The Grey Griffin Lounge and Coffee House

Minerva · Post by **Minerva** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:01 am

@Chrissy: True.

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:07 am

@Minerva, I don't know about Buddism, but I believe that humans face the same problem with 'nothingness' as infinite. To our understanding there has to be a beginning and an ending. There has to be something. I am not sure whether zero is something, as that is only a mathematical number. A question could be: is space nothing?

Minerva · Post by **Minerva** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:11 am

@Flagg: Personally, I don't think the space is nothing.

The question has to way to look at, scientifically or philosophically. You get different answers, which will never be "the" answer...

[This message has been edited by Minerva (edited 03-18-2001).]

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:14 am

@Minerva, Do you know what either one would be???

Most of these questions will most likely never be satisfactory answered.

At least not in my lifetime.

Minerva · Post by **Minerva** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:20 am

@Flagg: I don't know...

And you are right, we will never know during our life time.

Chrissy · Post by **Chrissy** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:26 am

Isn't the absence of mass a way to describe space scientificaly? Probably not accurate enough...

LOL. If I try to 'visualise' nothingness I start with a dark space and then try to subtract 'darkness' and 'space' because that are both things... Think about it hard enough and it makes your head spin

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:28 am

Originally posted by Chrissy:

LOL. If I try to 'visualise' nothingness I start with a dark space and then try to subtract 'darkness' and 'space' because that are both things... Think about it hard enough and it makes your head spin

You found the reason why I couldn't sleep when I was studying astrophysics while I was in highschool.

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:30 am

Originally posted by Chrissy:
Isn't the absence of mass a way to describe space scientificaly? Probably not accurate enough...

Does energy have mass? I can't remember right now.

Ubik · Post by **Ubik** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:30 am

OK, ok, as I promised I shall follow the tide (I am still waiting Waverly to come up with one of his not-really-original pick-up lines and start chatting with the ladies

).

I am particulary interested in the concept of time, I actually done some reading on it (some years ago). Actually, time in it's essence as WE humans see it, is a human invention.
Still, there is a passing of things (can't find a better expression for it) and something that most people know as "entropy".
Everything leads to self-destruction, this is inevitable.
But, as the phoenix, the self destruction contains the seed for the rebirth.
There is allways this question wether the universe is "open" (shall expand forever) or it's "closed" (shall stop it's expansion and return to the before-the-big-bang state - or something like that).
Time and space. Both are connected to eachother. Both are two aspects for the same continuity, wich right now as a bit too tricky for the human mind to deal with it.
Some day we shall have all the answers...

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:33 am

Regarding the infinity of the universe. The universe (IMHO) has boundaries - otherwise the theory of the big-bang would not hold. This theory states that the universe (at present (or what we define as present

)) is expanding. For it to expand it has to have boundaries, otherwise - what would expand.

But the concept of nothingness is extremely hard to define, because what is nothing. For instance space is full of particles and therefore the "empty space" is not empty - this can be proven by making a spectral analysis (a guy from my high school class made a paper about it and won a trip to Central America to some telescopes down there).

I think at present nobody can imagine how "nothing" is - well we all know that when there is nothing there is, well, nothing - but to understand nothingness is quite tricky.

But enough about that from me

What intrest me much more (but to stay in the same area) is the possiblity of creating wormholes and thereby making spacetravel a posibility.

Or to move away alittle.
(this is classic

)
A man is standing on a train that moves with the speed of light.
Another man is wacthing this train pass by.
The man inside the train starts to walk foward in the same direction as the train moves.
What speed does this man have??

(i like this one alot

)

Brink · Post by **Brink** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:34 am

I have a question.If space was really 'nothing',then how come light travels through it.Doesn't this nullify the effect of 'nothingness'?

Waverly · Post by **Waverly** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:35 am

<pours a cup of strong coffee and adds a shot of espresso>

The 'boundry' idea is just an easy way to look at the universe. I don't actually think you can simply step outside. In fact you can't get to the boundry because you cannot move fast enough to catch up with it.

Which brings up an easy way to prove to yourself there is a boundry: Starting with a 'big bang' and expanding outward from there: at any speed and given any span of time, there still has to be a limit to how far the univers has gotten.

@Chrissy time as relative concept is useful and extant. Time as an absolute is beyond me

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:36 am

What we can see of space: this is not nothing - there are plenty of particles in space. "Outside" the universe there might be nothing

Waverly · Post by **Waverly** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:37 am

Originally posted by Flagg:
Does energy have mass? I can't remember right now.

Strictly speaking no, though you may need a particle carrying mass to deliver it.

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:37 am

Originally posted by Xandax:

Or to move away alittle.
(this is classic )
A man is standing on a train that moves with the speed of light.
Another man is wacthing this train pass by.
The man inside the train starts to walk foward in the same direction as the train moves.
What speed does this man have?? (i like this one alot )

The man moves relative to the train at walking speed and relative to the man outside at the speed of light plus walking speed.

(All things are relative)

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:37 am

Time for humans is the revolving of our planet around itself and around the sun.

How an extraterrestrial entity might define time is impossible to say.

(IMHO

)

[This message has been edited by Xandax (edited 03-18-2001).]

Minerva · Post by **Minerva** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:39 am

Originally posted by Ubik:
(I am still waiting Waverly to come up with one of his not-really-original pick-up lines and start chatting with the ladies ).

I don't think he will, to be honest...

(And I wasn't that surprised either, really)

I agree that time and universe are connected. I think we need a measure to measure the time and use the beginning of the universe as the measure. Yet, the beginning of the universe is considered by the time...

And I am confused by what I am saying...

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:39 am

@All, of course the big bang theory might be false...

Ubik · Post by **Ubik** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:40 am

@Xandax: This is really a mental exercise than anything practical, but it is still fascinating. Actually there are some interesting theories suggesting an "endless" universe but they usually are against the relativity theory (and the Big Bang theory) so nowadays they seem timed out.
Man in the train... LOL

@Brink: Sound does travel trough matter. Does matter consist of nothing? Space is not "nothing". It has matter in it - still it's better than any "empty space" we managed to create in laboratories.
And light is - in a way - matter to. It exists from some litlle things (LMAO

) called photons.

------------------
Ubik
Elder God B.P. Pervert

Waverly · Post by **Waverly** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 10:41 am

Originally posted by Flagg:
The man moves relative to the train at walking speed and relative to the man outside at the speed of light plus walking speed.

Nope. Fitzgerald contraction--which is to say, (1) time would slow down for you
(although you wouldn't realize it), and (2) you and your train would get compressed like an accordion along your axis of travel.

[This message has been edited by Waverly (edited 03-18-2001).]