-
Posts
10567 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by ydoaPs
-
gravity isn't a dimension. and u r way off. sorry
-
so, u r mad bcuz i didn't put "WARNING: THIS CAN'T BE PROVEN" at the top of the post?
-
what you are talking about is the four extended dimensions. and is that or is that not everything? therefore universe lives up to its name. there are two configurations for the dimensions. calibi-yau manifolds or brane theory. brane is separated a little bit by if u want ten or eleven dimensions. but it goes like this: there are two four-dimensional "realities" less than a milimeter apart separated by two (or three depening on the string theory) dimensions
-
how can i prove it to be fact when it is beyond practical experimentaion? I can see that you wont even consider it until i prove it, so what do you want me to do, place a telescope in orbit around a black hole and see how fast the universe is expanding from that reference frame and compare it to what i would find here?
-
then what is your definition of universe?
-
u arn't even going to consider it are you? ok, actual experimentation. how can i experiment it?
-
i dont understand how there can be more than one everything(unless u r talking about brane theory in which there is a four dimensional "reality" less than a milimeter away separtaed from us by two dimensions)
-
What Einstien did was mental experiments. i suggest u do your own. use these facts: spacetime is expanding gravity contracts spacetime contracted time runs relatively slower than time that isn't contracted different observers percieve the same event defferently imagine yourself as two observers. one on a planet and one in the space between two clusters of galaxies. see what happens
-
how can there be more than one universe. define a universe if it isn't the extent of the four unfurled dimensions? I am not being sarcastic or anything, i just want to know.
-
Did Einstien test? no, that was done mostly after his death. It's not crazy, it is a logical use of relativity on a proven fact.
-
our technology hasn't progressed far enough to see many extrasolar terrestrial planets. no one said the life or conditions would be identical. we don't need identical conditions (even though there will be), because lefe has proven to exist anywhere on our planet. in every extreme where it was thought life couldn't exist, we found it. and the only reason the only proof we have is possibly fossilized microbes is that that we haven't left the syestem. we haven't even checked the most logical place for life to exist other than earth (Europa).
-
JaKiri, there are hundreds of billions of stars in our galaxy billions of galaxies that we can see (don't forget that we can't see most of the universe). almost every star that a has been searched for a planet has had one and we aren't even that good at it yet. of those possibly countless planets, there has to be life. it is a mathematical certianty (i can't remember the formula for it though). and u think that there is no other intelligent life exists in the universe? u might as well label yourself an anthropolater.
-
"Fabric of the Cosmos"--brian greene
-
hey fagel, atom doesn't fit the definion, but universe does
-
If the universe is expanding, what are we filling up?
ydoaPs replied to Soulja's topic in Astronomy and Cosmology
the second is wat i was talking about on my tangent -
hey fagel, learn the meaning of the word universe. uni=one vers=truth e=noun universe=one truth the universe means everything and dont say atom a=not tom=cut atom=indivisible ,because the definition of the universe as i have seen in books, magazines, ect. is everything (the extent of the estended dimensions)