| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
John Smith wrote:
Any ideas, or models which you can find to build a "mental model" from? Mine has always been "Flatland". It helps to understand that we are trapped on this three dimensional surface and have difficulty comprehending where we would be if we could leave it behind. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
John Smith wrote:
After the big bang, I am assuming (I know, that's bad) that somewhere, just by the design of "probability laws", that a pulsar was able to form, rather quickly (few billion years?)--and began emitting... If so, why have we NOT heard a bounce from the "shielding" (end of the universe)? The edge of the universe is more than 12.5 billion light years away, beyond our visible horizon. The early inflationary period caused the expansion of space to outrun the speed of light. Maybe in another 20 billion years, we will hear the bounce. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Portions of this universe are over 100 billion years old--that translates
directly to 100 billion light years... that is a lot of distance... even thought the echo of the big bang itself may have subsided, I just cannot believe we can't hear bounces of other signals (signals which cannot be accounted for)... Warmest regards, John "Cecil Moore" wrote in message ... | John Smith wrote: | After the big bang, I am assuming (I know, that's bad) that somewhere, just | by the design of "probability laws", that a pulsar was able to form, rather | quickly (few billion years?)--and began emitting... | | If so, why have we NOT heard a bounce from the "shielding" (end of the | universe)? | | The edge of the universe is more than 12.5 billion light years | away, beyond our visible horizon. The early inflationary period | caused the expansion of space to outrun the speed of light. | Maybe in another 20 billion years, we will hear the bounce. | -- | 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp | | ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- | http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups | ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Cecil:
Are you a follower of Dr. Michio Kaku? I think I remember reading a paper by him--he seems to have already accepted a multi-dimensional universe. It would explain why we have not heard the aliens, they are in another dimension! (Is that kinda like, "On another frequency?" grin) Regards, John "Cecil Moore" wrote in message ... | John Smith wrote: | Any ideas, or models which you can find to build a "mental model" from? | | Mine has always been "Flatland". It helps to understand that | we are trapped on this three dimensional surface and have | difficulty comprehending where we would be if we could leave | it behind. | -- | 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp | | ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- | http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups | ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
John Smith wrote:
Portions of this universe are over 100 billion years old--that translates directly to 100 billion light years... that is a lot of distance... even thought the echo of the big bang itself may have subsided, I just cannot believe we can't hear bounces of other signals (signals which cannot be accounted for)... How is it possible for portions of this universe to be eight times older than the Big Bang which occurred about 12.5 billion years ago? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
John Smith wrote:
Are you a follower of Dr. Michio Kaku? I think I remember reading a paper by him--he seems to have already accepted a multi-dimensional universe. My history reference on multiple dimensions is, "The Tenth Dimension", by Jeremy Bernstein. He doesn't mention Dr. Kaku. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Ahhh, you have me on my use of words...
Let me re-phrase, "Portions of this universe (as heavely bodies) came into existance over 100 billion years ago..." Warmest regards, John "Cecil Moore" wrote in message ... | John Smith wrote: | Portions of this universe are over 100 billion years old--that translates | directly to 100 billion light years... that is a lot of distance... even | thought the echo of the big bang itself may have subsided, I just cannot | believe we can't hear bounces of other signals (signals which cannot be | accounted for)... | | How is it possible for portions of this universe to be | eight times older than the Big Bang which occurred | about 12.5 billion years ago? | -- | 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp | | ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- | http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups | ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith wrote: Portions of this universe are over 100 billion years old--that translates directly to 100 billion light years... that is a lot of distance... even thought the echo of the big bang itself may have subsided, I just cannot believe we can't hear bounces of other signals (signals which cannot be accounted for)... How is it possible for portions of this universe to be eight times older than the Big Bang which occurred about 12.5 billion years ago? What came (or went) before the Big Bang? - Mike KB3EIA - |
I missed that!!!
Where is the 12.5 billion year age of the universe given, I will recheck, but the universe is much older... You sure that is not the age of our galaxy? Regards, John "Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... | Cecil Moore wrote: | | John Smith wrote: | | Portions of this universe are over 100 billion years old--that | translates directly to 100 billion light years... that is a lot of | distance... even thought the echo of the big bang itself may have | subsided, I just cannot believe we can't hear bounces of other signals | (signals which cannot be accounted for)... | | | How is it possible for portions of this universe to be | eight times older than the Big Bang which occurred | about 12.5 billion years ago? | | What came (or went) before the Big Bang? | | - Mike KB3EIA - |
Never mind, while I see the "proof", and this page:
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/age.html seems to suggest 10-20 billion years old--that seems wrong to me--but that is a lot of information to digest, and I don't want to be drug away from other pursuits at this moment... But, it looks like I will have to stand corrected for now... sorry if my error in "time" (hey, it ain't real anyway grin) caused any grief... Warmest regards, John "Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... | Cecil Moore wrote: | | John Smith wrote: | | Portions of this universe are over 100 billion years old--that | translates directly to 100 billion light years... that is a lot of | distance... even thought the echo of the big bang itself may have | subsided, I just cannot believe we can't hear bounces of other signals | (signals which cannot be accounted for)... | | | How is it possible for portions of this universe to be | eight times older than the Big Bang which occurred | about 12.5 billion years ago? | | What came (or went) before the Big Bang? | | - Mike KB3EIA - |
John Smith wrote:
Ahhh, you have me on my use of words... Let me re-phrase, "Portions of this universe (as heavely bodies) came into existance over 100 billion years ago..." Maybe in a parallel universe. But nothing remotely resembling heavenly bodies existed in our universe before the Big Bang. Where did you get such an idea? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Mike Coslo wrote:
What came (or went) before the Big Bang? An event horizon didn't exist "before" the Big Bang so "before" has no meaning in that context. If a clock had existed "before" the Big Bang and survived the Big Bang, it wouldn't have started running until "after" the Big Bang. The primeval mass/energy was virtually infinite. There was indeed literally a beginning of what we experience as time. When all movement and change ceases far into the future, what we experience as time will no longer exist. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
John Smith wrote:
Where is the 12.5 billion year age of the universe given, I will recheck, but the universe is much older... You sure that is not the age of our galaxy? I was remembering an earlier estimate. The latest is: http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...ry_030211.html "The new data show the universe to be 13.7 billion years old, to within 200 million years, Bennett said." -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Yes Cecil:
It seems my figure on the age of the universe was greatly in error... You see one figure, then a few years slip by on ya, and someone re-writes the darn books!!!!! I stand corrected, again.... embarassed-frown Warmest regards, John "Cecil Moore" wrote in message ... | John Smith wrote: | Ahhh, you have me on my use of words... | Let me re-phrase, "Portions of this universe (as heavely bodies) came into | existance over 100 billion years ago..." | | Maybe in a parallel universe. But nothing remotely resembling | heavenly bodies existed in our universe before the Big Bang. | Where did you get such an idea? | -- | 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp | | ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- | http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups | ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Yes, Cecil:
Yes, I agree, most are in agreement, at the VERY LEAST, that the universe is younger than twenty-billion-years old, I concede, I concede!!!! I surrender even!!! tearing-off-white-boxers-to-use-as-"flag of truce!" grin Warmest regards, John "Cecil Moore" wrote in message ... | John Smith wrote: | Where is the 12.5 billion year age of the universe given, I will recheck, | but the universe is much older... | You sure that is not the age of our galaxy? | | I was remembering an earlier estimate. The latest is: | | http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...ry_030211.html | | "The new data show the universe to be 13.7 billion years old, to within | 200 million years, Bennett said." | -- | 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp | | ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- | http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups | ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
"John Smith" wrote in message ... I wanted to respond to this right away--your post... but was quite simply unable.... (I literally spent time starring out a window!) Realize that I have nothing but questions about the "end of the universe", I think it is like that for us all, but, maybe not.... I suspect it to be a sphere, but you have seen the "mobius strip", it at first looks quite innocently like a two dimensional object, on closer examination, IT ONLY HAS ONE SIDE!!!! The universe could very well be like that... My mind spends a lot of time "out there" when I am slow to sleep.... I imagine most are scarred to speculate--others would probably mock their efforts.... Any ideas, or models which you can find to build a "mental model" from? Warmest regards, John John, Here is another thought. Just because we can only see 3 dimensions doesn't mean we don't exist in more than 3. Tam/WB2TT "Cecil Moore" wrote in message ... | John Smith wrote: | I think there may be a way if we tear a hole in the "shielding." | | Trouble is, we cannot locate the shielding. It's like | trying to get off the Earth by walking around. | -- | 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp | | ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- | http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups | ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Or, that the reports of UFO's aren't glimpses into another dimesion... but,
a mental model of such escapes me... I will need someone else with a mind more gifted than mine to supply one... frown Warmest regards, John "Tam/WB2TT" wrote in message ... | | "John Smith" wrote in message | ... | I wanted to respond to this right away--your post... but was quite simply | unable.... (I literally spent time starring out a window!) | Realize that I have nothing but questions about the "end of the universe", | I | think it is like that for us all, but, maybe not.... | I suspect it to be a sphere, but you have seen the "mobius strip", it at | first looks quite innocently like a two dimensional object, on closer | examination, IT ONLY HAS ONE SIDE!!!! | The universe could very well be like that... | My mind spends a lot of time "out there" when I am slow to sleep.... | | I imagine most are scarred to speculate--others would probably mock their | efforts.... | | Any ideas, or models which you can find to build a "mental model" from? | | Warmest regards, | John | | John, | Here is another thought. Just because we can only see 3 dimensions doesn't | mean we don't exist in more than 3. | | Tam/WB2TT | "Cecil Moore" wrote in message | ... | | John Smith wrote: | | I think there may be a way if we tear a hole in the "shielding." | | | | Trouble is, we cannot locate the shielding. It's like | | trying to get off the Earth by walking around. | | -- | | 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp | | | | ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet | News==---- | | http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ | Newsgroups | | ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption | =---- | | | | |
On Sun, 01 May 2005 17:58:44 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote: Cecil Moore wrote: John Smith wrote: Portions of this universe are over 100 billion years old--that translates directly to 100 billion light years... that is a lot of distance... even thought the echo of the big bang itself may have subsided, I just cannot believe we can't hear bounces of other signals (signals which cannot be accounted for)... How is it possible for portions of this universe to be eight times older than the Big Bang which occurred about 12.5 billion years ago? What came (or went) before the Big Bang? Fourier-play? :-) |
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:35 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com