The Big Question- need a good answer

  • Imagine you are sipping tea or coffee while discussing various issues with a broad and diverse network of students, colleagues, and friends brought together by the common bond of physics, graduate school, and the physics GRE.

wolfpoker
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:26 pm

The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby wolfpoker » Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:31 pm

Hi

I have a Question- maybe it's actually 2 or 3

We all live on the Planet earth nad I wanna know what's bigger than that. We know teh Solarsystem we know the Universe and so on.
But where is all ths located and what is teh next bigger "Universe"

I'm just askin where is all our Universe and where is the next bigger thing.
How big is space and what comes after that??

Can someone help me out to figure that out- I really can't sleep nomore it burns on my mind to figure out where we are and what we are doing here.

How big is all that where we are located??

Is our Universe just the eyeball of something real *** big and what is it??

User avatar
butsurigakusha
Posts: 293
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:05 pm

Postby butsurigakusha » Sun Oct 28, 2007 9:53 pm

I know the answer, but I am not ready to reveal it. The world is not ready.

User avatar
grae313
Posts: 2297
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 8:46 pm

Postby grae313 » Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:58 pm

"Can someone help me out to figure that out- I really can't sleep nomore it burns on my mind to figure out where we are and what we are doing here."


:lol: :lol: :lol: priceless! I'm in stitches

Bean
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:35 pm

Re: The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby Bean » Sat Jul 31, 2010 5:04 pm

You are assuming here that there exist coordinates with which "we may locate ourselves" outside of "our" universe (I say "our" solely because our denotes ownership, and, as far as I know, no one has as yet drawn up legal papers assigning ownership of this universe which has the consequence that the ownership implied by our does not technically apply [I felt like I owed myself an explanation for the quotations]). GR (the original put forward by Einstein, not those making use of bundles and unions (well, not mathematical unions, but I'm choosing to presume that "readers" (genuine readers/scoffers/crack-pots/etc) understand what I mean)) does not actually imply any such thing and while interpretations such as the many-world interpretation may be taken to imply such, said interpretations may also often be taken to imply only that there exist other coordinate charts/atlases/manifolds (in which case the coordinate adjective would be redundant) not necessarily that those coordinate bases/fields/whatever you choose to call them are fully compatible with "our" universe's (of course transformation is possible but that doesn't mean that the coordinates located with respect to "something" in "our" universe are compatible from the conceptual standpoint with the coordinates located with respect to "something" ' of another universe/thing/"whatever you want to believe, with or without evidence that may or not be true, is 'out there'". For instance (in exaggeration), for all we know "our" universe may reside on a manifold (not the manifold describing "our" universe clearly) where coordinates are expressed (location-wise and locally as should become obvious) with respect to their jerk (acceleration dot) in which case your query of where are we would not be compatible with the coordinates of this "outer-manifold" at a fundamentally conceptual level:
BOB: "I want to know what 'our' universes location is in this 'bigger place' so let me ask this other guy who just must know everything what 'our' universe's (x_0,x_1,x_2,x_3,...,x_D) parameters are."
TALL GUY WITH WHITE BEARD, HALO, AND LONG WHITE ROBE: "Well... which one is yours?."
BOB: *points to the universe with the big neon letters "BOB'S UNIVERSE" sitting on top*
TALL GUY WITH DESCRIPTIVE ACCESSORIES: "Oh. That one. Hmm... it's (0,1,2,3,...,D) with respect to your jerk when examined with respect to the 'bigger place''s (as you so elocquently put it) average jerk."
BOB: "So it's (0,1,2,3,...D) with respect to your father when examined with respect to my son?"
TALL GUY ...: "... Yeah. Sure. Whatever :roll: ."

Youe see. It just doesn't work too well.
Basically, no one knows with certainty, and, since the projections for the smallest time interval from the present to when we may actually be able to observe another universe (once again choosing to presume that you understand what I mean) indicate that we've quite a waiting time, it is somewhat unlikely that anyone will know with certainty in your (or my) lifetime.)

User avatar
WhoaNonstop
Posts: 851
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 1:31 am

Re: The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby WhoaNonstop » Fri Oct 15, 2010 12:36 pm

I laughed for approximately 7 and a half minutes at this.

-Riley

User avatar
grae313
Posts: 2297
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 8:46 pm

Re: The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby grae313 » Fri Oct 15, 2010 3:34 pm

Bean wrote:GR (the original put forward by Einstein, not those making use of bundles and unions (well, not mathematical unions, but I'm choosing to presume that "readers" (genuine readers/scoffers/crack-pots/etc) understand what I mean)) does not actually imply any such thing and while interpretations such as the many-world interpretation may be taken to imply such, said interpretations may also often be taken to imply only that there exist other coordinate charts/atlases/manifolds (in which case the coordinate adjective would be redundant) not necessarily that those coordinate bases/fields/whatever you choose to call them are fully compatible with "our" universe's (of course transformation is possible but that doesn't mean that the coordinates located with respect to "something" in "our" universe are compatible from the conceptual standpoint with the coordinates located with respect to "something" ' of another universe/thing/"whatever you want to believe, with or without evidence that may or not be true, is 'out there'".


Really, dude? Really? This is one sentence. Within this sentence are four and a half parenthetical statements, including a parenthetical statement inside a parenthetical statement inside a parenthetical statement. Three embedded levels of parenthetical statements! Do you think this is good writing? Do you realize that the point of communicating is to communicate? You are why scientific writing is dismal and pathetic.

User avatar
HappyQuark
Posts: 762
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby HappyQuark » Fri Oct 15, 2010 3:46 pm

grae313 wrote:
Bean wrote:GR (the original put forward by Einstein, not those making use of bundles and unions (well, not mathematical unions, but I'm choosing to presume that "readers" (genuine readers/scoffers/crack-pots/etc) understand what I mean)) does not actually imply any such thing and while interpretations such as the many-world interpretation may be taken to imply such, said interpretations may also often be taken to imply only that there exist other coordinate charts/atlases/manifolds (in which case the coordinate adjective would be redundant) not necessarily that those coordinate bases/fields/whatever you choose to call them are fully compatible with "our" universe's (of course transformation is possible but that doesn't mean that the coordinates located with respect to "something" in "our" universe are compatible from the conceptual standpoint with the coordinates located with respect to "something" ' of another universe/thing/"whatever you want to believe, with or without evidence that may or not be true, is 'out there'".


Really, dude? Really? This is one sentence. Within this sentence are four and a half parenthetical statements, including a parenthetical statement inside a parenthetical statement inside a parenthetical statement. Three embedded levels of parenthetical statements! Do you think this is good writing? Do you realize that the point of communicating is to communicate? You are why scientific writing is dismal and pathetic.


Now Grae, we should try to be helpful rather than critical.

Bean, I've highlighted all of the parts of your statement (in red (the color of blood( well the color of human blood( well the color of human, non-android blood)))) which I think you should consider revising for the purposes of clarity.

bean wrote:You are assuming here that there exist coordinates with which "we may locate ourselves" outside of "our" universe (I say "our" solely because our denotes ownership, and, as far as I know, no one has as yet drawn up legal papers assigning ownership of this universe which has the consequence that the ownership implied by our does not technically apply [I felt like I owed myself an explanation for the quotations]). GR (the original put forward by Einstein, not those making use of bundles and unions (well, not mathematical unions, but I'm choosing to presume that "readers" (genuine readers/scoffers/crack-pots/etc) understand what I mean)) does not actually imply any such thing and while interpretations such as the many-world interpretation may be taken to imply such, said interpretations may also often be taken to imply only that there exist other coordinate charts/atlases/manifolds (in which case the coordinate adjective would be redundant) not necessarily that those coordinate bases/fields/whatever you choose to call them are fully compatible with "our" universe's (of course transformation is possible but that doesn't mean that the coordinates located with respect to "something" in "our" universe are compatible from the conceptual standpoint with the coordinates located with respect to "something" ' of another universe/thing/"whatever you want to believe, with or without evidence that may or not be true, is 'out there'". For instance (in exaggeration), for all we know "our" universe may reside on a manifold (not the manifold describing "our" universe clearly) where coordinates are expressed (location-wise and locally as should become obvious) with respect to their jerk (acceleration dot) in which case your query of where are we would not be compatible with the coordinates of this "outer-manifold" at a fundamentally conceptual level:
BOB: "I want to know what 'our' universes location is in this 'bigger place' so let me ask this other guy who just must know everything what 'our' universe's (x_0,x_1,x_2,x_3,...,x_D) parameters are."
TALL GUY WITH WHITE BEARD, HALO, AND LONG WHITE ROBE: "Well... which one is yours?."
BOB: *points to the universe with the big neon letters "BOB'S UNIVERSE" sitting on top*
TALL GUY WITH DESCRIPTIVE ACCESSORIES: "Oh. That one. Hmm... it's (0,1,2,3,...,D) with respect to your jerk when examined with respect to the 'bigger place''s (as you so elocquently put it) average jerk."
BOB: "So it's (0,1,2,3,...D) with respect to your father when examined with respect to my son?"
TALL GUY ...: "... Yeah. Sure. Whatever :roll: ."

Youe see. It just doesn't work too well.
Basically, no one knows with certainty, and, since the projections for the smallest time interval from the present to when we may actually be able to observe another universe (once again choosing to presume that you understand what I mean) indicate that we've quite a waiting time, it is somewhat unlikely that anyone will know with certainty in your (or my) lifetime.)

User avatar
WontonBurritoMeals
Posts: 103
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 9:43 pm

Re: The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby WontonBurritoMeals » Fri Oct 15, 2010 5:48 pm

Really, dude? Really? This is one sentence. Within this sentence are four and a half parenthetical statements, including a parenthetical statement inside a parenthetical statement inside a parenthetical statement. Three embedded levels of parenthetical statements! Do you think this is good writing? Do you realize that the point of communicating is to communicate? You are why scientific writing is dismal and pathetic.


Image

User avatar
WhoaNonstop
Posts: 851
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 1:31 am

Re: The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby WhoaNonstop » Fri Oct 15, 2010 5:55 pm

WontonBurritoMeals wrote:Image


Bow Wow > Xzibit

Image

User avatar
grae313
Posts: 2297
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 8:46 pm

Re: The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby grae313 » Fri Oct 15, 2010 5:57 pm

WontonBurritoMeals wrote:Image


Yo dawg.

User avatar
HappyQuark
Posts: 762
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby HappyQuark » Fri Oct 15, 2010 8:12 pm

Image

User avatar
quizivex
Posts: 1029
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 am

Re: The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby quizivex » Sat Oct 16, 2010 6:06 am

Oh my... thank goodness zxcv, doom et al. from the 2008 censorship squad are no longer here... There's clearly no purpose of these pictures besides random humor mocking the absurdity of the original posts. But since the pictures are black people, the censorship squad would call the posters racist regardless, and the thread would evolve into a flame war over political correctness.

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1048&p=8645&hilit=holiday#p8645

User avatar
HappyQuark
Posts: 762
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby HappyQuark » Sat Oct 16, 2010 1:44 pm

quizivex wrote:Oh my... thank goodness zxcv, doom et al. from the 2008 censorship squad are no longer here... There's clearly no purpose of these pictures besides random humor mocking the absurdity of the original posts. But since the pictures are black people, the censorship squad would call the posters racist regardless, and the thread would evolve into a flame war over political correctness.

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1048&p=8645&hilit=holiday#p8645


To be fair, my contribution was quite racist. Despite my pasty white skin, I strongly maintain that black is the superior race. After all, if white man was meant to be equal to all others, why would I have skin that burns after 5 minutes in the sun. It's only logical to conclude white people are superior in only 1 respect, and that is the ability to be inferior.

again, just sayin...

maxwell200
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:12 pm

Re: The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby maxwell200 » Sat Oct 16, 2010 9:12 pm

I don't suppose the God, who may or may not be one of numerous gods who created the earth and people, is actually holding the universe in the palm of His hand and is looking at it and is displeased with this universe. Because He is Calvin, one of the Old and vengeful Gods. And in a time equivalent to a few years from now in our time scale He will demand living sacrifices.

User avatar
WontonBurritoMeals
Posts: 103
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 9:43 pm

Re: The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby WontonBurritoMeals » Sun Oct 17, 2010 1:25 am

Oh my... thank goodness zxcv, doom et al. from the 2008 censorship squad are no longer here... There's clearly no purpose of these pictures besides random humor mocking the absurdity of the original posts. But since the pictures are black people, the censorship squad would call the posters racist regardless, and the thread would evolve into a flame war over political correctness.


To be fair, we are practically the only physics forum on the internet that is even semi-free of new-agers. That and my picture was in reference to a particular internet joke and not making fun of black people.

-WontonBurritoMeals

geshi
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 12:01 am

Re: The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby geshi » Sun Oct 17, 2010 1:53 am

WontonBurritoMeals wrote:To be fair, we are practically the only physics forum on the internet that is even semi-free of new-agers. That and my picture was in reference to a particular internet joke and not making fun of black people.

-WontonBurritoMeals


There's other physics forums?! Blasphemy!

Other physics forums are also so ... full of physics ...

User avatar
quizivex
Posts: 1029
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 am

Re: The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby quizivex » Sun Oct 17, 2010 3:01 am

@Wonton: I know it wasn't racist... it wasn't even close.

I was only making fun of some of the hypersensitive whiners that used to frequent the forum back the year I was applying. In their eyes, any reference to a black person is automatically racist, and any sentence of the form "Jews tend to be ___" is automatically antisemitic regardless of what fills the blank. :lol: Some of the old school members may remember these people.

User avatar
HappyQuark
Posts: 762
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby HappyQuark » Sun Oct 17, 2010 3:09 am

quizivex wrote:@Wonton: I know it wasn't racist... it wasn't even close.

I was only making fun of some of the hypersensitive whiners that used to frequent the forum back the year I was applying. In their eyes, any reference to a black person is automatically racist, and any sentence of the form "Jews tend to be ___" is automatically antisemitic regardless of what fills the blank. :lol: Some of the old school members may remember these people.


Does that include the phrase, "Jews tend to be awesome!"?

User avatar
quizivex
Posts: 1029
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 am

Re: The Big Question- need a good answer

Postby quizivex » Sun Oct 17, 2010 3:58 am

Actually it does... in my high school two kids were reading a skit on the morning announcements to promote an upcoming play. One said something like "How much does it cost?" and the other said something like "Well it's only $10 but it doesn't matter for you anyway. You're a Jew.. you're rich!"

They got suspended and forced to apologize to the school over the announcements another day. I think being assumed rich would be a positive thing esp since it usually implies success too, but it seems even complimentary stereotypes are treated as racism in this obsessively politically correct society.




Return to “Physics Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest