DevilSolution

I'll try explain this as best i can without sounding too simple. Essentially we're saying that after 7 billion years this "dark energy" has started to expand the universe at some exponential rate (cant remember the exact exponent). Anyway as a parallel, if we take a normal explosion for example and scale down the time into nanoseconds (or some other minute time variable) then we would be able to see the initial reaction happen such that the chemicals react (with one another or heat etc) we would see the actual chain reaction in nano seconds so initially we're seeing one chemical react with the next creating a larger and larger force as it goes. If it took say 7 nanoseconds for the entire reaction to happen, then we would have seen only a small amount of energy exerted up until that point and then after that there would be the entire force acting equally in each direction at an exponential rate until the energy was completely transformed so that the heat and expanding force have no energy left. Presuming that the exponential force, heat and whatever gasses are made is 10 times longer in nanoseconds then the total reaction took 77 nanoseconds, 7 of which were the initial chain reaction of atoms and the other 70 the actual force emitted (im guessing that the reaction will slow down as less energy is available so that initially for the first 35 nano seconds the force is exponential and then the other 35 the force slows down until its reached its limit). So using this analogy, could we not say that its possible that the time frame in which were measuring the universe in, is infact relative to some conditions required of the universe for it to start "chain reacting", 1 possible condition (which i mentioned in my other post) could be that there needs to be so many supernova's before theres enough black holes to start pumping out huge jets of energy at close to the speed of light, forcing galaxies away from each other at the rate the solar systems are being sucked in by the the black hole. Or alternatively, rather than superimposing a hypothetical chain reaction, just equate the chemical explosion to this "dark energy" and say that the chain reaction is some unknown variable, (such that the amount of time is long enough that the amount transformation of matter into EMW has decreased the overall mass enough for gravity to weaken, and perhaps the effect of the transformation of matter into EMW also acts as a tiny force. Like a rowing boat of sorts, except the paddles are the amount of matter turned into gamma rays which exerts a tiny a force in the opposite direction (but there would be ALOT of these transformations), This is another hypothetical but i simply mean that there are some pre-disposed variables for the amount of time its taken, the 7 billion or so years for this dark energy to start becoming a expanding force. Which could then imply that the "dark energy" is simply an expansion force based on some pre-defined variables and that it only has a limited amount of energy (which would certainly be true if the black hole hypothesis were true because essentially were all just waiting to get sucked into a black hole and become energy of some description, but once the matter runs out, so does the "fuel" for dark energy.) Anyway thought i'd throw it out there. Mainly because im not keen on creating random names for forces that have probable cause and might just be an illusion relative to how we perceive time. One final note, if dark energy is essentially doing the inverse of gravity but exponentially so, wouldnt that infer that we wouldnt actually collide with the andromeda galaxy, or are we too close in terms of time relative to the force of dark energy? Regards.

2 simple questions really, 1) Shouldn't black holes essentially counter balance dark energy? Given the huge amount of gravity they have. 2) Could the streams of energy that are emitted from black holes be dark energy? From my basic understanding black holes release jets of energy almost at the speed of light, this would seem to act as a propelling agent other against other galaxies or forces. (from what i hear the dark energy started to make a major impact after 7 billion years, this could be the amount of time needed for there to be enough supernova's and hence galaxies with sizeable black holes) (i know these 2 idea's are contradictory, im just a little confused) Regards.

Slightly off topic but if an antimatter particle and its counter part collide, although there will be some energy emitted, if that energy is used up independently I.E it doesnt effect anything else in the universe, such that the exertion force didnt reach an object with which to act upon or if the gamma particles wind up in a black hole so the photons dont reach anything either. Wouldnt that count as defying the 2nd law? matter is destroyed and the entropy decreases?

I imagine that supernova's are quite hot. Obviously not energy persay but its disperses plenty of it very quickly.

No i'm fine, the gantt chart was one of three suggestions that are all equal in usefulness. The gantt chart can obviously be used by a single person (as i did at uni for modules and dates etc) but also if a few members wanted to collaborate on a project the feature would be of extra advantage. Regards.

Just a handy tool with the added bonus of the fact some one might come along and either help out or join a project or learning curve etc.

Depends if you sent it to the recycle bin Also as others have mentioned, its related to 64bit compatibility so if you've deleted some graphics files for a program that runs in 32 bit compatibility mode, chances are yes. Otherwise non. Quite alot does get installed there, Most my programs are.

I think having a set of goal written clearly, in a step by step process is a great help when learning, especially from the bottom up. It doesnt have to be a project, it can be set criteria for when you want to have learned specific things by or have specific things finished by.

http://www.thegamecreators.com/?m=view_product&id=2128 c++

By the vague definition of "symmetry of noise" then yes. Music generally has some sense of symmetry in terms of one instrument to another or frequency etc but its not always true.

HMM interesting, the values are close to USD/GBP or thereabouts 1/1.5 ish. There are other types of trades that can be made like binary options and bonds etc so it might be some specific type of trade option against said currency. How did you get the xml? Each broken (or bank) allows you different types of trade options based on the account type and deposit etc, Some brokers even let you trade shares with leverage so it could be quite a few things, the exact values though should give some indication.

Ofcourse you must have knowledge of it, but you must also be careful how concretely you accept that knowledge. Most forms of progression are usually extensions of the previous, but sometimes what the progression defines as new contradicts this previous knowledge. (as with some scientific theories now). Both cant be right? Yet we will use them both. (for example Newtonian physics vs general relativity (and QM))

Its the subconscious process of building and strengthening concepts through re-iteration, Once that concept is strong enough you'll never be able to break it. The process behind thinking outside the box is to abstract one idea to another, This becomes harder and harder the more enforced a concept or belief is. Therefore you want one foot in and one foot out. One that questions every new belief and one that can abstract that belief with another. Otherwise we would all be robots without ever creating new idea's because.....why should we sharpen a rock when for thousands of years we've survived without needing to. One foot says were using this rock because its always worked and the other asks what can we do with it. Alot of our knowledge and beliefs are by-proxy to some extent or another, through the beliefs of our society, friends, family etc. Most people wont question these beliefs because they are so deeply entrenched within out subconscious, some however might break the cycle and ask why shouldnt women have the same rights as men? why should we be allowed to print money but they aren't? and so on. But this isnt intrinsic in everyone, the necessity to question everything is fundamental to thinking outside the box. And then ofcourse your left with various sets of groups you can define based on what they question, what they did with the knowledge and how they behave because of it. All that being said you must have some fundamental basis from which to start, you must endeavour to understand what is perceived as truth and then apply any abstract notion of thought you have upon that knowledge to create new idea's and beliefs. Then you can open discus those idea;s with people or keep them to yourself. Which usually happens once people realise your actually quite insane and your concept of reality is not theirs. (such as science vs religion within history)

I'd suggest its related to automated trade mechanism, by which the bank would have some automation approach to a currency, possibly the arbitrage of each currency to another through this ATM symbol. (at a guess). Banks may have rates for exchange of currencies via ATM's if you can take out different currencies through an ATM. But i have no idea, its not a currency anyway. Not in any conventional sense. Was there just symbol data or any descriptive data in the xml?

I was implying the universe is god, like pantheism? Not so much faith as a belief. It comes under glossary of philosophy on wiki worth a read and totally relevant to this thread. Some people mis-interpret the use of the word god, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism (what faith do i need to believe in a god of this description?) Sorry got lost on wiki, oh also theres; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandeism which is a cop out version were they unify "creation" and "being" into one, where as pantheism simply states that the universe and everything within is by definition god, pandeism says god created the universe then became it. Are you familiar with extropy strange? may also want to read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extropianism

1) was rhetoric 2) im still posting nonsense wheeyyyyy. But i will go to sleep soon

Pretty dramatic response to free thinkers, my post wasn't meant to offend anyone, i think its a pretty accurate representation of the truth. I wasnt being specific. If you look at any establishment its usually embellished within itself or perhaps tunnel vision is a better way of describing it, a politician cares for politics not science or understanding, a scientist cares for maths of nature, a philosopher cares only to think, an actor acts...Each discipline or sub discipline constrains tighter and tighter rules on what is and isnt allowed (or true) such as a politician cant get drunk in public. To expand on that, eventually after many years of learning and understanding, whatever it is that you've learned then becomes distilled as fact. History is a great a example, if you study history to high level, degree or above, then you will take what you have learn as being fact. Someone thinking outside the history box might question why japan would attack pearl harbour for example, when you actually look at it, why would they? if they were going to be involved in the war (and were already in the midst of a land grab with china) why would they then attack the worlds most powerful nation? now ask a student of history and they will tell you exact dates and that they needed to get to the dutch east indies and such but when you sit back an analyse the information it doesnt add up. Atleast not to me a non historian. But thats from a non historians perspective, I ovcourse dont have dates and names so by extension what i have to say really amounts to nothing in the historians eyes. In all fairness it may amount to nothing anyway BUT if i were to explain the thinking to them, it was fall on deaf ears because they have the facts. Now im not trying to say history is false or Einsteins theories are false, im simply showing how someone in the box are just that, in the box, To think outside the box you must abstract what you know and then apply logic to it. Which is precisely how i previously defined it. Anyone capable of abstract thinking has the ability to think outside the box, be able to make obscure assumptions or relationships that people without that ability will never comprehend. And its people like Einstein who did that, he took what was at the time a fact of science and changed it into what it is now using abstract thinking. He completely re-invented parts of science. I dont or havent claimed that people without that ability or people who dont care for that ability are any less intelligent or highly capable, but they will always fit inside that box. And then there are some who with a little nudge or push in the right direction could actually access idea's and concepts they didnt think they would be able to understand and from there they can build their own new idea's. If you want to define everyone who claims to "think outside the box" as people with less knowledge that come say a science forum and claim to have a ToE or to have solved some unsolved problem within science then i can perfectly understand. Everyone would likes to invent the wheel. and we know we know the wheel already exists but to them, its like unravelling some truth. I dont claim to be an abstract thinker or a scientist so i know where i stand, i simply want answers to questions. Sometimes an answer leads to a question to another answer etc

haha nice, we had a lodger work 2 shifts, sometimes we'd find him asleep in the driveway when his bedroom was less than 30 steps. Poor dude. I think i'll check in with the fairies, make sure they're taking care of things. peace

The universe is the mind of god, it cant create another universe by thinking it, therefore there is only one. Or only 1 that we need care about.. Thats my logic.

Duly noted, i dont get nose bleeds and practically had to stay awake. Now its a case of being bothered to go back to programming and finish off or just sleep it off. Whats the longest you've held out? i must admit im on my third day so really if i slept now it would be like 2 and a half or such.

More nomenclature, i thought we "might" have got past the repertoire. Had i used rotate as i earlier stated, this too could have been avoided, but obviously my choice of words hinders my scientific endeavours. So whats our frequency? 1 cycle a year? Do we also have an angular frequency too given that we "spin" on our axis? and if so how does that relate to other planetary frequencies? I'm sure were close to defining a wave here. Then again im probably way out in my thinking.

Well no, because god made everything therefore its his particle. Is 3 days without sleep safe?

Probably not gas based planets at a guess?

I dont really claim to know a great deal, just drawing a parallel. As for realizing the measurement its quite simple, once the smallest distance and appropriate method were to be found, whatever that distance is, is a measure of the SOL, some tiny proportion. lets say a centillion of a second, namely because it sounds good and is tiny, well we know how big a centillion is so we just scale it into seconds based on that. Every second we have experienced a centillion "moments" of time. Same applies to measurement except you'd scale a meter different to a second, as its an actual distance a centillion of meter would expressively larger than a second, containing multiples of centillions i'd imagine. I missed Sensei's comment on plank time and space which seems to relate closely so ill research them for now. Until the physics is possible or as the OP stated we actually define what the physical limits are, they fit the void.