Nootropic Posted May 14, 2006 Report Share Posted May 14, 2006 Well, I'm aware of what a quasar is, but you would have to agree we cannot dissect every aspect and mechanism of how a quasar functions until we can study it directly, as close as possible, or some other method that is far from our current technology. We can make accurate predictions based on the date we have, which may be 99.98% of the truth, but it is safe to say we do not know everything about a quasar since we can only study them from observation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sergey500 Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 Multiverse is not a new concept. But I never heard of them rotating around a single mass, since outside a universe, one would expect to find nothingness. But imagin steping outside our universe, we might see a plethora of other universes, populating every dimension, heck some theories say they can dissapear and repear in seconds if their net energy is zero. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Costas Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 Hello All Response to Nootropic Yep and yep. We can never know all, but! try to theoretically put the puzzel together. There are some top notch scientists out there giving their best. We know more of the universe withing the last ten years, imagine the next ten years and beyond. The more I learn, the more I learn that I know less and sometimes I feel that its beyond me. Sometimes we look at theories for decades and than find out that it was all wrong. Back to the drawing board, smile these days back to the computer. As for Multi-universes it depends on how you define a universe. Multi universes are refering to units of universe as part of the total UNIVERSE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDMclean Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 The universe is. Our universe is what we can see. Multi-universe theory is that we are in a continuum of universes, of quantum states. Many-world is a deterministic interpretation of quantum theory,that rejects the non-deterministic and irreversible wavefunction collapse associated with measurement in the Copenhagen interpretation in favor of the conventional deterministic and time-reversible laws of quantum physics. The phenomena associated with measurement are explained by decoherence which occurs when a quantum mechanical system interacts with its environment. MWI reconciles how we perceive non-deterministic events (such as the random decay of a radioactive atom) with the deterministic equations of quantum physics. An implication of this reconcillation between determinism and non-determinism is that the universe is much larger than we would otherwise think, and that the world we see (including ourselves) is continuously branching into a greater and greater number of divergent copies. History, which prior to MWI had been viewed as a single "world-line", is rather a many-branched tree where every possible history is realised. Just thought this might be helpful. Now I'm off to finally answer the "Which QM interpretation for you?" thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Costas Posted May 19, 2006 Report Share Posted May 19, 2006 Hello The wikipedea is someones opinion. Like I said first define the UNIVERSE as being all. Than the parts within the "ALL UNIVERSE" can be defined as what you want. If you wish to have and define multi-universe units than you need to specify territorial dimensions. Some people bring in other time dimensions and so forth that have no proof , but! for some fantacy ideas. To give us multi-universes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappytheStripper Posted May 21, 2006 Report Share Posted May 21, 2006 Another universe or a spherical universe or a multi-verse .. this is still un-determined .. or what about an One-verse .. many harmonies .. Lets look at the word uni-verse .. what is a verse .. and what is the definition if uni ?? A combination of harmonic entities .. creating .. and uniting .. It is said the "universe" is a living signature .. of what ?? Maybe ligatures .. like in music .. One question almost always leads to another .. if you go back to the very core structure of the universe and use your imagination .. you will see .. its not all about QM .. its more like IM .. or .. AM .. or IS .. The variations are many .. the question is only one .. Simplicity has lead to complexity .. Regards Ashely Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted May 22, 2006 Report Share Posted May 22, 2006 Like I said first define the UNIVERSE as being all. Than the parts within the "ALL UNIVERSE" can be defined as what you want. If you wish to have and define multi-universe units than you need to specify territorial dimensions. Some people bring in other time dimensions and so forth that have no proof , but! for some fantacy ideas. To give us multi-universes. What's the problem with this? The multiverse theory is pure speculation. But tell you what - so is the idea that there is only one universe! While lots of things in cosmology cannot be proven, many can. One of those is this: There is at least one universe. Even if YOU choose to define "universe" as *everything*, you are making basic semantic assumptions as to what "everything" is. In essence, the multiverse theory is nothing but an attempt to explain certain aspects of our own universe. As such it is a wonderful idea, or rather several wonderful ideas (since there are multiple theories). However, lacking observational data they remain hypothetical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shyam Bharath Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 The universe we live now is an interleaving of space time. All space and time are packed into our day to day life. But if we have a well defined 5th dimension, may be we can have different universes on the basis of it... (Before i studied relativity, i used to think that we were living in a universe that is an array of universes split by time :evil: ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Costas Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 Hello All Its all in the definition. If you define the visible universe as a unit than we have multi-universes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 Hello All Its all in the definition. If you define the visible universe as a unit than we have multi-universes. Visible from where? From here or in a galaxy a billion light years away? It would look different but be the same universe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDMclean Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 The "visible universe" or "observable universe" is the space that humans can observe. It is all that we see and know. It is not to exclude that we cann't see only that we conceit that we can not observe and therefore measure other areas outside of this defined area. Stephen Hawking mentioned once, I believe, that it doesn't matter what's outside the box, if it has no observable effect on what's in the box. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthepon Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 The problem with the concept of other universes if all this is true: If we observe 'another' universe, we call it a part of the universe we have always bees seeing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guadalupe Posted May 23, 2006 Report Share Posted May 23, 2006 Hi! ryan2006 :hihi: In 2003 I copyrighted my idea that the Universe rotates around a larger energy source which I called a "sunburst" and I also said that it fits into a larger scale such as a galaxy filled with universes. Defining a universe is like defining a micro part or cell to a larger cell into a much larger cell. After I had copyrighted the idea I learned from a pysicist at Luther College in Decorah Iowa that a team of people had tried to discern whether or not the universe had an axis because if the universe is circular and bounded the pyhsics of outside our universe would be different and perhaps have different laws or the space between the energy source that it rotates around. So I was surprised to find out that someone actually thought along the lines that I had. And I have no information that would demonstrate today without a reasonable doubt that the universe does rotate around a larger energy source or a "sunburst" but what I did make an arguement for was that our bodies are made up of stardust and because we have memory the stardust must also contain memory and therefore could we imagine that because we have memory of the universe would we have memory or be connected to a larger cell so that we could make a statement based on imagination alone of course not we need facts and this is only one. Ryan J. Henningsgaard Copyright: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wnp There, you will see that ideas cannot be protected by copyright. But, I understood what you meant when you said you had your idea copyrighted. Congratulations on getting a copyright on your literary work. It’s not easy getting a copyright on an original literary works. Ryan, is the literary work you call, “Sunburst”, based on Science Fiction? :hihi: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Costas Posted May 24, 2006 Report Share Posted May 24, 2006 Hello All Have you ever felt that you are going round and round in circles? Good on you kickassclown on the visble universe. But! I undestand where Tomod is coming from.---------------------------------------------------------------Regardless there is only one UNIVERSE and it does not matter how fancy you talk about it. People will bring in science fiction about wormholes and a different dimension. It takes alot of imagination and fatansy and wishfull thinking. I must admit years gone by, I also thought of wormholes and multi-dimensions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthepon Posted May 24, 2006 Report Share Posted May 24, 2006 I am getting the feeling that half the posters on this thread have not bothered to read all the posts here. To those who have not done so: Please do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmarinas86 Posted May 24, 2006 Report Share Posted May 24, 2006 The problem with the concept of other universes if all this is true: If we observe 'another' universe, we call it a part of the universe we have always bees seeing. Exactly. That's what happened with galaxies. Galaxies used to be called "island universes". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Costas Posted May 25, 2006 Report Share Posted May 25, 2006 Hello Kmarinas68 Yes and yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.