Sorry for another black hole question

For the discussion of the sciences. Physics problems, chemistry equations, biology weirdness, it all goes here.

Moderators: gmalivuk, Moderators General, Prelates

Is the universe inside a black hole?

Yes, of course.
16
19%
No, of course not.
25
30%
*bubblebubblebubble* dude, what if the universe is, like, somebody's dream, and we all, like, just die when he wakes up...?
43
51%
 
Total votes : 84

Postby gmalivuk » Fri May 18, 2007 3:48 pm UTC

SpitValve wrote:And fresh, new minds often take their physical theories from metaphors in popular books and try to put them on the same level as rigorous mathematical treatment and end up in all sorts of trouble.


Or, worse, from movies about women who claim to be channeling people who lived 35 millennia ago...
In the future, there will be a global network of billions of adding machines.... One of the primary uses of this network will be to transport moving pictures of lesbian sex by pretending they are made out of numbers.
Spoiler:
gmss1 gmss2
User avatar
gmalivuk
Archduke Vendredi of Skellington the Third, Esquire
 
Posts: 19275
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here, There, Everywhere (near Boston, anyway)

Postby Yakk » Fri May 18, 2007 5:04 pm UTC

Fresh, new minds who hold ignorance as a virtue are not useful. :)

Put forward your theory. Admit your ignorance. Work to eliminate your ignorance.

I tossed out a number of possible problems about your theory: as an example, the degree of uniformity in the spectrum of the microwave background radiation.

If you want to seriously see if your theory holds water, at least do a small amount of minimal grunt work: Run the calculus on what it would look like being in part of a large explosion with an actual starting 'location'. See how it compares to space itself expanding.

Any heat gradients? Any doppler effect differences?

I don't think you'll manage to upset the big bang theory, but you might just teach yourself something.

If you are unable or unwilling to learn the language of science (mathematics), then you will be chronically incapable of determining if your own ideas are poor or not. :)
User avatar
Yakk
 
Posts: 10038
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Postby Amaroq » Fri May 18, 2007 5:41 pm UTC

Well, I guess that discredits me.

I'm an aspiring programmer, not a mathematician. The kind of mathematics required to test my theory are outside the scope of my knowledge.

So while I rather like my theories, and feel that they aren't just something I pulled outta my ass, theories are all they will ever be.

God help me if I ever have to learn those kinds of mathematics. xD
I can work on php all day, but I couldn't even stay awake during normal math classes...
User avatar
Amaroq
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 9:04 pm UTC
Location: Washington

Postby une see » Mon Jun 11, 2007 8:51 pm UTC

Yes! Twenty-ninth person to pick option 3. Metaphysics is always fun. (Correct me if I'm not using the right word here.)
User avatar
une see
Is my girl
 
Posts: 1038
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2007 8:31 pm UTC
Location: a tenuous grip on reality

Postby Vaniver » Mon Jun 11, 2007 9:33 pm UTC

Just saying that relative lack of experience on a certain subject shouldn't stop one from participating in that subject.
And this is the fundamental problem with Wikipedia.

So while I rather like my theories, and feel that they aren't just something I pulled outta my ass, theories are all they will ever be.
To a scientist or a person who works with actual theories, the use of them to describe opinions and notions is insulting. If it's a theory, it's rigorously explained and can be tested. If it can't be rigorously explained or tested, it's not.
Motivation is when your dreams put on work clothes. -- Ben Franklin

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.
User avatar
Vaniver
 
Posts: 9357
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Previous

Return to Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Armanant, p1t1o and 3 guests