Go Back   Computer Forums > Welcome To Computer Forums .org > Social Lounge | Off Topic
Click Here to Login
Join Computer forums Today


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-18-2014, 03:51 PM   #11
..m.0,0.m..
Site Team
 
iPwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 3,870
Default Re: The Big Bang - Just a fun discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by root View Post
consider a break in pool, all the balls on the table go in all directions.
after the break take away pairs of spots and stripes (yellows and reds if you're british) that touched.

You'll undoubtably be left with some matter and some anti matter left.
What rules is anti-matter governed by?

If anti-matter were governed by our current laws (as they apply to the visible universe), then
it should also occur in the basic structure of what we see (member of galaxy, solar systems, rings, stars, etc.) drawn together by gravity. However, if that were the case, then we would see many more, or at least some, violent explosions at seemingly inexplicable times.

That, to me at least, would have to mean that anti-matter, while sharing source of existence with matter, also plays by a different set of laws.... anti-laws? Perhaps things like gravity still apply, but matter is not subject to it, just as it is not subject to matter's.

By the belief that matter and anti-matter share some interactive properties, what else, if anything would?
Is it possible that there is such a thing as an anti-galaxy as well?


Quote:
Originally Posted by root View Post
only the matter and anti matter that collided would be wiped out.
Sure, that makes sense. My original stance was from my interpretation of how they presented the idea, they seemed to speak of the struggle between matter and anti-matter as a 'there can be only one', and matter happened to win. Hence my comment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by root View Post
it's not that this no longer happens, it's that with less energy concerntration this is harder, - i.e in the first few seconds of the universe all matter and all energy inside the universe is concerntraited into a small space, as the energy spreads out it's concerntration is less.
Even in an environment of reasonable concentration, we are still able to observe matter simply vanishing. It returns... then repeats. This happens (from what I've studied) somewhat regularly, all around us.

My original contest was with the idea this happened because of the environment. The way it came across implied that only those conditions would cause matter to behave this way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by root View Post
but the same as we can see rocks floating in space why can't ice float in space
You can see it in action if you live to see July 28th, 2061. Halley's comet will pass again and leave behind it a massive tail of melting ice/gas.

Quote:
Originally Posted by root View Post
that is not combustion, that is nuclear fusion.
Knew that... but don't quote me.
Was just using an easy to understand example of existence of different forces/forms of a concept
__________________

__________________
Me: You'd think as the dominant species we wouldn't be so effing stupid.
J: We're just intelligent enough to be completely effing stupid.
iPwn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2014, 09:58 AM   #12
Fully Optimized
 
ssc456's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,279
Send a message via MSN to ssc456
Default Re: The Big Bang - Just a fun discussion



Honestly I absolutely love this subject, I watch documentaries on it all the time, I think Professor Brian Cox is the best at trying to explain it in a way that even the simple brain of mine believes it understands (although I clearly don't, but I believe I do . . . ).

For what my 2 cents are worth, I do believe in the big bang over creationism, there are two many holes in the whole god story thing.

Exactly what happened at the big bang nobody knows and nobody ever will but some of the theories I have heard largely make sense (the bits I understand) and just from earths point of view the whole evolution thing makes sense and there is evidence to support it, which the bible neglects to mention.
__________________

__________________
He who has never failed has never attempted anything worth succeeding at.

Dont Eat Animals, Its Not Good For Them And They Dont Like It!
ssc456 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2014, 10:16 AM   #13
Fully Optimized
 
ssc456's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,279
Send a message via MSN to ssc456
Default Re: The Big Bang - Just a fun discussion

More brain ache.

The universe is expanding at an ever increasing speed, what happens when this speed eventually hits the speed of light?
__________________
He who has never failed has never attempted anything worth succeeding at.

Dont Eat Animals, Its Not Good For Them And They Dont Like It!
ssc456 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2014, 08:51 PM   #14
Baseband Member
 
Stormaggedon5555's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 54
Default Re: The Big Bang - Just a fun discussion

I think that the Big Bang is real because it's a logical answer. And, if you don't believe in the Big Bang, then how do you think the universe was created ( other than the writings in Genesis) ?
Stormaggedon5555 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2014, 10:43 AM   #15
Fully Optimized
 
Smart_Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Saudi Arabia
Posts: 3,230
Default Re: The Big Bang - Just a fun discussion

Dunno guys, but this is something that supposedly happened too long ago.

Such an ancient happening, should it be real, could have been interpreted completely different if a single thought was different within all the series of thoughts that took place to come to this Big Bang (I almost said Ping Pong hehe) conclusion. We could have ended up with a Small Crack theory instead, or anything like that.

Bottom line is: it is still a theory and no one lived even close to its happening to at least report anything at all.

But in the end, who am I, or any of us is, to say that it is 100% true!

Btw, being who I am could bring some ideas to you knowing what the media presents me and my kind to be, but I assure you, I'm a rational and open minded person
__________________
My main rig (click here).
Smart_Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2014, 08:08 PM   #16
Daemon Poster
 
YoungIT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 661
Default Re: The Big Bang - Just a fun discussion

My two cents, but I do want to highlight the fact that you CANNOT create matter, nor destroy it....

HowStuffWorks "Problems with the Big Bang Theory"
__________________
"Difficulties mastered are opportunities won" -Sir Winston S. Churchill
YoungIT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2014, 09:39 PM   #17
Baseband Member
 
Stormaggedon5555's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 54
Default Re: The Big Bang - Just a fun discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by YoungIT View Post
My two cents, but I do want to highlight the fact that you CANNOT create matter, nor destroy it....



HowStuffWorks "Problems with the Big Bang Theory"

Oh yeah! I forgot about that!
Stormaggedon5555 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2014, 11:17 AM   #18
In Runtime
 
briggs&straton's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: n/a
Posts: 283
Default Re: The Big Bang - Just a fun discussion

Let's just say there are two sides to this.. you either believe in the logic or the faith. And I choose the faith, because I would much rather believe in something that has A LOT more to give then some theory... but we are entitled to our opinion and thats awesome! I love free will!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Computer Forums mobile app
briggs&straton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2014, 03:43 PM   #19
Site Team
 
berry120's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: England, UK
Posts: 3,425
Default Re: The Big Bang - Just a fun discussion

Quote:
That, to me at least, would have to mean that anti-matter, while sharing source of existence with matter, also plays by a different set of laws.... anti-laws? Perhaps things like gravity still apply, but matter is not subject to it, just as it is not subject to matter's.

By the belief that matter and anti-matter share some interactive properties, what else, if anything would?
Is it possible that there is such a thing as an anti-galaxy as well?
Nope. Anti-matter, in all probability, behaves pretty identically to normal matter in terms of its fundamental particles - the issue is that this has never been experimentally observed. Public opinion seems to think of it almost as some kind of mysterious voodoo, whereas all it actually is (in hydrogen's case) an antiproton and a positron - just a different makeup of fundamental particles we already know about. Anti-hydrogen was first created about 20 years ago now, but it's so unstable that actually keeping enough of it around for long enough to conclusively measure it is the real challenge. IIRC I did see a paper not long ago where they'd made improvements in this regard - so perhaps that development means it's not too far off experimental validation (or refutation.)

The other thing to bear in mind is that the big bang is really a *terrible* name for this event, which wasn't really big (it was everywhere) and it wasn't a bang in the slightest (an expansion would be much more accurate.) This is where a lot of the misconceptions and difficulties have stemmed from - people hear "big bang" and immediately think of some kind of explosion in existing space. It wasn't, it's instead the notion that if we take our current best models of the universe and use them to rewind it by billions of years, we end up in the state where all of space was in the same place at once.

As for the speed increasing, no-one really knows why - the best theories come from the realms of dark energy and negative pressures, but that's a whole new board game so I'm deliberately going to stay away from that area!

The real limitation of the "big bang" (everywhere expansion) is that we can only rewind to a certain point before our current physical models completely and utterly break down, namely the Planck time. (Actually, we probably shouldn't push our current models to within many orders of magnitude of this time constant, but we can at least obtain a limited guess by doing so.) Beyond the Planck time constant however, no-one can claim to have any reasonable idea that's anything beyond guesswork - all our current theories are based on that atomic unit of time (and the corresponding Planck length), so here lies the real mystery. Before that time, or even close to it, all bets are off.

The only thing I am willing to bet is that there's likely a whole new field of physics that may well crop up the closer we get to measuring close to the Planck time - and I for one find that incredibly exciting.
__________________
Save the whales, feed the hungry, free the mallocs.
berry120 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2014, 07:01 PM   #20
BSOD
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: MI, USA
Posts: 722
Default Re: The Big Bang - Just a fun discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by briggs&straton View Post
Let's just say there are two sides to this.. you either believe in the logic or the faith. And I choose the faith, because I would much rather believe in something that has A LOT more to give then some theory... but we are entitled to our opinion and thats awesome! I love free will!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Computer Forums mobile app
I agree absolutely 100% with you on this. Very well put
__________________

Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0