File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
>> Anonymous
Wtf happend to the thread?
>> Anonymous
Continuation of last thread;

>>341038
And this ranting proves what? That you cannot take part in a discussion? Like I said, it cannot be proven wrong nor right, therefore you have already lost if you have restricted your mind to believing that there could only be one universe.

lol, course there is a "center" of this universe. But if there's a SMBH/WH whatever there, thats another thing.

Get your heads out of yer asses, and try some different perspectives, whether it will be fact or fiction, it will still give you some deeper insight and thought about this existence, if not simply a brief moment of funny thoughts.

Anywho, the fact of this matter is that mankind dont know SHIT! We'we learned some basics, thats it. And much of what we take as facts, are theories made be insane mathmaticians. And even though math can explain a lot it does not explain everything. Yet.. For all we know we are part of a bigger entity, however unlikely that should be. If you have the imagination to see how microorganism live off other things, this reasoning is not to fucked up at all. And no, I do not personally believe that, but the idea is kinda cool, yet scary.
>> Anonymous
OP probably deleted the original thread.

Whats wrong OP?

Too DEEP for you?
>> Anonymous
>>341071
>>341081
>>341083
>>341098
WTF happened? I post and leave for an hour and I miss something.
>> Anonymous
Q: What is the largest telescope in space?

A: Hubbl- WRONG

The largest telescope in space (with a mirror much bigger than hubbles, therefore higher resolution) is pointed right back at earth. And it's owned by the US military.

What a god damn waste.

Once the New Worlds Imager my university is helping design is completed, we'll start getting direct images of planets in other solar systems. Woo.
>> Anonymous
>>341083
>lol, course there is a "center" of this universe.

That statement is sufficient evidence that you know sod all.
>> Anonymous
>>341109
I am the center of the universe, foolish cardboard dream figures.
>> Anonymous
>>341119
O SHI--
>> Anonymous
>>341103
who cares, visible wavelengths can only do so much anyways.
>> Xero
Yeah, I wanted to see if anyone responded to my post in the OP...
>> Anonymous
OP here...and I did not delete the thread. I was very interested in the continuing discussion. Not sure what happened.
>> Xero
>>341653

Strange.. Anyway, about the multiverse/universe thing, because of the origins of our universe, assuming the big bang is "the beginning" our universe would be insignificant compared to other universes piled up on top of us, because we have black holes in our universe. And well... Gravity.. And I don't mean insignificant as in, non-unique, because who knows for sure what the other universes on top of ours are like.

All in all, the 10th dimensional point that is everything, yes, a point, meaning infinitely/indefinably small, means that our universe would still be an infinitely small point, just as it started in the big bang.

Which leads to another thing. An informational paradox of sorts. If you take 2 electrons that were formed at the same time (technically if you're viewing time how we 3d characters view it, time is just 3 dimensional cross sections of the 4th dimension. Just as a 2d character would see the 3rd dimension as, for example, a balloon, starting as a point, then inexplicably growing to a certain size, then shrinking back down again. All the while in the 3rd dimension, the balloon isn't changing at all. Well, that's an easier way of looking at time as something more mathematical.) And you take one of the electrons and pull it to another side of the universe (not literally of course, but theoretically) and interact with one of the electrons, the other one will react instantaneously. Which means that either information is traveling infinitely fast, which is physically impossible, or in reality the electrons are still touching. So that's how we can tell that the universe (or multiverse) is still infinitely small. Exactly as it was at the point of the big bang.
>> Anonymous
>>341680
ITT we watch stupid explanations for obsolete theories on google video and are true experts
>> Anonymous
i sear these are aliens i saw, weird ,http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wGxgJXO7gc
>> Anonymous
I've been away for a while but I have this
http://www.spacetelescope.org/news/html/heic0810.html

uber HR space PICs'O'WIN

some of you might already have this
other of you who are Google-tards might injurry theese
>> Anonymous
Real OP here. I posted this thread a while ago and kind of forgot about it (two days of hard drinking). Can someone bring me up to speed on whats been going on?

I must say I did not expect much to come of my request, certainly not a huge discussion.
>> Anonymous
>>341795

I guess we both must of posted the same photo at different times.
>> Anonymous
>>341680
lol quantum physics. How does quantum electron jumping prove our universe is infinitely small? Quantum physics can't be applied to relativity (yet, because we haven't completely figured it out). Also, during the big bang's inflation period, the universe expanded, much faster than the speed of light from that single point, meaning it is no longer infinitely small (still it could be very small, but the simple fact that we can move through space-time proves that it's not infinitely small and dense like before the big bang).

But I'm no expert.

...yet.
>> Anonymous
Its me, multiverse man XD

I saved the last post as I saw it dissapeared while posting. So if there should be a want for it, I can provide. Likewise with the pics that was in it and more if wanted? Its cool to hear you guys enjoy this thread as much as me.>>341680
This may be getting too deep for my understanding.. But Ill still discuss and debate after my best knowledge.
>>341751
THANK YOU. You sir, are great.

We may not know shit, but we sure as hell are trying, hehe XD