Added: 1 year ago
From: TorBarstad
Views: 8,366
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (36)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • This is really awesome.

    I love it how the biggest questions remained unanswered.

  • The universe is flat like my girlfriends tits.

  • And physicist with their linguistic perspicacity. XD

  • pure shit

  • So in short our eyes deceive us,our earth is in a bubble of slowed time due to heavey gravity, if u lok from outside in everything will look slowed down, when lloking from inside out u only see the past, so everything we see are images distorted of the past, of how the galaxy was, u'd need to be outside the force field to se the real universe as it is.

  • Aether? Flat universe? Just as I was getting used to the world not being flat!

  • For some reason every time I hear about 'dark matter' / 'dark energy' I think 'ether'. What makes this different from ether except that we can measure its need to exist? Could we simply be misunderstanding the universe in a way that makes it necessary to postulate dark matter and dark energy in place of something else?

  • @songteller

    i agree. i like the aether idea. it explaines the wave-like nature of the particles. and since the vacuum is not smooth and can be seen as a quantum foam? also, as you say, dark energy is sometimes called quintessence due to its similarity to the classical aether.

    the word aether has negative connotations because of its past association to special relativity. nobelphysicist laughlin says that SpRe. presupposed the nonexistence of a space-medium while GeRe. conceptualizes it.

  • @songteller we will never know the whole truth. but so far this theory best describes reality. Now it is up to the observers/experimentors to verify or confirm what the theorists came up with. This is how science works, and it is the only way forward. Yes, maybe we will have to rethink the concepts of dark matter or dark energy if they fail to find evidence for it at the LHC, but until then its the best we have. Bear in mind that quantum theory is responsible for the best predictions in physics

  • Comment removed

  • you cant see the dark matter because it sucks in light? just a thought :D

  • @TheSunnycar If it sucked in light, you couldn't see what's behind it. And with Dark Matter being in such high concentrations, I think we couldn't be able to see much of the observable universe.

  • Very interesting. Thank you

    Rosanella :)

  • I may be confused here, but estimating that a hyperbolic universe would cause a certain change in the degrees we measured (ie. 1 degree becomes .5 degrees) would require knowing the radius of curvature no?

    Is it not possible that the universe is slightly hyperbolic? As long as there is error in human measurements, it will be impossible to prove a triangle has 180 degrees...

  • Maybe the dark matter is GOD?

  • @TaiFerret no..

  • @TaiFerret A god dragged around mercilessly by gravity? That would be a funny one.

  • I'm an Atheist who proved that god(s) can't exist.

    sagargorijala[DOT]blogspot[DOT­­]com

    God(s) can not exist.Space can not be infinite and it is timeless.There is no beginning and an end to the existence of the World.Numbers are infinite but number of apples (existence) can not be infinite.....

    I invented this theory in January 2000 and as you can see... more than 11 long years have passed and the World doesn't know my theory. I need your help in doing so. Please help me.

  • @way12go Sorry man, but the net is full of crooks like you, with childish "theories" "invented". The World will only know your theory as rumblings of yet another crazy guy. I've checked your page and reasoning, your logic is flawed, it's kindergarten level philosophy. Read more, educate yourself, try to find the holes in your own theory before trying to spread it.

  • The comment about the birth of the universe not needing a deity is of course not a scientific statement but an ideological statement based on a disteleological "leap of faith". Deities by definition should transend scientific observation and cannot be proved or disproved either way. Obeserve data: good science. But make giant philosophical conclusions based on empirical data: not good science.

  • @BattleBits Gods are postulates as delineated by the faith-traditions that adhere to them. If you can describe X in terms that are applicable to humanity you can show a vanishingly small likelihood of any truth-value with science. As deities are, by definition, described by humanity, and as no faith-traditions contemplate cosmogenesis in this way, and indeed because the model shows no need for any external interference of any kind (yet described or otherwise), it is a consistent statement.

  • Isn't it possible that the 'dark matter' is just some sort of quantum phenomena that is so dense that on a macrocosmic scale it induces mass and gravity?

  • i'm an architecture student and i found this lecture is very nice and clear. thank you

  • Wait a minute. I don't think anyone can say that the Universe is "flat" because the devices used to measure the internal angles of the triangle will be equally distorted by the shape of the Universe. Therefore, the angle measured will always be 180 degrees because of this. One would have to measure the Universe from outside our Universe to know for sure. Comments anyone?

  • @eseskay99 My first thought is that the distortions of spacetime on the scale of something as small as the size of earth are effected by the curvature of a universe tens of billions of lightyears in diameter much less than the huge three dimensional triangles they are talking about at its edges.

  • @eseskay99 In the same way, if you draw a triangle on the ground of earth that is one meter wide, and measure the angles, it will seem to add up exactly to 180 degrees, but if you draw a triangle on earth that is so large it spans the entire circumference of the earth, and measure the angles, they will be distorted.

  • very interesting i learnt alot thx

  • Are you sure the triangle is big enough to determine that the universe is flat? Great lecture. I'll second the "amazing" statement.

  • @eseskay99 I'm glad you found this interesting as I did. No, I know little more of this then I learned from the talk.

  • @eseskay99 "How Do We Know the Universe is Flat?" by tdarnell.

  • amazing..

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more