Airbrush

There are many functions that head for infinity as a numerator approaches zero. Try to apply that math to the actual big bang. Look at the biggest picture possible, the observable universe. It resembles a homogenious sponge-like structure of galaxy clusters. If you had to bet on only one or the other, what would you bet on? 1 That homogenious, isotropic structure extends like that all the way to infinity? Or 2 That structure changes over distance, becoming scarcer or denser?

This is what Trump plans for his enemies. The Capitol police were physically abused by his mob for being "so bad and so evil" for defending Trump's enemies INSIDE the Capitol! Is this respect for law enforcement? WHO exactly are "so bad and so evil"? Earlier he said "Move the fooking mags, let my people in! I don't care if they are armed! They are not here to hurt me!" (They were armed to hurt Trump's enemies, which is ok.) "I know your pain. I know you are hurt. We had an election that was stolen from us. It was a landslide election, and everyone knows it, especially the other side. You have to go home now. We have to have peace....This was a fraudulent election...Go home...We love you. You are very special. You see what happens. You see how others are treated that are so bad and so evil [WTF?!! Who is so bad and evil? The Capitol police? He was actually implying "look how my enemies SHOULD be beaten with poles!!] ...But go home in peace." Unidentified female rioter "We need weapons! We need strong, angry patriots!"

This is an interesting explanation. Thank you. Can anyone state this in terms more understandable to non-experts? What are "killing fields"? How many geometries can a region of the universe have?

When GR says "general relativity does not offer a single definition of the term mass, but offers several different definitions that are applicable under different circumstances," does than mean that mass is different depending on how close to the speed of light it is traveling thru space? If so, I don't see how that would impact the concept of a finite amount of mass in the universe. You mean an expansion of matter, contained within space, is moving at relativistic speeds, through space, so we don't know how massive it is because we don't know how fast it is moving?

Thanks for the info. That is so strange and surreal. This is from your link: "...general relativity does not offer a single definition of the term mass, but offers several different definitions that are applicable under different circumstances. Under some circumstances, the mass of a system in general relativity may not even be defined." That seems obvious and makes perfect sense. Hahaha.

That is an amazing thing to consider, and a very new concept for me. How do you know that? When it curves around it ends up on a different dimension or groove in the record?

Thanks for posting that. I'm sure I saw every episode of X-Files, I just don't remember that part. But good to hear it. Dan Marfisi and vocal by Glenn Jordan "Staring At The Stars"

Good answer! Thanks for the reply. Thank you Whoops, I meant TREE(3). They know it is finite, but I don't understand how they know that, since it blows past Graham's number like it's not even there. Matter in the universe is probably finite, but maybe space by itself can stretch beyond that to infinity, assuming flat or hyperbolic universe? A positively curved universe is certainly finite in mass and size. Is "infinity," like a singularity, just an abstract idea?

My next question is, can something finite in mass (or size) expand to an infinite size? And please explain for me without advanced math. Thank you. Can anyone explain how mathematicians know that the number TREE3 is finite?

We may never know. Why do scientists believe that the unfathomable number TREE3 is not infinite? If you are walking along a sandy beach, and you scoop up a handful of sand, how much about our universe does that little handful of sand tell you? It tells us about the minerals in sand and some other things, such as the atomic structure of this kind of matter. It does NOT tell us about EVERYWHERE in the universe. Our observable universe is just a handful of sand, in a universe that extends to infinity in every direction (assuming a flat or hyperbolic universe). Our observable universe is a tiny pinprick in the vastness of infinity. For this reason, I think that our universe, the large-scale, sponge-like structure we see is probably finite. It just becomes less dense in one direction, until there is no matter at all, and empty space until you reach the edge of an adjacent big bang.

Fair enough. My next question is how representative is our observable universe in telling us what an infinite (flat or hyperbolic) universe is like a googol lightyears away? Grahams number of lightyears away? It seems to me that INFINITY requires a lot (an infinite number) of alignments for our big bang to stretch to infinity, as we see it.

Yes, so assume the case the universe was either flat or hyperbolic, that allows for the possibility the universe was infinite, but how about the PROBABILITY of it? Infinity is a long way from home.

Thanks for your question! Nobody has ever wanted to discuss infinity here, regarding the universe, although I introduced it many times over the years. Because if the universe was NOT flat, then there is no infinity for our observable big bang. We cannot see any curvature yet, but maybe it is so large that it is still undetectable. Infinite size is possible only with a flat universe. Am I correct? The difference between infinity and a very, VERY large universe, is INFINITE. "Infinity" is a problematic word and probably should not even be considered. The number of Planck Volumes in our observable universe is only about 10^185 (or 10 to the power of 185). That means that if you fill the observable universe with a tiny dust that is only ONE Planck Length in size, and volume, you can pack only 10^185 into it. ".... I don’t see how the universe could be infinite and yet constantly expanding. I believe it is constantly expanding but something that is infinite in size cannot be measured and you cannot just say it is now Infinite+1 and Infinite+2. Infinity is infinity. If the universe was infinite it wouldn’t need to expand anymore. It’s as big as it ever could and will be in that case." Logically, how can the universe be infinite in size? - Astronomy Stack Exchange

Let me try to answer my own question. This assumes a FLAT universe. The way to expand to an infinite size is the big bang was infinite in size at the first Planck Time! How else?

Can you say anything about the probability of the "universe" being finite or infinite in size? Does it seem more likely to you that it would be FINITE in size? It seems to me, that what we can see does not reveal what it far beyond. Probably the universe does not look quite the same here as it does a googol light years away, it seems to me. It could be doing things other than only expanding. Or do you think it is a coin flip whether it is actually infinite or finite in size?

We always hear that the big bang started from a tiny point, smaller than a proton, that experienced cosmic inflation and expanded many times the speed of light for a tiny fraction of a second. Oh, I see, that was only the observable portion of the entire universe. Considering that anything finite can never expand to an infinite size, does that not indicate that the region of the universe we live in is probably not indicative of our universe out to a distance of, for example, a googol light years? Or Graham's number of light years? It would appear that our universe probably has a finite size. Or maybe it has reached infinity through some means we don't understand? Was the beginning of the entire universe not a tiny point, smaller than a proton, but for the universe to be infinite in size, the beginning had to be infinite in size, which doesn't make sense.

What about the 2024 election? I had a vision there was trouble, but I didn't guess who was the victim Warning, warning, it was a warning, we are living on borrowed time

All we know is the universe was denser and hotter near time zero. We don't know it's shape, or if it was a point, or a sphere, or jagged and irregular as a lightning bolt. If the universe is currently infinite in size, then it was also infinite in size at the start. Something finite in size cannot grow to an infinite size. That's why it seems more likely that the universe is not infinite in size. Only the observable universe was a tiny point near time zero.

I always loved math. I like to calculate while I jog around my neighborhood almost every morning. I know the distance is 2.4 miles or 4 km. I know where the quarter distance is, half distance, and 3/4 distance. At one quarter I check my time and calculate my pace by multiplying my time by 4. At the half distance I simply double my time to get my overall pace. At 3/4 I have a list that tells me what my final time will be at current pace. Each time I compare my actual pace with what I forecasted and see how accurate my forecast is. It's fun!

That sounds like a good idea for capturing carbon. I had thought there could be a way to make desalinization economical enough that we can convert desert into lush rain forests to accelerate carbon capture. But these natural methods seem too SLOW. So, is there a way, after energy becomes dirt cheap thru fusion reactors, to simply build a large number of machines that can pull the carbon out of the air faster than nature can? The only limit is energy and the materials to build carbon capture machines. When you say "carbon capture" does that mean separating the CO2 into carbon and O2? Or does it mean pulling CO2 out of the atmosphere and storing it under ground? Will the day come when earth vegetation gets so accustomed to high CO2 in the air that when we finally, thru technology, pull huge amounts of CO2 out of the air, that plants will suffer because they had evolved and adapted to high CO2 atmosphere?

Was the Titan sub descending too fast? Did anyone check out this Youtube transcript? Authentic or fake? Did they implode at about 9:47? Was the crew in panic mode for about 20 minutes? According to the transcript, at 9:28 was the first alarm: "We're noting an alarm from the rtm." Last message from Titan at 9:46am: "...reading red on the A power bus. I switched to B. at 3457m more sounds aft"

What is the most cost-effective way to cool a home? We live in very hot climate in this Socal valley. We had many days over 100 F and days over 110 F. We have 2 large evaporative coolers, many electric fans, and central A/C. We are able to stay cool on the hottest days using just our 2 evaporative coolers and maybe a couple of hours of A/C on the hottest days. It seems we are saving energy by not using A/C all day, but rather using most evaporative coolers? Should energy companies be encouraging customers to use evaporative coolers?