Neurocomp2003

and for whats missing? well as it stands we are missing stuff, for all the motion in the universe the "VISIBLE MATTER" (based on conservative law) cannot account for it all thats why there is such a high pursuit for the theory of dark matter. Some ideas that i believe are possible 1) LIGHT actually has negligible mass 2) multiuniverses 3) Dark Matter in the essence like meteors and planets that we can't see because the light does not reflect towards us 4) "negative matter"

welll your right in a sense that the system would start out 3D, over time however, because of the rotational axis/heavier objects concept, things start to become uniform.. another example to further my explanation is the centrifuge(unless you know some stuff about dynamical systems/chaotic theory) which has to do with matter-heavier matter moves to the bottom of the glass while lighter matter moves to the top. Now in our case if you think of a cylinder spinnin on its middle axis the matter starts to collect in this 3D rotational way like the dog spraying water but now in terms of matter and the centrifuge, heavier stuff starts to move to the normal middle plane of the axis(by "gravitational pull") like you see the centrifuge matter move to the bottom but in this case the middle because on earth you'd have to have a tube that runs from the southpole to north poel to see this effect. And as heavier stuff moves closer it pulls in other sorts of matter. so in essence you got 3 things working here, (1) cylindrical rotation-something heavy in the middle creates this effect. (2) planar middle rotation-the centrifuge idea that heavier stuff tends to move towards the middle normal plane. (3) matter at the poles- you still can get local systems rotating near the poles but because of the centrifuge idea they still have attraction tot he middle. 2 things to note A)This is over a large amount of time so is very slow. B)The get a better idea of these effects you need to know some general physics/mechanics concepts of conservation.

Just a suggestion....i think a new forum should be added called other Chaotic & Complex Systems or Cognitive Science. because each of these fields are an interdisciplinary mix of all the rest.

QUESTIONS(hypothetical) if scientists do solve the universe into fundamental equations and the like, that is the behaviour of particle interaction. What would be left for us to do?? Would we keep jamming as many particles together to try and disprove our final theory or would be go to the next scale(molecular scale) and jamm things together to see what chaotic and complex systems we could make?

just go buy HL1 for 20bucks CDN

the VR world is a cool idea, Cyborgs and brain modelling and Molecular Neural nets The mars one is a bit far fetched cuz you would have to have some dedicated people to go live on mars to manage the "cities" there as your tourist would like a clean place to live. The moon one is better.

Gary Flake's Computational Beauty of nature...great book about simulations. Gerstner's Spiking Neurons book---> TOO HARD Steve Geary--> the body electric good cybernetics type book on uptodate researchers and their studies like cell growth on chips. I am waiting upon Steve Grand's new book and Strogatz Sync book

lots of books out there if you have the time to read it but the book i especially like is my textbook frm university can't remember what its called but the other is B. W. Carroll & D.A. Ostlie, think the title is Modern Astrophysics but there are alot of papers out there too, search for xxx.lanl.gov i think well lanl and papers and then type wormholes. But the idea has alot to do with negative mattter. However it is believed that a wormhole is never sustainable because all the positive energy will collapse onto the exit and thus you will be trapped between the singularity region and the exit. As for folding, the paper example is the best one where you take a needle and thread and tie the end onto one have of the paper and then poke a hole on the other half and pull the two halfs together. The string represents the path that will be traversed. i do not believe in the concept though of actually making the path shorter, i think it will be more of how fast you are going. Which brings me to time travel which i do not logically think is possible because combining this with the multiuniverse idea how would you ever know that you were in the same place. And how could you ever describe the events that would change with many time travellers that started their journeys at the same time but travelled to different times. One mans journery into the past would be repeatedly distorted by another mans journey into the past of the other mans past.

Just outta curiosity do you think that man can ever develop a huge neural net based on stars or other spacial phenomas....perhaps by building large face plates to direct the intensity of light in a certain direction

yay for Serway, researcher's gift to undergrads

Janus is right in that the planetary objects/meteors were made outta the nebula/space that was perhaps previously pushed out but not necessarily by a supernova some time ago. FOr you explosion idea, not all explosions are spherical symmetrical. If it was static,symmetrical in nature and slow moving then yes it would seem relatively symmetrical. But if it was rotating relatively fast then no it would it. THink about a dog when it gets wet and it twists its body, the water doesn't come off very symmetrically As for your rotation question it has to do with rotational axis as seen in great effect by i think what is called the accretion disk (haven't taken astrophysics in a while). basically as one large thing starts spinning, the small things around it start moving and in time become relatively coherent with the axis of rotation of the large object in your case the sun. But the small things themselves can great a rotational system of their own. So you must thing in terms of scales. FOr example galaxies spin around a point/axis, and each galaxy has its own axis and each star system has its own and so on. Thats why our universe and our solar systems do not lie in perfect planes. since these smaller systems can have their own behaviour in their local region hope that helps.

There is one thing you could do....a minor in astrophysics/astronomy...thats what i did. If your heart truly lies in this area as mine did but you don't know whether you can see yourself pursuing such a career as of yet the minor would be your best bet. THe most important thing to note is if you just wanna be an observer or actually work in the research fields-> astrochemistry, astrophysics,astrobiology, radioastronomy. If you just wanna be an observer then i suggest the minor or just develop it as a hobbie. I've heard that sitting at a telescope on ends can make you abit crazy. Now if you wanna be a researcher then do it as a major. Or as a minor with a related field. If your looking into engineering->aeronautics will keep you close to astronomy as will space "??" i can't remmeber the name. But if your into computers, try simulations(computer science/science blend), computer simulations are very important to alot of fields and this way you can still focus on astronomy but also have the backup of progrmaming