[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

Search:


View post   

>> No.12187703 [View]
File: 642 KB, 1920x1080, alkuräjähdys.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12187703

>My own research paper on this topic finds better than 50% that we are living in a non-simulated base reality.

Where were you when Youtube's biggest Chad destroyed simulationfags?

>> No.8482553 [View]
File: 633 KB, 1920x1080, The Big Bang.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8482553

Now that the dust has settled, what did you guys think about the Universe?

>> No.8312662 [View]
File: 611 KB, 1920x1080, tumblr_static_big_bang.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8312662

Hey /sci/ anyone wanna share their thoughts on why the universe/ reality exists instead of not existing? Like I'm sure all of you have thought about this so let me know what you think

>> No.8287299 [View]
File: 633 KB, 1920x1080, bigbang.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8287299

Hey /sci/ I have recently developed interest to astrophysics and have a couple of questions about the big bang.

1. How did antimatter form and why was it less than matter?
2. How did the singularity contain both matter and antimatter?
3. How did the big bang suddenly activate vby itself without outside stimulus
4. Since the black hole gets bigger in mass by absorbing matter, is it safe to assume that it somehow stores the matter inside of it without destroying it?

In that case I have a theory on what could have started the big bang - after the initial force of expansion is depleted, the big crunch happens and we're left with 2 super massive black holes - 1 full of matter and 1 with antimatter (which is a little bit smaller), and their collision prompted the big bang. The black hole with antimatter was first full of regular matter, but somehow due to its strong magnetic fields converted the matter to anti matter.

What does /sci/ think about this?

>> No.7743658 [DELETED]  [View]
File: 642 KB, 1920x1080, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7743658

The Big Bang is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

>a bajilllion years ago, the entire universe magically poofed out of nothing

lol yeah okay sure

>> No.7680077 [View]
File: 633 KB, 1920x1080, bigbang.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7680077

>> No.7658899 [View]
File: 633 KB, 1920x1080, alkuräjähdys.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7658899

What caused the big bang?

The fuck is even the big bang? I can't understand shit, it sounds like something a crazy cult would say.

>> No.7108896 [View]
File: 633 KB, 1920x1080, 1863znwyceav1jpg[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7108896

If the universe is expanding at the speed of light does that mean objects moving away from the center are already traveling faster than the speed of light?

>> No.6977144 [View]
File: 633 KB, 1920x1080, 1863znwyceav1jpg[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6977144

Why isn't it widely accepted that the universe always been non-empty ?

Assume a physics fully able to describe the universe exists
Then it's possible to link every effect with a cause otherwise we couldn't describe that effect

Assume a empty universe
Assume somethings come out of this empty universe
Then the first effect could be linked with a cause which can't exist since it would be in the empty universe

Then something coming out of a empty universe is a contradiction
Then the universe has never been empty


Conclusion: Either a physics fully able to describe the universe doesn't exist, either the universe has allways existed

>> No.6612616 [View]
File: 633 KB, 1920x1080, bang.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6612616

>>6612488
BANG

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]