What exists beyond the known universe?

[maddog]

By changing the dimension you can go beyond it. right now earth is moving from 3rd dimension to 4rth dimension.

By changing the magnitudinal vibration of the place u can create another dimension.

 

:) What ?

 

I don't think I'm doing any drugs to figure this one out.

 

As Tormod said, adding dimensions does not get one beyond anything. Just harder to

visualize. You can add time as a dimension (with conversion) to space (3 dimensions) to

make a 4D spacetime. We don't move there...#%$. This is the reference model we use

to determine where we are (or not). The Kaluza-Klein model uses 5 dimensions and

was a method to merge EM equations of Maxwell with Netwons Law of Gravitation as

modified by Einstein (GR). You had 4D spacetime with one extra "rolled-up" dimension

that ascribed charge to particles. With Einstein's help Kaluza was able to publish this

idea in 1915. Look it up if you wish. This is also referenced in Brian Greene's book

Elegant Universe. String Theory now thinks of rolling-up dimensions. This does not

however, create parallel universes because of extra dimensions. The many worlds idea

coined about in 1950s is a separate idea.

 

Maddog

[arijit]

Earth is showing signs of changing its climatic patterns throughout the world . And valcanoes is showing signs to erupt. i think this is the early symtoms of earth changing .

[BlameTheEx]

For me this thread is on 4 pages. Of course I might be going through spacetime dialation

or something. :D

 

I don't mean to offend. You are free to go back and reread the whole thread, I did. If u

want some assistance, I believe it was with posts 10-40 or so (first page for me). :hyper:

 

Maddog

 

I checked posts 10-40. No show.

 

Sorry and all that but I just can't be bothered to check further.

 

Who were you writing that post for anyway? Did you expect your readers to go through some 150 posts to find the original sources of your quotes, or did you expect them to just assume that the quotes were valid when pulled out of context? If the former you are perhaps a little optimistic. If the latter, you are being a tad naughty.

[alxian]

i went thru this with a coworker today

 

tachyons

 

the only proven particles to transcend the matter energy barrier we call the speed of light.. with visible light being slightly slower than this barrier(why we can see it and interact with it) but particles on the other side of the matter energy barrier such as tachyons although somehow we can see them we cannot actually measure them by subliminal metrics.. which causes headaches..

 

but if you think of tachyons as particles that move independent of all other known partciles (i.e. the only way to define them is to say where they were with some certainty.. by the time we've defined their location they are long gone)

 

i had a but of trouble with concept if yuo take science literally in that tachyons will arrive long before they are measured. which is silly, that would imply negative distances.. that in order to control tachyons you need to predict where they will be.. which isn't practical.. for such applications as communication. what's required is being able to generate tachyons and make guide ways (like fiber optics for them) super conductors? hmmmm..

[IDMclean]

If something moved faster than light I don't believe we would be capable of detecting with any know method. as it is the distance a photon travels is already zero. this is true of all types of photon from radio to gamma they all travel at the constant 299792458 m/s in all frames of reference.

 

If tachyons exsisted then how would you purpose to detect them? they would have a distance transformation of x' = γ(x - vt)

γ = 1/(√1-v²/c²) this would result in a negitive number and as such brings up the question of time travel. Amongst other things. This purposed particle would travel a negtive distance. normally that means it goes backwards but this is slightly different. not to mention what of Space-Time curviture?

 

Also as for the "predicting where it will be" bit. not possible or rather not fesible. the data collected from such a thing would be almost useless. heisenberg uncertainty principle. the more certain of a particle's postion you are the more uncertain you are of it's momentum.

 

Thats quick and bruttle but should suffice. What is one's rebuttle?

[lindagarrette]

No rebuttal. More speculation: Could neutrinos be tachyonic?

[pgrmdave]

Who were you writing that post for anyway? Did you expect your readers to go through some 150 posts to find the original sources of your quotes, or did you expect them to just assume that the quotes were valid when pulled out of context? If the former you are perhaps a little optimistic. If the latter, you are being a tad naughty.

 

The quotes are from post number 89, page 9.

[alxfamlaw]

There is not much to explain. God/Gods/Allah/Jesus/Vishnu/Zeus etc. = Infinite. Nothing = infinite. Therefore, beyond = infinite.

 

I am new here, but I tend to agree with oblivion. There are vast number of things that exist beyond our own universe. It is up to your subconscious to feel and wonder what could be out there. I myself tend to dismiss the big bang because whatever exploded came from somewhere, and that somewhere came from somewhere, so Oblivion is right, it is just infinite nothing else to explain about it. It is up to the imagination to believe what is out there IMHO..

[maddog]

i went thru this with a coworker today

 

tachyons

 

the only proven particles to transcend the matter energy barrier we call the speed of light.. with visible light being slightly slower than this barrier(why we can see it and interact with it) but particles on the other side of the matter energy barrier such as tachyons although somehow we can see them we cannot actually measure them by subliminal metrics.. which causes headaches..

 

but if you think of tachyons as particles that move independent of all other known partciles (i.e. the only way to define them is to say where they were with some certainty.. by the time we've defined their location they are long gone)

 

i had a but of trouble with concept if yuo take science literally in that tachyons will arrive long before they are measured. which is silly, that would imply negative distances.. that in order to control tachyons you need to predict where they will be.. which isn't practical.. for such applications as communication. what's required is being able to generate tachyons and make guide ways (like fiber optics for them) super conductors? hmmmm..

Yah, my favorite physics subject really... :hyper:

 

To clarify a little though. Hhmm....

 

Taychons are theoretical and have not been observed. They would definitely have strange properties

were they to be observed. Yes, their time sense would travel backwards. However, not at all like

anti-particles. Instead it would a negitive imaginary time (-it). Such a particle would loose kinetic energy

as it accelerated faster. Symmetrically time and space (imaginary) would dialate were the particle to slow

down towards the speed of light. And its energy would get more negative. In fact as one take the limit

as energy approaches zero, this particle would start to behave as thought it was everywhere all at the

same time. This summary description comes from the analysis by Recami, an Italian physicist who

published a paper, "Classical Theory of Tachyons", in Nuovo Il Cimento in 1976.

 

What I am interested in is for the Bosonic String Theory (that was figured in 26 dimensions and only

worked with Bosons) had these structure labeled "Ghosts". I am wondering if these could be tachyonic.

 

As for the comment could Tachyons be really Neutrinos. Personally, I doubt it for this reason. We have

figured a way to detect Nuetrinos and they do not exhibit the properties above. Theoretically, Tachyons

would emit Cherenkov radiation in a vacumn. We have not found such. Just like the Monopole here a

negative result does not equal a negative confirmation. Still, it would imply we don't understand all that is

involved. Now could the mysterious dark matter by tachyonic. Maybe. Haven't found except by

Gravitational lensing. Already know Gravity seems to have this property to leak out into other dimesions

according to Kaku and the like. Might it be the missing Superpartners from Supersymmetry. Maybe.

Conjecture along these lines only breed more questions which is good.

 

Maddog

[maddog]

The quotes are from post number 89, page 9.

Thanx, Dave.

I hadn't found it though I knew it was there. :hyper:

 

Maddog

[philosophy]

from what i see in the world around me Everytihing mimics everything to some degree.

 

Atoms are all you need to know about the universe. look at them.. its not too hard to figure out.

 

and i believe the whole "atoms are the smallest things" fact will be considered complete foolishness soon enough.

 

Fractal Geometry = what the universe does.

 

I believe we are wasting our time trying to unlock Dimensions 5th 6th.. w/e

 

Whatever dimension we as humans are (4th?) we can only master and control what we are and below what we are.

 

 

this is why we know how to make 2d paintings and 3d videogames and control our 4th dimension lives with our laws and natures laws.

 

5th dimension controls itself to a degree and everything below it...

6th controls itself and everything below it...

 

 

think about it like this

 

King = highest

Aristrocrat/nobleman=next

working man=middle

pauper=low

 

or

 

ACE=highest dimension

king=next highest

queen

jack

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

(im using metapors here) Do you understand?

 

I Have never researched any of this..

its just what seems like common sense to me.. Its just my own conclusions after asking myself questions..

 

I have no education background either.

 

so i am not Proven to be correct. dont accept this as fact only as my own theory

[C1ay]

....

do you think that universe is all there is?

 

No. I personally theorize that there could be many universes like our own. I envision our universe as an expanding collection of mass resulting from a local big bang in an infinite space that contains it and others like it. Just imagine the room you're in as the infinite space and a marble in your hand representing our universe as we know it. Now imagine other balls of different sizes throughout the room as universes resulting from other events. Some may actually have merged together like some galaxies do in our own universe. This is my vision.

 

I see space as the void, the volume which lies around all matter. Everything else is the matter that occupies space. If you could pull a perfect vacuum in a container such that it was devoid of all matter you would have a sample of space. Outside of our universe I see the same space we have within, thus it is not our space that is expanding, only the matter it contains.

 

I think it is possible that our local universe could contain matter that was not part of the mass expelled from our own big bang. This would explain why some globular clusters appear to be older than our own universe. Imagine a bomb going off and expelling matter in all directions. Matter is expelled beyond other matter in the vicinity of the explosion but, as you envision the boundary of that explosion you see that it contains matter that was not part of the explosion itself.

 

In short, I envision space as an infinite void containing some finite number of finite universes similiar to our own.

[GreekTTC]

....

ok, lets restore this topic...

 

as we know, the universe is infinite,

but do ppl mean that the universe is infinite in all dimension?

if not, that means there is something beyond,

there is something bigger that includes the univers...

and what is it?

 

also, what happens if you could exceed the speed of expansion of the univers?

what will you see beyond it?

 

vacuum? space? do they even exist?

......??

 

do you think that universe is all there is?

back in history, ppl thought there is only ground, heaven and hell...

later, they realize there is an earth...

later to space....

do you think we can go beyond that?

it seems to be that there is a great possibility in finding something beyond later in the future....

 

(tormod, thx for telling me, i finally know that there is something called"private message"!! lol!! oh, i got 4 unread messages)

 

Your idea is pretty much where I was going with my post about the possiblitiy of another larger world outside of our universe. See my post here...

 

I'm saying that maybe space and time isn't the issue, but size.

[maddog]

Do we know the universe is infinite ? We know the current expansion has been happing for a finite time.

Recently a theory that each expansion period were it to collapse would not consume everything. Thus

from cycle to cycle a future Big Bang would occur on top of the current and previous ones. This is a

variation of the oscillating universe proposed in the late thirties. This doesn't state whether the universe

is open or closed. In fact measurements taken have calculated to high accuracy of being mostly flat

(Euclidean) and not curved in nor out.

 

Roger Penrose has a new book out about multiple universes. I am wanting to get it and read it.

 

Maddog

[Tormod]

We cannot know whether the universe is infinite or not. We can make assumptions but never prove them.

[DStickler]

Okay. Our universe = 1. The universe next door = 2.

 

Mathematics does not prove anything. Mathematics is a tool which explains a lot of the properties of the universe. However, I would like to see you prove that "the universe is governed by mathematics". That is quite a statement!

 

Tormod

 

All things equate to mathematics, Tormod. Every single action or reaction in the universe can be explained with one form of math or another. Newton's gravitational equations explain the interactions with stars and galaxies and all the rest of the matter in the universe. Fusion, black holes, string theory, Hawking radiation, the total number of calcium atoms in your body, etc.... All explained by numbers. Even subjects as mundane as the weather and how flocks of birds react to predators can be broken down into equations.

 

All things, on their basest level, require the figures to be correct. :eek:

[Quantum]

You can not say that Mathmatics governs everything yet because a GUT has not been yet discovered, so a mathmatical description of the interaction between Relativity and Quantum is what an overall Mathmatical government needs. I do however beleive that will be found in the future :eek: