Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Posers and Puzzles

Posers and Puzzles

  1. Subscriber sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    14 Apr '06 19:07
    Just wondered.
  2. 15 Apr '06 06:33 / 1 edit
    oh, I don't know a proton yet. Present me one, pls.
    Then, may be I could answer your question...
  3. 19 Apr '06 18:21
    a proton is a subatomic particle. As a universe is infinitely bigger than a proton as far as we are concerned, no universes are in a proton
  4. Subscriber sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    19 Apr '06 20:56 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by laur3tta
    a proton is a subatomic particle. As a universe is infinitely bigger than a proton as far as we are concerned, no universes are in a proton
    And your proof is?
    For instance, it is thought black holes house an entire universe with its own time scale inside, the implication being there are other universes.
  5. 20 Apr '06 05:23
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    For instance, it is thought black holes house an entire universe with its own time scale inside, the implication being there are other universes.
    To accept this, one has to redefine the word - 'universe'.

    One definition of universe is 'All there is'.
    This definition doesn't support the idea of a universe within a black hole just because this black hole universe resides totally within ours.

    To make the discussion of this matter continue we have to have a better definition of 'universe' in order to make it a meaningful diskussion.
  6. Standard member XanthosNZ
    Cancerous Bus Crash
    20 Apr '06 05:26
    Originally posted by laur3tta
    a proton is a subatomic particle. As a universe is infinitely bigger than a proton as far as we are concerned, no universes are in a proton
    Infinitely?
  7. Subscriber sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    20 Apr '06 13:35
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    To accept this, one has to redefine the word - 'universe'.

    One definition of universe is 'All there is'.
    This definition doesn't support the idea of a universe within a black hole just because this black hole universe resides totally within ours.

    To make the discussion of this matter continue we have to have a better definition of 'universe' in order to make it a meaningful diskussion.
    Thats the interesting thing about at least the theory of black holes, the inside cuts itself off from our universe and starts another.
    The definition of universe in that case is what you might call universe bubbles embedded in a higher order dimensional matrix, whatever that number may turn out to be, say 5 dimensions at minimum since we already have 4. String and M brane theory suggests 10 or 11 dimensions, testable btw, at least in part.
  8. 20 Apr '06 14:05
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Thats the interesting thing about at least the theory of black holes, the inside cuts itself off from our universe and starts another.
    If we define 'universe' as an entity containg a full set of laws of physics - then I can't imagine that the volume inside a black hole can be a universe itself.

    The thougt that our universe is the content of another black hole the idea seems rediculous. If not there is two cinds of universes - one inside a black hole and one, completely different outside of a black hole.

    What about the boundary between the two universes? In what universe resides this surface? And with what laws of physics do apply?

    No, we can't call inside of a black hole as an universe of the same kind as our own universe.
  9. Subscriber sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    20 Apr '06 14:22
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    If we define 'universe' as an entity containg a full set of laws of physics - then I can't imagine that the volume inside a black hole can be a universe itself.

    The thougt that our universe is the content of another black hole the idea seems rediculous. If not there is two cinds of universes - one inside a black hole and one, completely different outsi ...[text shortened]... o, we can't call inside of a black hole as an universe of the same kind as our own universe.
    According so some theories, you are right about that, but the boundry to that place is called the event horizon, beyond which you are part of the inside of the black hole and permenantly disconnected from our universe, in fact, if you had instrumentation that could magically watch events in our universe, you would see our universe meet its destiny, all the while your univese would have its own disconnected time rate, that alone is a disconnect from our universe as we count time as one of the dimensions of space.
  10. 20 Apr '06 14:45
    If we don't agree what definition of the very fenomenon 'universe' is - then we don't know what we are talking about.

    The key question before we can say anything is - "What is a universe?"
  11. Subscriber sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    20 Apr '06 14:50
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    If we don't agree what definition of the very fenomenon 'universe' is - then we don't know what we are talking about.

    The key question before we can say anything is - "What is a universe?"
    Your working definition fits mine, a box with its own set of physics laws inside. That is what present theory says, there can be other boxes with its own set of laws, say places where the speed of light is one meter per second, or where the time scale compared to ours is a million times faster or a million times slower. The overall picture according to this kind of theory is called the 'Multiverse'.
  12. 20 Apr '06 16:13
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Your working definition fits mine, a box with its own set of physics laws inside.
    So the universes are isolated from each other?
  13. Subscriber sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    20 Apr '06 17:13
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    So the universes are isolated from each other?
    Not entirely. Theory has it these multiple universes have one connecting glue: gravity. According to these theories, gravity is so weak compared to magnetism for instance (a refrigerator magnet holds back the gravitational pull of the whole planet for example), precisely because it crosses dimensions, the power of gravity thus becomes shared by all these dimensions and therefore each set of dimensions only feels a shared piece of the power of gravity. I suspect that makes for an open door between dimensions for sufficiently advanced civilizations. Just a personal speculation.
  14. 20 Apr '06 17:33
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Not entirely. Theory has it these multiple universes have one connecting glue: gravity. ... Just a personal speculation.
    Well, this theory is not more than speculations. And should be treated as such. As a brain-teaser over a hefty glass of beer for physicists theoreticans local pub, inside or outside university campus.

    A complete universe inside of black hole? No way in my humble opinion.

    But the discussion is fun.
  15. Subscriber sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    20 Apr '06 18:15 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    Well, this theory is not more than speculations. And should be treated as such. As a brain-teaser over a hefty glass of beer for physicists theoreticans local pub, inside or outside university campus.

    A complete universe inside of black hole? No way in my humble opinion.

    But the discussion is fun.
    There are testable ramifications to the gravity spread amongst dimension theory which is being vigorously tested as we speak.
    You of course know about Newtonian gravity, inverse square law and all that. Theory has it, if other dimensions are embedded in our dimension but are hidden, say by being rolled up like a plank length sized rug, then as two objects get extremely close, the inverse square law will break down and change, don't remember if its supposed to get weaker than inverse square or stronger but at any rate, there will be a change in the inverse square curve. So far they have built accurate devices that measures that law down to one tenth of a millimeter, or 100 microns, 1000 microns=one millimeter, and so far no split from Newton. That null result begins to chop out alternate theories but still there may be differant results if you can measure down to 10 microns or maybe 1 micron and that is where the experimentalists are pushing. Its very difficult to do accurately though. If you are interested,here is a link to that work:
    http://www.int.washington.edu/talks/REU/2002/People/Searing_P/ISLpaper.pdf