 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (1)recycle ...and 312 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2613477 Today 3 Topics 127503 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Did you know the closest star to our sun is called Proxima Centauri. This star is only 4.2 light-years away. we may reach there on day. It's like the thinking of our people in the early 1900's "could we ever reach the moon!?" although, not many people have heard of proxima centauri.:/ add your interesting space stuff below......... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I know that when I was little my teacher told me that by the time the light from a star had reached my eyes,the chances were that the star wasnt there any more.That fucked with my perception of time and space for years. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yes, many many years till the light reaches us :) i suppose also the birth of objects too.....what looks like a blank piece in space could really contain a newly formed star or blackhole? i really do not know , because we were not taught this type of thing in school, which is sad ...but at least we have the Internet now and even youtube can broadcast wonderful space and history progs! :P |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Thats what I like about todays creative thinkers,they know that we cant all understand theoretical & quantum physics and adjust their language accordingly. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Talking of quantum physics,freqy,check this out~ :) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
if we do not destroy ourselfs..... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i heard of this , something to do with , nature that we presume to be constant and would NEVER make a mistake , reacts differently to certain experiemnets .....only if a human looks closely to measure the result. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Exactly!Almost as if 'it' knows 'its'being observed. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
So maybe there is 'always' a way to figure out a puzzle, always , there is always a back door or a method to outwit the person that set the puzzle.. the person/lifeforce that made this universe. Because as we know nature NEVER EVER makes a mistake! if Nature did , that would mean that it was synthesised or created from a faulty piece of equipment , that nature is just a result of am illusion gone wrong by a magician. its as if we have found a loop hole in the magic from these results??? however we could be wrong ,could the observing equipment induce a variation somehow , to alter the qualities of resistance in the environment? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I just think that we cant ever be 'sure' of anything.There are too many variables.Besides which,Mother Nature has that way of kicking us up the arse when we become too confident. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"however we could be wrong" There's your answer i believe. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The human being is one of the most faulty creatures if you're looking at nature from a "perfect" perspective, thinking that nature would have no mistakes, it is always succesful, but we humans are a part of this natural process and we bring about a reflection to nature which isn't perfect, it's self destructive. Not only humans but animals as well, every life force is consciously or subconsciously focused on its own survival. The fact of life. The fact that we are human beings right now pondering nature shows our inability to be above it to actually attempt to fully grasp what moves it, or how it is affected by the human mind. ? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I must say it's great being alive though, at least right now. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
some fucked up ideas in this thread! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yeah well...maybe you dont see things because...'they' have already fucked with your mind... *twilight zone theme fadeout* |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
to say nature (never) makes mistakes personifys nature |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
exactly |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
3ds max > a virtual 3d graphic environment. When you create a universe within this program, to save on processing power and memory you set rules,so that= the distant objects are the least important over the closer objects, because the 'viewer' of the 'scene' will be more focused on the close/near too objects than the distant objects . So if a program prioritised a distant object over a near field object that would be inefficient and unneeded as regards to our human minds sight perception (our brains demand for seeing things that are close in high resolution , over things that are more in the distance) i haven't used 3ds for many years but there are many environmental parameters regarding distance (perspective) so to lower cpu usage. A mountain is given 3000 pixels whereas a flower is offered 60000pixels From the evidence of your video it is as if nature also has a set of rules regarding observation....so why? Is nature trying to conserve cpu power? or is it simply that our instruments are altering the environment each time we turn these instruments on ? :/ |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Very quickly,I think the turning on of the instruments messes with the end result of the test.Although the romantic in me would like to think its just the universe playing 'lets trip them up again'. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I believe nature cuts corners, the way we perceive things is strange. when you look at things your brain remembers them and uses data it already has to tell your brain what your looking at. for example when you look at a door, instead of processing the whole dimensions of the door, your brain already has the data and it creates the geometry of the door and cuts corners saving your brain the processing power. So in effect when you look at objects your brain is filling in allot of data of various shapes and colors from memory rather from the actual source. This is so hard to explain and i can't remeber the name of this concept |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Nature isn't perfect. Nor is it imperfect. It simply exists, it "works", but that doesn't make it perfect. The concept of perfection/imperfection is a construct of the human mind. It is a byproduct of man's need to quantify and categorize everything we observe. We say something is perfect when we cannot find the means to further improve it, but the lack of observable faults in a process or object does not equate to perfection. We must remember that we are flawed beings so any assessment of perfection on our part will be inherently flawed. Perfection suggests that there is a black and white scale that all things fall neatly into but there is no rigid code of good or bad, perfect or imperfect, in the universe. Every natural process is shaped by chaos. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
A person that creates a jigsaw , may not expect the user to try and complete the jigaw flip turnred up side down,where even more informative/alternative data may be present on the reverse side or at a different perspectives. As may not the creator of this universe ...there is always a possibility that our incredible cameras ,telescopes , microscopes may produce perspectives our own creator may never imagined us to be able to observe. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the way one type is a perspective on a website |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
but another thing, it's not like we are separate from the creative source. We are interacting, sure. But to say that we can even understand what the source's intentions were is too human of a thought to even be in the same vicinity as something as complex as the universe's creation. Sometimes i feel like this is all just a backwards train of thought, pondering the universe. Because the human mind is limited to itself, so trying to understand the universe only ends up feeling like your looking yourself in the mirror. It's like essentialy by pondering the universe, it's like the universe is looking at itself in the mirror. Very funny way to live. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
like, when you play with legos, the lego people aren't doing their own thing, you make them do what you want. So we're just part of some crazy giant life force that's moving our arms and legs and making connections in our brains. I wish i could understand everything too. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
well. before proxima centauri man is bound to explore the other planets of the solar system... NASA, witty folks indeed, funded insane projects to reach that planet, just a bit farther away than the moon: they studied for years a type of propulsion based on atomic explosions and planned to bombard mars with thousands of missiles full of CFC (the gases that destroy ozone) to build an atmosphere on that planet. Quantum physics: yeah let's build a GIANT particle cannon underground, maybe we can build a black hole! Nature way of doing economy: let a race evolve enough to eliminate all the other predators and reduce biodiversity to a level in which the only vertebrate animals alive are closed in cages and ready to eat. I'm exagetating obviously but I think we are not a very peaceful race. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
no, that is just an accurate description. A little too blunt, but recently i would say that this statement, "let a race evolve enough to eliminate all the other predators and reduce biodiversity to a level in which the only vertebrate animals alive are closed in cages and ready to eat. I'm exagetating obviously but I think we are not a very peaceful race." is a correct one. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
we are not a very peaceful race yeah right |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The CERN particle collider wasnt just built to see if dark matter/black holes could be created,there is potential for clean affordable energy for the whole world.Something that we should be looking at now fossil fuel reserves are drastically low. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
how can anything that's created by a particle collider ever be clean and or affordable? Do we even know how much it's costing to run the thing? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Would you prefer nuclear energy? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I'm sure the scientists at cern are some of the finest minds on this planet and of course they won't destroy our planet (hopefully). What i don't understand is why that is much more focused to resolve our current energetic issus has still problems getting adequate fundings. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
To tell you the truth khrimson I donnt know why one project would get funding and not another.Im pretty sure it would be something to do with the projected time for positive results.Ive read some damning reports from all countries that lambast governments for not providing funding for really life altering projects,or seemingly worse to me,withdrawing funding halfway through a project,just before tests results are imminent.I think CERN got the go ahead and billions poured into it because of so many countries becoming involved it was more of a global event rather than confined to any particular area.Theres a lot of stuff goes on in geo-politics that will never be made public so we,the average person,can only guess at the reasons behind it. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the interesting space between your nose and the screen of your computer |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i heard that the enrgy in a bucket of water and a few rocks wll be enough to power all my needs ...travel and computers. with very very little pollution .. that's nuclear fusion i heard. which will be in place within 25- 50 years. if more scientits mad or otherwise were influenced to help design such power plants it could be done in a few years. its the money inspiration that is in the lacking. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
*energy for aprox three months |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
There are more things in heaven and earth, Xltronic, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Is that really true? Is the 'star map' we made through astronomy now obsolete since most of the stars are gone? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
really! what most of them? are you serious ! wow! never really thought about it like that before. google search.. The life of a star depends only on how much mass the star has. Stars that are 10 times the mass of the Sun will last about 100 million years. Stars with about the Sun's mass last about 13 billion years, and stars about one tenth the mass of our Sun last 100 billion years or longer. All of the stars in the visible universe are packed into a sphere of diameter 12000 light years. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
what? 12000 light years? the milky way alone is 100,000 light years in diameter, the visible universe must be millions upon millions? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
3.14 million light years The Triangulum Galaxy (M33), at 3.14 megalight-years away, is the most distant object visible to the naked eye. that was me on google for 3 mins ....i didnt think to double check alternative sources.. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
So many of the stars are still in existence it seems. which is nice to know. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
lol My housemate (who is a mathematician) says; "Well, the Sun's a star, so it isn't true for that star. And if it was it would mean that we would all be plunged into darkness for the remainder of eternity. This 'teacher' needs to check her facts. She sounds incompetent and perhaps should/ should have been fired on the spot." |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
What does your friend being a mathematician have to do with this? "Plunged into darkness" is exactly the fate that will befall the Earth after the Sun has used up all its available fuel and transitioned from a medium star (what it is now), to a red giant, to a white dwarf, and finally to a black dwarf. We don't have to worry about being around to witness it because the process of transitioning to a black dwarf star will require a couple billion years after the Sun has already charbroiled the Earth by transitioning to a red giant in about 5 billion years. What atwood's teacher said is potentially true for every star. Visible light from a star 100 lightyears away will continue to reach Earth for 100 years after the star is gone. In other words, any given star visible in the night sky could potentially have ceased nuclear fusion (died) long ago. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
