Wormholes

[Sayonara]

On what scale?

[ydoaPs]

the scale that has been attempted on this site

[DreamLord]

which is worse, defining "time", "everything", or "exists"?

 

Um... They all seem to be equally confusing and raise just as much of an argument.

[Sayonara]

I think "time" is worst, "exists" is second, and "everything" is least worst (as in, most context-sensitive).

[AtomicMX]

DreamLord has a boyyyyyfriend

jajajajajaja

 

I have no plans of putting my picture on the web. I like my avatar fine the way it is.

Well, in that case i will not be angry if you send it to my email.

 

 

Well, my point was that if we are unaware of it and cannot interact with it, then for all intents and purposes it does not exist to us, so there's no particular reason it include it in our definition of "everything that exists".

well in that case, it wouldn't exist.

what do we care?.

it does not exist to us,

if it exists; it would be part of the universe.

 

if it does not exist then we can call it the nothing. not another universe.

it would not be easier than proving that there is a god.

[ydoaPs]

if it exists; it would be part of the universe.

 

if it does not exist then we can call it the nothing. not another universe.

it would not be easier than proving that there is a god.

 

good point. people these days don't seem to understand that

[123rock]

I seem not understand how you are able to understand without any proof?

But beside the flaming

They are parallel universes in the fourth extended spatial dimension. Why is that so hard to comprehend? Like two sheets of paper are parallel to each other. And yes there can be a fourth dimension as much as there can be a 3rd one, or 2nd one for that matter. The big question would have been whether it was possible for there to be a 1st dimension, but I think that was fundamentally solved.

True the orbits would be very unstable, and there probably wouldn't be any living things, but there can be parallel universes, and I think math doesn't count for shit in that matter.

[Thales]

It is entirely possible that other universes exist.

 

Another universe being a 'region' of a multiverse where the laws of physics are different and it is not in contact with our space time.

[Sayonara]

if it exists; it would be part of the universe.

if it does not exist then we can call it the nothing. not another universe.

good point. people these days don't seem to understand that

By that logic strings and dark matter do not exist, so there's no point discussing them.

 

QED.

[ydoaPs]

and I think math doesn't count for shit in that matter.

 

wow, i bet ur good at physics.

 

 

sayo: theoretically, strings are played with every day. so, :Þ

[Sayonara]

sayo: theoretically, strings are played with every day. so, :Þ

Really.

 

Theoretically there is another universe in my toilet cistern.

[Thales]

I think 123Rock's point was that the mathematics of this universe serve as no justification for ruling out the existance of others.

 

There could be a universe for instance where two plus two equals a banana, we just don't know, but that does not meant that we will never know. If you adopt that attitude we wouldn't progress very far at all, now would we?

[ydoaPs]

o really, what theory is that?

 

i talking about one that actually exists. string theory ring any bells?

[Thales]

I'm sure our friend Sayo is aware of string theory.

 

He was taking the piss out of the lack of relevance of your comment.

[ydoaPs]

and i was talking about the lack of relevance in his.

[ydoaPs]

odd question: if there are black holes arranged in a circle, could they rip open space and create a wormhole?

[Thales]

The fact that strings exist on a macroscopic scale is not incontrivertible evidence for their existance as fundamental energy fluctuations.

 

Mr MX seemed to be implying that anything that exists outside our realm of existance, doesn't exist. Which may be true on a psychological level but certainly isn't true on a physical one.

[Thales]

In a word, no. You would have to have a black-'torus' not individual holes arranged in a circle.

 

I mentioned in another thread the speculation about rotating black holes having 'ring' singulaties which may create genuine 'holes' in space-time. But seeing as I don't believe in singularities the arguement doesn't hold much sway with me.

[Sayonara]

and i was talking about the lack of relevance in his.

If you don't have a constructive comment to make, or don't understand my very simple point, then I strongly suggest you do not attempt to retort in any fashion, particularly not a sarcastic one.

[Flak]

In theory is posible to create a wormhole. On a book that I dont remember its name, you need to acelerate particles making a sort of "particle hurricane" on a very big proportion.

However in practice, in case this work, the worm holes are not a local phenomenon (well if we not take the concept of local to be thousands of kilometer of radious), there is astronomical proof of wormholes taking entire stars.

Making powerfull propultion devices will be more safe to travel long distances than a wormhole.

[DreamLord]

In theory is posible to create a wormhole. On a book that I dont remember its name, you need to acelerate particles making a sort of "particle hurricane" on a very big proportion.

 

Thank you. That was what I was trying to say in the first place. That, theoretically it is possible to create a wormhole.

[AtomicMX]

By that logic strings and dark matter do not exist, so there's no point discussing them.

You have a right point here, but well, we still do not know much about antimatter, even this Hawking has recently contradicted himself. so.... we cannot discuss what we do know.. i agree.

 

 

 

I think 123Rock's point was that the mathematics of this universe serve as no justification for ruling out the existance of others.

 

There could be a universe for instance where two plus two equals a banana, we just don't know, but that does not meant that we will never know. If you adopt that attitude we wouldn't progress very far at all, now would we?

Math are abstract.

 

odd question: if there are black holes arranged in a circle, could they rip open space and create a wormhole?

Time is defined by movement, space by energy density.

 

 

In theory is posible to create a wormhole. On a book that I dont remember its name, you need to acelerate particles making a sort of "particle hurricane" on a very big proportion.

However in practice, in case this work, the worm holes are not a local phenomenon (well if we not take the concept of local to be thousands of kilometer of radious), there is astronomical proof of wormholes taking entire stars.

Making powerfull propultion devices will be more safe to travel long distances than a wormhole.

That wouldnt be a worrmhole.

[123rock]

Wormholes cannot exist. This universe would be bent in the fourth dimension, which is disallowed by this universe's properties. However what AtomicMX is blindly referring to as nonexistence may be true, as to the fact of the laws of thermodynamics, which if he actually knew what he was talking about would have mentioned them much earlier.

 

 

And to yourdadonapogos, you better shut your trap you blonde schoolgirl, because obviously the only thing you know is how to spam. The reason math doesn't count, is because the only proof that x=x is what we observe in nature. In other universes, nature might not have x=x, so shut up unless you can come up with a proof for x=x.

[Flak]

In theory is posible to create a wormhole. On a book that I dont remember its name' date=' you need to acelerate particles making a sort of "particle hurricane" on a very big proportion.

However in practice, in case this work, the worm holes are not a local phenomenon (well if we not take the concept of local to be thousands of kilometer of radious), there is astronomical proof of wormholes taking entire stars.

Making powerfull propultion devices will be more safe to travel long distances than a wormhole..[/quote']

 

 

 

That wouldnt be a worrmhole.

 

Explain yourself please.

 

On that book was pointed that "In order to create a wormhole, is needed an infinite cylinder rotating at the lightspeed".

The point that is imposible to set up an infinite cylinder, however as described on the book, on particle acelerators there are not start and end so a cylinder of particles acelerated may work as an "infinite cylinder". However to do this a very big particle-acelerated/cylinder is needed, technically imposible, and of course, a theory. Wormholes and black holes work in the same way if not even the same, and they born on astronomical energy forces. And what happen to the mass while it enter it is unknown. For example some stars was taken by BH, however they didnt apear on other part of the space, or at least detected.

[ydoaPs]

Wormholes cannot exist. This universe would be bent in the fourth dimension' date=' which is disallowed by this universe's properties. However what AtomicMX is blindly referring to as nonexistence may be true, as to the fact of the laws of thermodynamics, which if he actually knew what he was talking about would have mentioned them much earlier.

 

 

And to yourdadonapogos, you better shut your trap you blonde schoolgirl, because obviously the only thing you know is how to spam. The reason math doesn't count, is because the only proof that x=x is what we observe in nature. In other universes, nature might not have x=x, so shut up unless you can come up with a proof for x=x.[/quote']

 

1.)wormholes DO exist

 

2.)fourth dimension is time.

 

3.)what makes you an expert on the properties of the universe?

 

4.)I should reach through my computer and kick your ass for talkin to me like that.

 

5.)still no definition of "universe" that allows there to be more than one