open All Channels
seplocked Out of Pod Experience
blankseplocked String Theory fails on news that CERN cannot create micro black holes.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic

Dannerkongen
Posted - 2010.12.18 12:14:00 - [31]
 

lol, string theory.

u guys believe in gnomes and timetravel too?

Riedle
Minmatar
Paradox Collective
Posted - 2010.12.18 12:28:00 - [32]
 

Quote:

We think that tremendous mass being compacted is how a singularity is created, but after that point all bets are off


The singularity is just what we call the mass at the centre of a black hole. That's all.

Quote:
You can just as easily say it has infinite density as it has zero, because both are equally insane.


No, saying it has zero density is ignorant. Saying it is close to infinitely dense is probably what it is.

Quote:
You often hear people say black holes have infinite density, because it's slightly less insane, or maybe more impressive, but it's a property which they haven't been proven to have.


It's inferred because so much mass has collapsed into such a small area.

Quote:
Think about it this way, if black holes truly did have infinite density, wouldn't that throw off the figures about how much mass exists in the universe, and along with it the case for dark matter?


Only if you don't understand what dense means.
No one is saying that they have an almost infinite amount of mass.

Not at all, in fact we are pretty sure how much mass they have. We are just saying that so much mass being concentrated into a small area then necessarily that ball of mass has to be close to infinitely dense.

That does not affect the theory of dark matter or energy and has nothing to do with how much mass there is in the universe.

Betty Boom
Caldari
SPECTRE Syndicate
Posted - 2010.12.18 12:32:00 - [33]
 

The main problem in all discussion is : E=mc^2. But this only works coz Einstein though ct(E) = ct(m). This means energy would be change in t=0 to mass and back. Thats wrong.

Second mistake is E coz no Engery can exist without an momentum. Energy with t=0 will not exist. Based on this there must be some other dimension that safes the momentum.

Major Kaboomski
Posted - 2010.12.18 12:52:00 - [34]
 

watShocked


google translate cant translate this thread into english, so could anyone do it for me?

Betty Boom
Caldari
SPECTRE Syndicate
Posted - 2010.12.18 12:55:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Major Kaboomski
watShocked


google translate cant translate this thread into english, so could anyone do it for me?


Wiki would help : string theory. We talk about the way this universe works.

Major Kaboomski
Posted - 2010.12.18 13:07:00 - [36]
 

Edited by: Major Kaboomski on 18/12/2010 13:07:13
Originally by: Betty Boom
Originally by: Major Kaboomski
watShocked


google translate cant translate this thread into english, so could anyone do it for me?


Wiki would help : string theory. We talk about the way this universe works.


73.307 characters, 11.099 words, 1.259 lines, 5 pages.
tl;dr?

Edit: also this picture which is more than a thousand words: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/55/Calabi-Yau-alternate.png

Bill's Alt
Posted - 2010.12.18 17:30:00 - [37]
 

You see that image? The TL;DR of this thread is that that's not what the Universe looks like.

Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
Posted - 2010.12.18 21:02:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Saju Somtaaw
Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence. In other words just because you have no evidence that some pig farmer in Austria exists doesn't mean he doesn't.


Way to be stupid.

So would would rather assume he exists before you actually know it? rather then try and figure it out?

assuming something in the absence of evidence is just idiocy. E.g all the worlds religions.

Zhim'Fufu
Posted - 2010.12.18 21:18:00 - [39]
 

Seems to me unlocking the secrets to the universe with our primitive technology would be akin to a caveman trying to make a fabergé egg
with a coconut and flint knife for the carving.

Pesets
The Hunt Club
Posted - 2010.12.18 22:38:00 - [40]
 

Well, it's going to stay primitive forever if we stop trying...

Maldranan
Posted - 2010.12.18 22:53:00 - [41]
 

TBH, I've never really understood the motivation behind being a fanboi for one scientific theory or another. This is how science is done; you have a theory and test it out to try to home in on the theory that most accurately reflects our observations.

This is a test of one string theory model, not all of them, so people talking about string theory isn't going away. Personally, I just think it's cool that they've found a way to start testing string theory and that they're getting some results.

Dimitryy
Gallente
Broski Enterprises
Elite Space Guild
Posted - 2010.12.19 04:04:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Maybe now Michio Kaku will stop annoying the living hell out of me in every single physics documentary and TV show, but i doubt it.


Michio Kaku is the man, how does he annoy you? Confused

Zhim'Fufu
Posted - 2010.12.19 05:11:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: Pesets
Well, it's going to stay primitive forever if we stop trying...
I'm not saying stop trying, I'm saying don't get your expectations too high.

Zhim'Fufu
Posted - 2010.12.19 05:16:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Dimitryy
Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Maybe now Michio Kaku will stop annoying the living hell out of me in every single physics documentary and TV show, but i doubt it.


Michio Kaku is the man, how does he annoy you? Confused
Because he is trying to be the next carl sagan. Sorry but his theoretical ramblings can't touch the legacy of sagan.


Triple Entendre
Atrocity.
Posted - 2010.12.19 06:47:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: Zhim'Fufu
Originally by: Dimitryy
Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Maybe now Michio Kaku will stop annoying the living hell out of me in every single physics documentary and TV show, but i doubt it.


Michio Kaku is the man, how does he annoy you? Confused
Because he is trying to be the next carl sagan. Sorry but his theoretical ramblings can't touch the legacy of sagan.



Personally, I think the closest thing there is to a Sagan these days is Prof. Brian Cox. He certainly shares the enthusiasm and the ability to put it across, as well as the knowledge behind it. Not to mention he's no stranger to the media either.

Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
Posted - 2010.12.19 20:25:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: Saju Somtaaw
Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence. In other words just because you have no evidence that some pig farmer in Austria exists doesn't mean he doesn't.


The invisible pink unicorn, may her hooves be blessed, living in my basement, agrees.

The burden of proof always rests upon the party making the claim. This is what separates a "theory" from a "fact". If it is neither of these, it is a "belief" in the context of "faith", versus the all too often equivocated demonstrable context.


Pages: 1 [2]

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only