End of the world ?

kuro is a perfect example of why scientific theories should not be shared with the public unless they actually learn about it first. The nonsense she spouts surpasses even my wildest imagination, and I know many other people at least as bad if not worse. I wish people would do research or think logically before jumping to conclusions that have no basis.

i speak in joke.

because its funny. i use imagination a lot. i know your brain doesnt explode. its just funny.

im not stretching the truth im finding the most unlikely situation.

and yes i guess i am the perfect example of someone who likes to make a joke about your brain exploding.

and you are the perfect example of a person who can't take a joke

Though you may be joking, (which I had no way of knowing) there are plenty who would not be. I have many real life friends to seem to think that way, including some with high IQ who have no business being so stupid. Random made-up mumbo-jumbo is =/= to actual scientific facts, and using half-assed guessing combined with real science completely degrades the institution as a whole.

I do apologize for flaming, and joking is fine. But there are people who think that way, and they need to be re-educated. (1984 style if you know what I mean. If you don't, then go read the book because it's a classic.)

I'm confused... this is completely off topic, but props to Skape for creating a thread that held my attention

Plus, it encouraged some thought and other such stuff to be brought in which is nice. No flames yet, but I think I may have felt sparks there for a second.

Quote :

A new big bang simply cannot occur, because if you believe the big bang occurred, then you believe that there is a finite amount of matter and energy in our physical universe. For a bang of comparable magnitude to occur, the entire universe would have to be compressed by some means into a singularity. The process of causing such a compression would most certainly exterminate all of us and take more than we can possibly fathom to perform.

Completely in theory, then, would we not be able to create another universe with a "Finite" amount of matter? However that amount is much smaller, and life would be created out eventually of even smaller beings :O.

@Jay hahaha yeah... possible but technically everything is possible with quantum physics. Probable, now that's a different story...

So I guess quantum physics is optimist and probability is pessimist?

I can't claim to be well informed about quantum physics, but from what I have heard in the past, the basic premise is that EVERY event has a nonzero probability of happening, that nothing is impossible, just infinitely improbable.

What about paradoxes? Like it's possible for something to be impossible? Or is that just wordplay and only works because of the definitions of the words?

No, technically it's impossible for anything to be impossible. Basically, everything has a particle nature and a wave nature. The nature of the wave is that it can be anything between point A and point B and has an equal probability of being anywhere in that space and that space represents all possibilities. However, particles take up a definite point in space and time. At first, people thought that only subatomic particles behaved like waves AND particles, but they soon discovered that everything does.

How it works: When a thing is *not* being measured, it behaves like a wave. When it *is* being observed, it behaves like a particle. It has a duality.

Then there's Heisenberg's uncertainty principle which states when you measure one thing, you can't measure another... something like once you measure the speed, you don't know where the particle is, but if you know the orientation you can't know the velocity.

Then there's the Copenhagen Interpretation which states that everything's state is in a state of quantum possibility until someone (thing) observes the thing in which case it collapses into a particle state of being and takes a definite position etc.

That then leads to Schroedinger's Cat thought experiment.

So, yeah, BnS, Quantum Physics goes hand in hand with probability theory.

The Prequel to The Davinci Code, called Angels & Demons, was actually entirely based off of this recent news.

To sum it up, Cern created the Super Collider, tested it and found that under the right circumstances they could create Anti-Matter. Of course in order to propel the story to anythign meaningful they turned it into a weapon, as they put it a single drop of anti matter could destroy half the planet.



So ya Im optimistic about this

AquaAscension wrote:

No, technically it's impossible for anything to be impossible.

So its impossible for it to technically be impossible for anything to be impossible as well?

If it's impossible for nothing to be impossible, then that means something is impossible - so it is possible for something to be impossible, no?

Yes. *edit: *

you guys are smart lol im learning lots, please continue i take notes

woah...if we can make anti-matter this means we would be able to make wormholes according to the theories I've read...I just made a mess in my pants...

anti-matter is the opposite of matter. im not sure exactly how it works, but it is basically a bunch of super-electrons (negative).

when it touches matter with 'super-protons' (positive) it 'explodes', or neutralizes/equalizes some way.

atomic bomb explosion energy= .07% of antimatter explosion
therefore antimatter explosion= 15atomic bombs... depending on how much antimatter it is.

im not really sure how it works but its something like that.

my friend said that antimatter HAS been created before. but it has never really exploded. so how do we know it will explode with the power of 15 atomic bombs? isnt having antimatter dangerous??? o.o

anyone who has read the davinci code please explain id like to know.

kuro wrote:

anyone who has read the davinci code please explain id like to know.

I would explain, but you haven't solved the cryptex yet.

When anti-matter and matter meet, they are both annihilated. I'm not sure of there is a difference of proportion in the volume of anti-matter required to annihilate an amount of matter.

I haven't read much on this subject, because it doesn't interest me a great deal, inconsequential as it is because anti-matter cannot be stored (It would annihilate any storage container that it came into contact with).

You shouldn't trust everything your friends tell you kuro, you shouldn't trust everything I tell you. I could be mistaken, or I could be lying, and in most cases people are indeed mistaken.

THE POINT: World's not going to end because of the LHC. World (as we know it) is going to end on December 12, 2012, when the alignment of the planets of the Solar System will cause something called Polar Shift to occur to Earth, where the poles physically shift from the north and south to east and west, annhilating pretty much everything but not actually destroying the planet, but maybe just leaving it a smoldering ruin because of the magma thats going to be coming from under the earthen crust. Will we survive? I think we stand a pretty damn good chance, but we will need to prepare. And pray. Praying always helps. At least thats what were told.