Great book that's easy to get into is Stephen Hawking's
"Universe Explained". And only has one equation.

___________________

Electric Zoo 2010! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVE-RutexSE

Source:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world...icle2134891.ece

Thats sweet.

I don't buy it.

The whole "Dark Matter" thing.

I think that our current theories are unable to determine yet what actually happens out there in the void, and we keep building on TOP of old theories, instead of taking steps backwards to rectify errors. The reason we can't do this is most likely because our system of arithmetic itself may be the root of the problem, disallowing the cohesion of absolute information and theoretical inquery.

So yeah... we can't actually ascertain the weight of galaxies and solar systems, so we sloppily make up a variable, "dark matter", to encompass everything that we don't yet understand or doesn't fit correctly into our models.

I don't doubt that there are entire spectrums of vibrational waves as well as material objects that we can't even detect in *any* possible way yet. Overlapping universes, new types of states of matter beyond plasma, or maybe just errors in how mass actually functions in its non-dimensional reality.

Why is there even matter?

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby I don't buy it. The whole "Dark Matter" thing. I think that our current theories are unable to determine yet what actually happens out there in the void, and we keep building on TOP of old theories, instead of taking steps backwards to rectify errors. The reason we can't do this is most likely because our system of arithmetic itself may be the root of the problem, disallowing the cohesion of absolute information and theoretical inquery. So yeah... we can't actually ascertain the weight of galaxies and solar systems, so we sloppily make up a variable, "dark matter", to encompass everything that we don't yet understand or doesn't fit correctly into our models. I don't doubt that there are entire spectrums of vibrational waves as well as material objects that we can't even detect in *any* possible way yet. Overlapping universes, new types of states of matter beyond plasma, or maybe just errors in how mass actually functions in its non-dimensional reality.

Well I believe because there are inconsitencies in weight
that they believe that itself is proof of dark matter. Another
interesting idea deals with gravity. They haven't figured it
out all the way and have thought that maybe gravity is seeping
into another dimension. It's alot deeper than that but I
think that's the gist.

___________________

Electric Zoo 2010! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVE-RutexSE

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby I don't buy it. The whole "Dark Matter" thing. I think that our current theories are unable to determine yet what actually happens out there in the void, and we keep building on TOP of old theories, instead of taking steps backwards to rectify errors. The reason we can't do this is most likely because our system of arithmetic itself may be the root of the problem, disallowing the cohesion of absolute information and theoretical inquery. So yeah... we can't actually ascertain the weight of galaxies and solar systems, so we sloppily make up a variable, "dark matter", to encompass everything that we don't yet understand or doesn't fit correctly into our models. I don't doubt that there are entire spectrums of vibrational waves as well as material objects that we can't even detect in *any* possible way yet. Overlapping universes, new types of states of matter beyond plasma, or maybe just errors in how mass actually functions in its non-dimensional reality.

Well I believe because there are inconsitencies in weight
that they believe that itself is proof of dark matter. Another
interesting idea deals with gravity. They haven't figured it
out all the way and have thought that maybe gravity is seeping
into another dimension. It's alot deeper than that but I
think that's the gist.

___________________

Electric Zoo 2010! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVE-RutexSE

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby I don't buy it. The whole "Dark Matter" thing. I think that our current theories are unable to determine yet what actually happens out there in the void, and we keep building on TOP of old theories, instead of taking steps backwards to rectify errors. The reason we can't do this is most likely because our system of arithmetic itself may be the root of the problem, disallowing the cohesion of absolute information and theoretical inquery. So yeah... we can't actually ascertain the weight of galaxies and solar systems, so we sloppily make up a variable, "dark matter", to encompass everything that we don't yet understand or doesn't fit correctly into our models. I don't doubt that there are entire spectrums of vibrational waves as well as material objects that we can't even detect in *any* possible way yet. Overlapping universes, new types of states of matter beyond plasma, or maybe just errors in how mass actually functions in its non-dimensional reality.

you're gonna have to do better than that, if youre gonna fly in the face of popular expert opinion.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN you're gonna have to do better than that, if youre gonna fly in the face of popular expert opinion.

Hm... actually, I don't.

I think I can have a different opinion than the general opinion if I please, whether you like it or not.

And as your cute little oxymoron, where exactly do the popular experts get their qualifications?

Oh... that's right, their models are mostly based on Einstein's model of relativity, in which he himself said that our theories are guesses that attempt poorly to mold to what is actual reality and not vice versa.

You're gonna have to do better than that.

peace

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby Hm... actually, I don't. I think I can have a different opinion than the general opinion if I please, whether you like it or not. And as your cute little oxymoron, where exactly do the popular experts get their qualifications? Oh... that's right, their models are mostly based on Einstein's model of relativity, in which he himself said that our theories are guesses that attempt poorly to mold to what is actual reality and not vice versa. You're gonna have to do better than that. peace

what i meant was- these scientists are the ones that are looking for it (dark matter), theyre the ones crunching the numbers and evaluating the models. if youre going to disagree with them, then you should also be working through the same hypotheses, to show why theyre not accurate. basically im gonna accept their assessment at face value coz i certainly cant do the work myself. perhaps you can, and if so id love for you to explain it to me

___________________

We are one step closer!

___________________
"You won a new refrigerator, great! Where you gonna put it?" - Tony Danza

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN what i meant was- these scientists are the ones that are looking for it (dark matter), theyre the ones crunching the numbers and evaluating the models. if youre going to disagree with them, then you should also be working through the same hypotheses, to show why theyre not accurate. basically im gonna accept their assessment at face value coz i certainly cant do the work myself. perhaps you can, and if so id love for you to explain it to me

Ah, I see.

Well if I had to guess, I'd say that they're taking in various ranges of electromagnetic radiation and perhaps inversing that data.

It's a little strange how haphazard their current diagram turned out to be. Personally, I just don't think we have the tools yet to really grasp what other potential dimensions or material states can exist... but, as with all things, this information will come with time and progress.

I'm not sure if I even believe this massive gulf of space outside of our galaxy to be the do-all-end-all of the system we label "universe". I would equate it more to earth and space in the past 1000 years... they theorized all sorts of things, from angels, to gods, to ether and machinations. Right now we believe it to be a vacuum, which in itself is rather difficult to conceptualize. It also creates the error that all that "space" out there is just null void; it's actually a topographical series of huge amounts of varying amounts of "stuff".

I mean think about it... we have not come up with any machine here on earth that can simulate a vacuum. It's really just a word to label the circumstances we believe to be occuring (pressureless/etc, as opposed to a plenum). We can create tight-locked closed systems, but they are not vacuums. We can simulate antigravity through supersonic flight, but it's still nowhere near the situation in space, which itself shifts as the variables we do know -- temperature, density, etc -- raise and fall through the universe.

So what about the variables we can't yet measure and the effects they may have? I imagine eventually we will have self-replicating "droids", for lack of a better word, crawling through space-time mapping its components, and perhaps they'll be able to come up with some fun new layers of consciousness necessary to fathom all this fun stuff.

Until then, these guys are doing research and that never hurt anyone; I was just stating my viewpoint on the whole dark matter deadend (in my opinion)

Last edited by DJ Shibby on Jan-11-2007 at 05:51