i have few doubts :unsure:
Printable View
i have few doubts :unsure:
:eyebrows:
our big bang is just another singularity . correct ? :unsure:
Nope :eyebrows:
you sure about that ? :huh:
pretty much, yeah :dabs:
why cant it be ? it could just another singularity . i believe a dent in the space time fabric caused by a blackhole rips through the multdimensional multi verse which made it possible to transfer stuffs through the blackhole, and the dark energy itself flowed to our universe from another multiverse ..
and there you have it , on the otherside of the blackhole the ever expanding universe with time as the 4rth dimension ...
and we are the byproducts of a universe with 4 dimensions and four forces .. just a thought :dabs:
I curse the idiot who first coined the phrase "black hole". It's not a hole. It's simply a point in spacetime where information gets destroyed. There's no "other side", no "flowing through" such a thing.
There is nothing.
The Big Bang was something entirely different.
Also, it didn't make a bang and it wasn't big, but never mind about that for now.
you can call it whatever you want ... but for the sake of discussion .. i am going to continue calling it a blackhole...
well , i think blackholes are linked to our own anti universe with all the anti matter stuffs which paul dirac predicted ...
anyway am sure a collapsing star would have a great influence on the space time fabric around it .. and it curves so much that somehow the gravity interacts with each other creating a singualrity .. if there is no other side of blackhole .. there is no singularity :lol: , which is not the case according to hawkins ..
yes i do
awesome .. casanova am not a physicist or anything . do you think am completly wrong ? :unsure:
it could be possible that the spacetime fabric curvature comes close enough for the gravitons to interact during the collapsing of a star ? :unsure:Quote:
An interesting feature of gravitons in string theory is that, as closed strings without endpoints, they would not be bound to branes and could move freely between them
.. triple post :dabs:
our big bang and our universe could be one among millions of other big bangs in the membrane :lol:
..
The big bang was just another cosmic fart
Dear Theoretical Physicist:
My best friend is more "developed" than I am on top, and the guys pay way more attention to her, even though she's got the personality of a crouton.
What is going on?
—Kimberly F., Upper East Side
Dear Kimberly:
One possible answer is that breasts are composed of some kind of superdense material, such as that found at the center of a collapsed star. Such a concentration of mass would have the effect of warping space-time in the vicinity of the breast, causing less massive objects, such as men, to gravitate towards it.
This theory would also account for the fact that most women are not attracted to other women's breasts (due to the inertial mass of their own breasts), and we can speculate that lesbianism may be primarily a question of aberrant breast density.
However, while the supermassive breast theory ( S.B.T.) does an adequate job of explaining the attraction phenomenon, it leaves certain questions unanswered, such as why the men who are attracted by the breasts are not then sucked into them and pulverized by their enormous gravity.
—TP
i found something yesterday which is similar to what i had in my mind
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Smolin
:happy:Quote:
theory (also called cosmological natural selection theory) of cosmology advanced by Lee Smolin suggests that the rules of biology apply on the grandest scales, and is often referred to as "cosmological natural selection". Smolin summarized the idea in a book aimed at a lay audience called The Life of the Cosmos (ISBN 0-19-510837-X). The theory surmises that a collapsing black hole causes the emergence of a new universe on the "other side", whose fundamental constant parameters (speed of light, Planck length and so forth) may differ slightly from those of the universe where the black hole collapsed. Each universe therefore gives rise to as many new universes as it has black holes. Thus the theory contains the evolutionary ideas of "reproduction" and "mutation" of universes, but has no direct analogue of natural selection. However, given any universe that can produce black holes that successfully spawn new universes, it is possible that some number of those universes will reach heat death with unsuccessful parameters. So, in a sense, fecundity cosmological natural selection is one where universes could die off before successfully reproducing, just as any biological being can die without having children
How did it smell ?Quote:
Originally Posted by thewizeard
like your mom , in a much smaller scale
That means it smelled great ... thx for the info.
BTW: You remind me of a certain member that visited here some time ago. His name was J-Die, you're not related aren't you?
The similarity is obvious ... a lot of ego-posting (= filling threads with own posting), replying to it's own posts, generally spreading jibberish that tends to be unreadable and was well-know for his horrible interpunction.
i suppose he liked the way your mom smelled too
I'm sure he would have ... everybody does ... but I never introduced him to her because I thought he was an arse!