beyond tideless Jamuna river that seeps as its foundations. Now and then are maya - illusion, a freakish pattern of impermanence. Three hundred and more years of history can be palimpsested with the transparency of layers of cellophane, and may well be an Indian illusion." So, in what way should go India now in 21 century, could she become a new China? Indians were always been very good in dealing with things who are invisible and cant be touched with hand - philosophy, mathematics etc and were always very weak with dealing with everytning which can be touched by hand. Could modern India can start produce gigantic quantities of material goods as China - refrigerators, radios, cars and become an industrial super power as China - I don't think that it could hapenn in full degree. India should follow her own way - become a economic superpower in producing not goods, but services who cant be touched by hand - IT technology, softwear, film industry and others - hence to become an post-industrial age economy of information. Do not try to became as the West or China. Indian film industry should also try to became competitive in the world markets and probably later in this century Bollywood to become equal to Holywood, but that needs a lot of reforms and ambition.
I wouldn't generalize like that, Wolverine. There is plenty of spirituality in the west, as well as materialistic people in India. I wish it was the way you're describing it, but I just don't think it's that simple.
(09-18-2014, 01:06 AM)Pckts Wrote: Largest known Stars  *This image is copyright of its original author Roberta Humpreys thinks Vy Canis Majoris up to 2100 solar radii. I don't say Uy Scuti is largest star.Because Uy Scuti don't have a catalog. First,Vy Canis Majoris upped to 2200-4000 solar radii(If this true,Quasi-Star or other Hypothetical stars don't like huge) |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 3 Guest(s) |