arkain101 Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 I cant wait for the images we will be getting with the new telescopes and atmosphere image correction techniques... I mean we are going to be seeing hubble quality images times 300 .. or something crazy like that.If we get carried away enough we could now build (with these new telescope engineering techniques) a huge mirror the size of that in the ground radio dish. Who knows what we would see, maybe we could get a nice view around the black whole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ingannilo Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 black whole. Be it an error or not, that made my day.Beautiful. I too am really excited by advances in telescope tech. I'm in love with pictures of nebula clouds. I'm no astronomer , but I've got a cool 600megs of hubble shots saved. :hihi:Most beautiful things in the observable universe if you ask me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkain101 Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 howd that make your day? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Costas Posted April 3, 2006 Report Share Posted April 3, 2006 Hello The minute you start pulling in ideas of different worlds and different dimensions is the minute you start going around in circles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ingannilo Posted April 3, 2006 Report Share Posted April 3, 2006 howd that make your day? My mind took those two words and ran with them in a direction no other two words could have made it. It's the same feeling as my first car/k'nex set/blowjob. No big deal. Thinking twice, I should not have posted it because I can't really explain it. :hyper: to borrow some words of eternal wisdom from vonnegut, so it goes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ingannilo Posted April 3, 2006 Report Share Posted April 3, 2006 Hello The minute you start pulling in ideas of different worlds and different dimensions is the minute you start going around in circles. Well, let's hope there isn't much to quantom theory then! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racoon Posted April 3, 2006 Report Share Posted April 3, 2006 to borrow some words of eternal wisdom from vonnegut, so it goes. I love Vonnegut!crazy genius... Slaughterhouse 5 and Breakfast of Champions were my favorite! :hyper: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ingannilo Posted April 3, 2006 Report Share Posted April 3, 2006 Wampeters, Foma & Granfalloons recently toppled Breakfast as my favorite of his. I'm dying to read A Man Without A Country, though (very recent release). Looks like we've gotten off topic though. Racoon, if you want to talk books you can email @gmail me or get me on aim. Both the same as my nick here. So now are we trying to define the observable universe, or are we trying to figure out just what gives with this collection of galaxies relative to other collection of galaxies? Or just trying to decide what the term universe means to in the scientific community? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkain101 Posted April 3, 2006 Report Share Posted April 3, 2006 Funnny part is, I also noticed the typo after I posted it and it had my mind wrapped around the word combo for a bit too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saitia Posted April 3, 2006 Report Share Posted April 3, 2006 Hi Craig, et al, Riding the coattails of this interesting thread, first a question on your comment-- Early Christians, for example, fairly clearly believed in an afterlife scenario in which their physical remains would be reanimated to live again on Earth, Hm; I thought Christians believed what Jesus said-- that his "kingdom" was "not of this world."? . . .That they would ascend to a "New Jerusalem"? But back to the definition of "universe" if I may. Most dictionaries actually describe the word universe to mean the "whole" thing; i.e., the cosmos. So let's accept that basic definition, and explore how it may be qualified to add dimension and meaning to our understanding of what the "whole" universe may look like. Some examples, with suggested definitions: 1. The "material" universe. The universe is material in the sense that energy is the basis of all existence; it's just the tip of the universe "iceberg," so to speak, for lack of a better term. The source of all energy and matter is somewhere under the waves. . .<g> 2. The "spiritual" universe. The rest of the iceberg. 3. The infinite universe. The nature of the iceberg. 4. The "central" universe. The center of the iceberg; i.e., "Paradise." 5. The "Grand" Universe. The present inhabited creation. 6. The "Master" universe. The present inhabited and uninhabited creation. 7. The Universe of "Universes." The vast mechanism of creation controlled by infinite Mind. 8. "Super"universe. A proportionate geographic "section" of the "Grand" universe. 9. The "local" universe. Our neighborhood. Of all the ways we may seek to qualify the universe, one thing is pretty clear to me: the staggering immensity of even the observable universe constitutes a mystery beyond human comprehension, whether it's approached by science, religion, or both.:hihi: --Saitia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qfwfq Posted April 4, 2006 Report Share Posted April 4, 2006 Some confusion arises because the term 'universe' has sometimes been used as a word for "closed system". Where many physics textbooks assert the principle of entropy saying "entropy of the universe" they are just using a handy example of an ideal closed system. Strictly the two notions are distinct concepts. If someone says "there is another universe out there" it's a contradiction in terms. If there's more than one of them, call'em something else! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted April 4, 2006 Report Share Posted April 4, 2006 If there's more than one of them, call'em something else!The crowd rises for a standing ovation! :rainbow: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrotex Posted April 4, 2006 Report Share Posted April 4, 2006 ...Or just trying to decide what the term universe means to in the scientific community?Well, lemme try. :rainbow: A "universe" is a big, large, huge, mind-bogglingly vast collection of stars and planets and ... well, I'll complete the list later -- anyway, this collection is bounded by a ... well, maybe it's not -- anyway, this collection of stuff obeys certain rules? ... laws? hmmm ... well, there is a certain amount of order, let's say, as opposed to chaos, but then they're often mixed up, ... I mean, anyway, this collection seems to often sometimes obey or follow certain principals, more or less ... okay, there's this speed of light thing ... no, that doesn't work.Okay, maybe it would help to describe something that is NOT a "universe" and then we can ... uh, compare them? Right. Okay then. A "not-universe" is a really humongously big collection of ... no, that stuff would be in the "universe" wouldn't it. Right.This isn't working.Later.I need to take a nap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boerseun Posted April 4, 2006 Report Share Posted April 4, 2006 Sorry - I'm a latecomer to this thread. The way I have it, is that 'Universe' implies everything within our 'local' universe's light-cone. Everything outside of that is considered to be part of the 'multiverse' - if which our universe is but one of countless others. Oh **** - no, wait, that was either Hawkins or Douglas Adams... Go to sleep now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indroneil Ghosh Posted April 29, 2006 Report Share Posted April 29, 2006 In my opinion, 'universe' is our own human way of summing into a short word 'everything that we can observe, describe or comprehend' Thus the universe may include all of the following Observable and non-observable matter and energySome things which we may call 'things not yet found'Empty space that can be occupied by the elements abovePhysical laws that govern the above. I must also say that in my opinion the word has not been defined well eough. For example we may or may not believe in other universes, what ever that may mean. I mean I have come across other definitions like 'galaxy of galaxies' and 'all matter and thought' etc. 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.