consider this

i am not saying this is true i am not saying i think its true, and im not asking that you beleive so... i just request that you let it boggle your mind for a minute... the idea is infinity

alright... the earth is an orb of matter which basically breaks down into a mass of energy. and the other planets and stars in our galaxy are also orbs of energy... they form into a galaxy, which from far away is another orb... and these form into more and more orbs. so on into infinity.

and then it goes in the opposite manner... the earth is made up of billions of smaller orbs of energy... atoms, which are made up of smaller orbs of energy... protons, electrons and neutrons, which break down into smaller orbs of energy... and those smaller orbs of energy, so on and so forth, into infinity.


THE POINT...

since the earth has people walking around it, its a logical conclusion that the atoms and so forth that we're made up of could be little planets with little people walking on them too... and it goes the other way too, our universe could very well be just an "atom" that combines with other universes to make up another person who is much larger than us...

infinity

I often thought about that before, it seems like it could be possible.

I hope there is weed on the other orbs.

Men in Black already covered that.

ever seen a fractal? More importantly, do you understand what it represents?

the smallest fractal = the largest.

the farthest point away from the universe = the smallest point within an atom.

I'm not really sure, but I think Aristotle had a theory about the universe being orbs of pure light and energy, but I don't think that applies to this. The universe, I think, is most definately an infinite thing, but as the for the planets and matters of stuff out there, I'm not sure they could be just energy. Just my two cents.

Atoms are made up of 1 element, wheras earth and all it's inhabitants are made up of hundreds of elements, assorted in trillions of combinations. that's why atoms most likely aren't little planets. the reason for all the similarities is due to gravity, which organizes all the masses from atoms to gallaxies in the same way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrdevious

Atoms are made up of 1 element, wheras earth and all it's inhabitants are made up of hundreds of elements, assorted in trillions of combinations. that's why atoms most likely aren't little planets. the reason for all the similarities is due to gravity, which organizes all the masses from atoms to gallaxies in the same way.

---

no, atoms are made up of electrons, protons, and neutrons, and diff combos make diff elements. and i would think that diff combos of the same energy particles make up protons etc. in the end it all breaks down to pure energy, so the earth is just a big mass of energy

and i dont think they are little planets, it just is crazy to imagine that it could be

what are protons, nutrons, and electrons made out of? and their parts are made out of what other parts that are made out of what other parts???


my theory says that every atom is an entire altenate reality.


realities are compressed balls, infinite realities, infinite compressed balls, infinite compressed balls that make other (alternate) realities...

maybe one day one of those atoms will burst into the next big bang

i'd rather ours imploded into the atom as the next big bang :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stoner Shadow Wolf

i'd rather ours imploded into the atom as the next big bang :D

---

maybe that's what the black hole that's gonna suck up the universe is

could be, except i always figured that black holes were the starting point for new planets...

that when the black hole finally "fills up", it begins forming a tiny rock.... that slowly continues collecting mass and becoming a planet....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by opiuser

no, atoms are made up of electrons, protons, and neutrons, and diff combos make diff elements. and i would think that diff combos of the same energy particles make up protons etc. in the end it all breaks down to pure energy, so the earth is just a big mass of energy

and i dont think they are little planets, it just is crazy to imagine that it could be

---

elctrons, protons, and neutrons aren't elements themselves though, as you said, their combination makes up the element. but one atom, no matter what combination, doesn't make up multiple elements. the combination determines what 1 element the atom will be, then multiple atoms of unique elements can come together to create a molecule, which can be multiple elements. A single atom in itself does not make up a complex system of elements capable of creating a little planet or people on them. besides,electrons/protons/neutrons are just condensed energy.

good point devious... and we're getting closer...

i didnt start this thread to make you guys beleive this crazy theory... its just to make youy start thinking.

ASK WHY, dammit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by opiuser

good point devious... and we're getting closer...

i didnt start this thread to make you guys beleive this crazy theory... its just to make youy start thinking.

ASK WHY, dammit.

---

sorry, I'm a firm believer now, you have my unquestionable loyalty and need only to point out the infidels for me to smite ;) .

damn you devious... you ass... lol.

why must you mock me? do you want me to smite you with my firey wrath??? do you really want me to throw this banana at you?? do you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stoner Shadow Wolf

could be, except i always figured that black holes were the starting point for new planets...

that when the black hole finally "fills up", it begins forming a tiny rock.... that slowly continues collecting mass and becoming a planet....

---

Sorry to say, but all objects in our universe form out of large balls of gas and dust or are an end product of the formation of these. Black holes are only formed under extreamly dense conditions. So dense that there are no known forces (pressure) to counteract gravity to prevent the object from collapsing upon itself. There are only 3 ways they can form, from the big bang, the death of massive stars (about 8 times the mass of our sun) in Super nova explosions, and at the center of many galaxies.

The problem with your idea is that a black hole never "fills up" as it gathers more mass (it dosent acually suck like a vaccume, it works by gravity in the same way as the Earth, Sun any other object with mass.) Once somthing becomes a black hole, there is really no way for it to be reversed because the density is already past the critical. They can, however, evaporate, but it involves some quantum mechanics. (Stephen Hawking proved this.) Matter anti-matter pairs can spontainiously form and recombine (this dosent violate any laws as long as it follows the uncertainty prinicible) but one can fall into the hole and the other can fly off. Matter inside the hole must then be "erased" to allow the other partical to exist. Somthing along these lines.

hahahahahahhahahahahahaha how the fuck do you know? havew you lived for 40 billion years to study how long it takes for a black hole to fill up?



everything we know about black holes are idle speculations and theories!

what proof do you have that a black hole never fills up?



given that all our science is based on what our five senses tell us... how do we know there isnt anything beyond that that can turn it upside down at the drop of a hat?

we have very little information on black holes...actually we have speculations of it...its true that they appear after a big supernova and all cause we've seen it...(i think we did) anyway for were the things go from there we dont know but! we do know 1 things and hmmm i think Lavoisier or wathever said this ''Rien ne se perd rien ne se créé'' meaning something like nothing appears or dissapears...so thinking that the black hole erases stuff is probably not it...I sure is hell dont know what happens there....il let my imagination fly on this =)

maybe humans and beings that walk the Earth are electrons floating around the atom.

Lets try this again...

First let me say that all of what I say corresponds to theories (like
gravity) that scientists have developed using the scientific method to develop these ideas. While yes there will (I do mean will) be ideas that come along to change things, they will be towards perfecting the ideas we already have. What I mean is that there will always be "gravity", electrons, protons, forces, the "laws" (really theories) of thermodynamics, and it's our ways of looking and modeling them that will change, not the universe. There will always be certain theories that will govern our universe weather we like it or not. Once these ideas that you speak of come along then science will change to form around them. Nothing I have said neither violates anything we know right now, nor is there any sign that they will be false in the future. One more thing: a hypothesis is an idea unsupported by observations and tests but is still built upon the science known. A theory is a hypothesis that has been tested over and over and has always passed.

Theoretical scientists predicted Black holes with theories based on a
combination of Newtonian physics and Einsteinâ??s general theory of
Relativity. While they will not describe the inside of a black hole they
can explain their existence and some properties they have while viewing them
from the outside. The "invention" of the black hole was to describe a star's
core when gravity overwhelms the forces supporting it. The first is
electron degeneracy pressure, where the electrons kinetic energy as it spins
around the nucleus, is the only thing that supports the star's core from
collapsing. Because nothing can travel faster then light, there is a point
at which this fails and the star collapses.

Now, we need to talk about Gravity and potential energy. When you throw an object into the air you use energy. If you throw it fast enough the object will be able to escape from our atmosphere and into space (escape velocity). Now the force between the objects goes as Force=GMm/d^2 where G is a constant (non changing) M, m are the masses of the objects and d is the distance. This means that a massive object with a small radius will be harder to escape from then an object of the same mass with a larger radius (it essentially comes down to density.) Now what makes a black hole so black is that nothing, not even light has a fast enough escape velocity to get out of the hole. Hence when something goes in, it doesnâ??t come out.

Now objects with mass have Gravitational potential energy at any distance from a black hole (or anything else with mass.) As they get closer the object picks up speed by converting this potential into kinetic energy. This is the same sort of phenomenon as a ball rolling down a hill, or a comet/planet with an elliptical orbit around the sun. Around a Black hole gas/dust/planets/stars respond in the same way only as they get closer to the hole they reach a point where they begin to travel at the speed of light. And as they rotate around they collide and rub together. This friction heats the gas to millions of degrees and radiates photons with a huge amount of energy. (This is the original method they used to detect them.)

â??we have very little information on black holes...actually we have speculations of it...its true that they appear after a big supernova and all cause we've seen it...(i think we did) anyway for were the things go from there we donâ??t know but!â?�

Actually we have very strong (yes theoretical) theories behind black holes and how they form. Observationally yes we are limited in some respects. What appears after a Supernova (or at least what I think your referring to) is probably a white dwarf or a neutron star. They have very distant features observationally that give us good guesses to what they are. To detect a Black hole something needs to fall into it and/or things need to revolve around it in order to measure its mass. Another way would be to detect gravitational waves, but this has been unsuccessful. The only way I know of is when a companion star dump gas onto the black hole and this radiates light. This allows the hole to be â??seen.â?� The mass is then calculated by measuring the period it takes to revolve around the star (as long as itâ??s mass is known, this is determined by itâ??s luminosity mass relation.) There is also a similar way to detect very massive holes at the centers of spiral galaxies by measuring the Doppler shift of objects rotating around the center. Ironically this is also how Dark Matter was hypothesized (then turned into a theory.) Which is thought to consist mostly of Neutrinos, which are particles almost beyond our 5 senses. Trillions could pass though your body and only one might collide. Iâ??m a little fuzzy when it comes to these, though I do know that the main way they interact with normal matter is by the gravitational force.

So you can have your hypothesis:
â??could be, except I always figured that black holes were the starting point for new planets... that when the black hole finally "fills up", it begins forming a tiny rock.... that slowly continues collecting mass and becoming a planet....â?�

But I just wanted to let you know that it violates current theories, and that you might want to use a different term then â??black hole.â?� What your talking about clashes with the current scientific definition of what they are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sugarmagnolia

maybe humans and beings that walk the Earth are electrons floating around the atom.

---

exactly

hey wait one sec i thought this sounded a little familiar. This is basically an idea from that pothead teacher in Animal House.

Yeah, it is from animal house (whether you meant to get it from there or not).

That would be pretty tight. Billions and quadrillions of universes! Ahhh! Mind-boggling, aye?

Love- Kate

especially when you realise the immensity of just 1 universe!! billions universe is just too much info for our littre brains!! we will have big brains one day...if the human race survives long enough to go through a couple of milion years of evolution from now =)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sm0k1t

especially when you realise the immensity of just 1 universe!! billions universe is just too much info for our littre brains!! we will have big brains one day...if the human race survives long enough to go through a couple of milion years of evolution from now =)

---

sorry, but you just said the rawng thang.


there was a guy who was a math genious, surpassed all his peers and some of his teachers... his brain was smaller than his fist.

according to your theory, he shouldnt have been able to know more than how to walk, move, talk, and basic use of his primary 5 senses.



there are no limits to how much a person can know, knowledge isnt stored in teh brain, but the mind, which USES the brain to controll the body! :)


MoonStarer... i dont really CARE about other scientific THEORIES, theories based on theories are what determine the black hole.


i just read the basic; nothing can escape the black hole, not even light. known that since 3rd grade.

and just using my own logic, not considering any other thepries, i came to conclude that after 900 dodecillion years or more (likely more) a black hole will begin to find it's limits, and become filled up with all that energy. once the hole is filled, it's pull becomes weaker, while it also begins taking outward form, rather than inward collection. it becomes a rock that seals off the other side of the hole, which continues to attract matter to the rock.

since it's pull has weakened, it is subject to stonger gravitational pulls too now, it could start orbiting a giant star.


after so MANY MANY eons, it will become a planet.



of course this is only a theory ;) :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stoner Shadow Wolf

there are no limits to how much a person can know, knowledge isnâ??t stored in the brain, but the mind, which USES the brain to control the body!

---

This man may have had a brain the size of his fist, but he was still able to function better then others probably because he had a very good environment when he was growing up (just a hypothesis/ could be a theory. I stole this idea from my anthropologist professor either way. He told us of a similar one about a woman from Ireland? Whose brain was basically a smear on the inside of her skull) I'd like to see where you got this story. He would still have enough neurons to store all the information he needed. Our brains contain approximately 10^11 neurons which means even if you had a 100th of that, you would still be able to function pretty normally. I admit I don't know why our brains are as large as they are now. Maybe it has something to do with sexual attraction or that we developed larger brains because it may have allowed us to retain knowledge easier under poor learning environments or that they allow us to think faster. Isnâ??t it possible that our â??mindâ?� is a complex system of neurons (and other things) run by electrical pulses? With brain implants you can actually stimulate people/animals to do actions against their will.

One thing I do know is that Einsteinâ??s Brain had More folds (ie: surface area) then someone with an average IQ. This gives a hint that it has something to do with the brain in some sense. But what ever it is, itâ??s going to be a bit more complex then just the brain size.

There is one limitation though, itâ??s time. We only have a certain amount of time that we're able to learn new information.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stoner Shadow Wolf

:)of course this is only a theory ;) :)

---

When I said theory, I meant law, and the laws I talk about govern your life if you like it or not and they will not change. Although the way we perceive them will. The funny thing is you proved yourself wrong by stating an idea you said you already accepted: nothing, not even light can escape a black hole.
Well Also it violates Newtonâ??s third law, â??III. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.â?�
Then there is also the problem in explaining why terrestrial (rock) planets formed only in the inner solar system and not in the outer. If your â??black holesâ?� collected mass, they would collect mostly Hydrogen the most common element in the universe. Thus only creating gas planets, unless you can come up with some sort of limiting factor that depends on where they formed. The current theory (collapsing gas/dust cloud) explains this nicely.

I also suggest you never say, "only a theory" again, I hear the same thing from creationists about evolution. These â??theoriesâ?� give us very important information about our environment and allow us to predict future events based upon them. The universe doesnâ??t depend on our senses at all (it gives them to us in a way.) The Sun â??risesâ?� doesnâ??t it? Would it make a difference if you were blind? Or even if you were dead? This is what science lets us understand. It explains things that would normally be beyond us. Like a sixth sense, the ability to determine what will happen in the future, or what has happened in the past, based upon theories on our surroundings.

One last thing: I figured out what bothers me the most about you. You seem to be a mystic, but I was wondering: what do you consider yourself to be?

human. i cant be anything else, i dont like labels, because i never have, and never will fall into a single catagory, as who i am is made up of hundreds if not thousands of theories, ideas, philosophies, and religious bits and pieces.

well technically, even given what we think we know, everything is still theories, physics isnt understood fully to be anything more than a theory.

sure, we percieve it's effects and call them laws, but how they work and/or why are still only theories. untill we can actually create physics, in a perfect replica of our own physics, everything we know about it is theories.

if we rely on technology to recreate physics, we're still using theories, and we would end up creating theoretical physics, which, dont get me wrong, could still be almost exactly the same, but there is still the glaring difference; the source.

as for the brain, you can believe what you will, but the mind is infinite, the mind is not a physical thing or collective of physical things, it is what created these physical things, and now is also using them to pretend to be "real".

first there is nothing, this nothing is just an infinite source of thoughts. then there are egos, which reside outside the nothing, in real, true nothingness. as egos enter the mind, they gain awareness of thought, and are no longer "nothing". in an instant, they create "themselves", the egos, they create a metaphysical body to represent themself; all thoughts, without the thoughts this metaphysical body would be nothing, unpercievable, no thoughts to associate with it.


you should now be able to see how in an instant, one ego can and would create an infinite universe, if not infinite universes.

you might even call the mind the omniverse.

Ok, so we both agree that the universe is infinite. However I think that conciseness is what lets us observe and study the universe, and the universe will exist regardless of the mind/conciseness. I think youâ??re stuck on the idea that we (minds) generate the universe and not vice versa. Granted we each have a different perception on the universe, it doesnâ??t mean we can physically influence it (unless youâ??re talking about using your body/brain, which seems to be what youâ??re talking about.) The universe acts upon us equally though forces (exchange of quantitative partials of energy.) Itâ??s all about energy. But our minds are part of the physical world, not the metaphysical. But I guess I canâ??t really prove that... Unlessâ?¦your talking about brain implants that use electrical pulses to control people though physical processes. They influence the brain and not what you might call your mind.
I know youâ??re not insane, you wouldnâ??t have the ability you question your own judgment. I guess the question is if insanity actually exists at all, and the answer to that depends on the whole notion to why we are here in the first place.
Iâ??m interested in a few of your opinions: How old do you think the universe is? Do you consider other animals besides humans to have minds? And what do you think about evolution?

"We are a way for the Cosmos to know itself"-Carl Sagan.

you're the one who's stuck ;) stuck on that we are physical entities.

WE are ego, ego is nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stoner Shadow Wolf

you're the one who's stuck ;) stuck on that we are physical entities.

---

Touché Mr. Salesman Touché

lol i have habit of speaking of my (so called [sorry]) opinion as fact... it's only because of that "truth is nothing; we are nothing" thing :)