/sci/ - Science & Math

Pictures both related

>philosophy
this belongs in >>>/lit

>biology
this belongs in >>>/an/

Actually. all pictures related.

can you argue that, on a massively large timescale this beautiful galaxy doesn't act like an amoeba?

>>4498550
Not op here, but bio belongs here whether you like it or not.

Biology:
>1. The science of life and of living organisms, including their structure, function, growth, origin, evolution, and distribution. It includes botany and zoology and all their subdivisions.

Your simply implying an isomorphism between the structures observed biology and the structures observed in the universe. This does not imply that the universe is actually "living". In an abstract sense, sure why not. Literally? No.

This idea became popular from that silly picture of the hypothetical underlying dark matter structure in the universe that resembles a brain nueron.

Nah.

Stars would be at least molecules if you're comparing them.

>>4498550
>>4498550

alright sir.

i will carry my discussion elsewhere if you are not interested.

Philosophy belongs in literature huh?

Philosophy = literature

i think not

always thought 4chan needed a /Phil/

>>4498554

yes. Galaxies don't receive biological inputs. Amoebas do.

>>4498561

I agree, aa /philo board is definetly needed. Then I wouldn't have to see those obnoxious solipsism vs realism, or dualistic craptastic threads

>>4498554
>can you argue that, on a massively large timescale this beautiful galaxy doesn't act like an amoeba?
Yes.

Most galaxies will burn out before they collide with anything else. They just drift through space, without pulling themselves along. When they do touch something, they don't respond to it, it just disrupts them. Their internal organization is not complex, it's just a bunch of stuff orbiting a common center.

A galaxy behaves nothing like an amoeba on any timescale.

>>4498558

yes yes i know

What the question actually is:

name for this theory?

but i have thought this for quite sometiem.

yes, picture got me a little excited.

can it really be coincidence?

did said computer KNOW what a neuron was beforehand?

>>4498559

you think so? i was thinking star system to atom

>>4498556

Thank you sir.

i think i have a valid discussion at hand.

>>4498558
>that silly picture of the hypothetical underlying dark matter structure in the universe
Uh... it's not a picture of "the hypothetical underlying dark matter structure", it's a picture of the large-scale structure of the universe.

Look up "galaxy filament". On the largest scale we can observe, the universe is made of filaments and voids. The filaments are made of galaxies, while the voids are empty.

The filaments connect to each other, forming a network which resembles the fine structure of the human brain.

It's not hypothetical, it's observed.

>>4498569

>Most galaxies will burn out before they collide with anything else

oh i'm sorry. so...our galaxy hasn't collided with anything else???

please, explain the creation of the super-massive black hole at the center of...almost any galaxy.

had to 'eat' something to become super-massive

right?

although your arguement is quite valid form a /sci/ standpoint

and i'm not saying they act COMPLETELY alike.

just conveniently similar

>>4498591
Why would you even consider the possibility that the super-massive black holes in the centers of galaxies were formed from material from outside of their home galaxy?

>>4498569
> Most galaxies will burn out before they collide with anything else.
We are colliding with 3 galaxies. OP is still a fucking retard though.

OP appears to have seen powers of ten:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fKBhvDjuy0

Polite sage for apparent non-board related thread.

>>4498589

i like you. please continue.

it's not silly.

somewhere deep inside me says this is actual reality.

this creature is 13 billion years old and still growing.

we are but small particles on this being.

how long do the cells live on our bodies?

compared to us not long

i believe life may go infinitely in both directions

both speeding up and slowing down in corresponding larger/smaller "universes"

>>4498614

was thinking that but did not mention because i'm not an asshole

i'm not here to prove you wrong.

i'm not here to prove me correct.

for polite discussion.

>picture, blood cell?

(bare with me here)

>picture, sickle like or mutated 'sick' cell

>>4498589

There are pictures of galaxy filament and then there are ones of galaxy filaments + dark matter distribution. Its the latter that is the picture that people claims resembles a neuron structure. Normal galaxy filament pictures semi resemble neuron structures, but only if your really trying to make it so. And then that's only one system where it is modeled, there are various other techniques that in no way resemble a nueron structure.

>>4498548

And this isn't a theory, as there are no testable predictions. Just fun fiction.

bottom line here.

you are not open to possibilities and discussion

i swear, no matter what board i go on 4chan is just filled to the brim with elitist faggots like yourselves.

If this is the wrong board i appologize

where do you suggest i post this?

Let us say, by the off chance, that i was correct...

would this not belong in /sci/?

Science is based of fact i understand

but isn't science fiction the dream of science

science fiction often becomes reality

space ships. sub marines. satellites. airplanes even. computers. cellular telephones. space travel.

once dreams.

now reality.

open your minds to dreams /sci/

...and let the wonders of reality flow from the fountains of a dreamy existence.

>>4498644

for now.

doesn't hurt to think ahead.

.

>>4498548
I believe the name for this "theory" is macrocosm and microcosm, which Wikipedia defines as "schema of seeing the same patterns reproduced in all levels of the cosmos, from the largest scale (macrocosm or universe-level) all the way down to the smallest scale (microcosm or sub-sub-atomic or even metaphysical-level)"

,

I'm curious OP. How old are you, and what is your educational background?

>>4498674

THANK YOU ANON

i really do appreciate it.

No. Solar system is to atom (perhaps even subatomic particle).
As cell is to universe.

>>4498684

sigh.

23 y/o

just starting my degree in Entomology

better late than never yes?

..i know... i know...

i feel i have gotten more unintelligent since high school

but i am working on that.

...don't make fun of me.

i'm very self conscious.

i chose the wrong friends

fucking stoners will never grow up.

...forgot pic

i breed tarantulas for fun

;)

want one?

>>4498691

>i chose the wrong friends
>fucking stoners will never grow up.

Exactly what I was looking for, thank you very much.

>>4498660

Lol I am open to possibilities and discussion but isomorphic tendancies between large scale structures and smaller structures in the universe does not imply anything more than humans are very good at recognizing and seeking out patterns. The theory that small structure immitate large structures does not imply that the resulting immitation results in an intelligence, as there are uncountable diferences between biological systems and the universe. It's all fun metaphorically, but there's no reason to discuss the possibility that the universe is literally a living organism. Other than funsies.

>>4498698

thank you man.

>>4498703
The real question here is, on what scale does the universe look like a face?

>>4498703

why not?

big bang theory

which i think is strait BS

is widely 'accepted' by the scientific community.

Big Bang = Rapid Growth

do not we go through a 'rapid growth' as humans?

2 cells meet.

and egg cell. a sperm cell.

Rapid Cellular Growth nine months later a fucking HUMAN BABY is born into existence. from what?

life springs fourth from life. seemingly to me from almost nothing, beautiful.

another question for you /sci/

how did life originate?

discuss consciousnesses, being and the individual.

image is a baby A. Versicolor.

>>4498721

question irrelevant.

it does not.

ever.

>Implying life on a whole different scale has 'faces'

now if it did i would just shit myself and become a drunkard.

i would also start to believe in God.

which would blow my mind a touch.

I guess what i want ITT: /Sci/entists with imagination.

...because i think that is what truly accelerates any field.

I've thought about the same thing often OP.

We're beginning to delve into the microscopic world and discover how far it actually goes which is amazing in it's own right. Once you start seeing how tiny things can get, nobody can help but to travel in the opposite direction and boggle at the vast scale of the universe.

Nobody can say that we aren't part of one cell in an atom, and that life itself never ends and keeps repeating in the same ways. I'm a believer that universe is close to what we imagine and people report on... but hey it's fun to dream and come up with new ideas constantly.

>>4498700

You are quite welcome Anon.

Have a good 'insert timezone specific time of day here' now.

>>4498740
We're human. Everything looks like a face to us from the right perspective.

>>4498703
There's no reason to discuss the fact about how our space and matter works. What in the world can we harvest from the knowledge that says one cannot exactly know the energy and place of a particle at the same time.
In the end it becomes a speculation about nature accompanied by a realization how beautiful it all is and what possible realities will be the real one.
Which person will figure out how it all works? :D

>>4498745

very true.

cool story bro tiem.

have a stoner ex-gf

she left me for a stoner BF of mine

he goes to the dollar store and buys googley eyes and glues them onto everything.

she is impressed with this. "OMG it looks like a face"

>me "sigh"

i'm glad to be rid of the both of them.

Unrelated

>>4498741

who the shit is bombadil?

>>4498558
>This idea became popular from that silly picture of the hypothetical underlying dark matter structure in the universe that resembles a brain nueron.
No, it's a lot older than that. Pick a random crackpot's ramblings, and there's a good chance he'll mention it. It's probably been popular from the dawn of thought.

I don't know of any name for it, but it's probably best that there isn't one. It would serve no other purpose but to give another word to the idiots who like to argue "your manner of stupidity has a name; that makes me right."

>>4498760
The role Brian Blessed was born to play.

>>4498761

oh my nonexistent God

thank you.

>>4498761
Actually, I just remembered a significant number of said crackpots have now taken to calling it the "fractal universe theory" or variations on that.

>>4498731

Sigh I don't even...

You deny all the evidence for big bang theory? You should try reading a book, and you wont assume its BS. The evidence for big bang theory is overwhelming, denying it is asenine.

>>4498748

The point? other than all of modern technology, I guess nothing. You really have Below an elementary scientific understand of what your talking about. We can know the energy of a particle at anytime, your talking about position and velocity.

>>4498788

sigh again,

enlighten me.

you all knowing being.

>>4498788

btw no matter how many teims you sage i can still bump

>>4498791

Enlighten you on?

>>4498796

big bang thoery please

anyway. next tiem

i'm far too tipsy for this and

slutty whore wants to hang out

...


...

...

what?


Entomologists like to party.

deal with it.

OH...

btw

women... (for the most part) don't dig the bugs in my house.

...i don't believe in cages

>>4498791

Ill assume you mean bbt? I frankly don't feel like explaining the base conceptions of quantum theory.

Other than:

Large scale homogeniality of the universe.

Abundance of light elements

Hubble diagram/ cosmological redshift

Existance of cosmic microwave backround radiation

Age of stars

Large scale structure of the universe

Time dialation I'm supernova brightness curves

I guess there isn't any reason to believe the big bang theory.

>>4498816

In*

>>4498812

And im sure non of that correlates to a big bang theory for you, so you should read up on it. Then come back and explain why it is BS, instead of just your opinion.

remember, big bang theory says nothing about the creation of the universe, just the developement of it. From its earliest state. This is a common misconception by christfags.

>>4498816

creation of the universe.

pretty big thing to state 'Hey this is fact and this is how it happened'

how this is so widely accepted....

i don't even know.

>All Matter in the universe in one ball of extreme density

can you expalin that shit please?

now.galaxies exist. they move around. they abosrb other galaxies.

i don't care how fast we redshift

galaxies have mass

as far as i am concerned gravity seems to be god of reality

two massive galaxies left at end of universe should eventually gravitate toward themselves yes?

...fuck.. drank too much Jamenson...

what the fuck was i trying to say here?

fuck it.

ima go get my dick sucked.

Peace.

picture related.

i also take pictures of bugs with my camera phone

not half bad if i do say so myself.

>>4498818

oh, i'm no christfag (im a lil better than that.)

i just a little uneducated.

: )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_qMbzfF31k

but watch Eyedea blow this nigger outta the water

: )

picture now unrelated. it is an ant at Clear lake in oregon.

: )

>>4498836

You should probably not come on sci. /b/ seems fitting for your scientific knowledge. Not even entertaining the notion of an intelligent conversasion with you sir. Your scientific understanding is lower than originally thought. I'm slammed to, no excuse.

later fellas

YFW an idiot kept you here for so long?

>>4498855

hahahhahaha

you sir do not know what 'too much Jamenson is'

i have to go pretend to care to socialize.

goodnight sir. i thank you for your tiem.

>>4498836

as already stated. big bang theory says NOTHING about the creation of the universe. Only its DEVELOPEMENT from its earliest states. We know for a fact that the universe was once very dense and very hot, for 2 reasons.

1.) cosmic microwave background radiation. Predictions from the big bang model predict accurately that a universe that was once in a hot dense state should have a backround radiation of what is observed today.

2.) abundance of light elements is evidence that the universe was once in a significantly dense and hot enough state to produce primordial nucleosynthesis. Free neutrons and protons underwent nuclear fusion during the first minutes of the universe producing mainly helium nuclei. This is why there is an abundance of helium in the universe.

It would be weird if we became aware of the greater consciousness of the universe and were able to communicate with it. Like the gunk in your toenail evolving intelligent life.

>>4498885

whoa

i think we have the potential
IN THE LONG RUN

life on that scale.

10 seconds to it would be a lifetiem for it. or even moarso

in teh immediate future not possible

too much humanity against humanity

too much greed,

for that to be accomplished, which i believe possible. we need to be well evolved past our current state of barbarism.

MFW we think we are out of our tribal state.

american, british, chinese, japanese, canadian. mexican, australian

if these are not 'tribes' i laugh

>human race as one

then we get shit done...

<UNRELATED SHORT POEM>

...but it and we can never be...

for it has always been..

..and we just temporarily...