/sci/ - Science & Math

More universe.

>>6194784
>More universe.

Beyond that even

>>6194787

Kevin Bacon

>>6194787
The multiverse most likely.

Or, almost as excitingly, a quantum soup of virtual particles all bursting and extinguishing themselves in an instant.

Which would you prefer, other universes with the prospect of different laws of physics or quantum soup?

>>6194801
Ignore this guy who's pretending to know shit. There is no beyond, there is no outside. What exists is in the universe.

>>6194801

I dunno man, that soup sounds pretty delicious

>>6194801
>Which would you prefer, other universes with the prospect of different laws of physics or quantum soup?

Yes I select this option, now explain it more.

>>6194801
Virtual particles don't exist.

>>6194787
It loops around

>>6194778
the observable Universe.

The non-visible part of the Universe.

>>6194778
The leftover bit of the Universe.

Infinity

>>6194787
>Beyond that even

There is no beyond that.

>>6194801
>muddled popsci nonsense

>>6196461

>citation needed

Option 1: more universe, forever and ever
Option 2: apparent infinite emptiness, filled with weird particles doing weird things
Option 3: Option 2, but with other universes
Option 4: another, bigger universe in which we are just an atom or whatever in
Option 5: something that is outside our realm of understanding

>>6194778
The precise definition of the Universe is the totality of existence. Everything that has existed, and that will exist, is part of the Universe. So there's no "beyond" the Universe.

But I understand what you mean, you're probably thinking "If the fabric of the Universe, spacetime itself, is expanding, then what is it expanding on?" Spacetime is, well, space and time, so where ever it hasn't stretched yet, means that in that place, space nor time exists. So how the fuck can you expand on pure nothingness? On void that doesn't even have space? Just what the fuck is that void?

Yep, we're pretty much retarded when it comes to shit like this. I would really like to believe, and I repeat believe, that the existing Universe is expanding on another realm of existence. And whatever that exists in that other real of existence, is probably what created or started our Universe. Cause otherwise, a Universe with a sans raison d'etre is frightening. What the hell are we?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGxSExvJ2L0
Well, the universe is shaped exactly like the earth / if you go straight long enough you'll end up where you were.

>>6196399
>The universe is like the surface of a sphere, it always loop arround, we can not exist it unless we go into another dimension.

>>6196478

Try Wikipedia.

>>6194787
I would guess even more universe. Maybe it thins right out, maybe it gets as thick as pea soup but no need for specualtion.

It's like asking a termite mound why they think the sky is blue. You could tell them what you think or tell them because God made it that way, and you can talk directly to this God...etc.

More universe. Any assertions beyond that are wild speculation, since humanity has no way of getting that information with modern technology, or technology in the foreseeable future.

Our universe is finite SHRIEK prepare for impending doom and for alternative universes to take our place

nothing exists beyond the horizon because light hasn't been there, therefore nothing else can be there

are you all retarded

>>6198317
>implying light implies existence of all matter and energy

>>6194778
Probably the rest of your mom's fat ass

>>6194801
>>6194816
>>6194840
>>6196421
>>6196426
>>6196433
>>6196461
>>6196635
>>6196647
>>6198256
>>6198267
>>6198317

http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/PDF/multiverse_sciam.pdf

>>6194801
>tfw there's another universe out there where you are living with your waifu

>>6199142
While this supposed other may share your name, genome, and/or anything else you deem private and personal.

They are not you.

>>6199142
>>6199591

Many extras would be highly divergent, and the differences would go way beyond the goatee they may be sporting. But they are usually similar enough to sow confusion unless dealt with. (re: Kill them and take their place.)

>>6196166
That's rich, considering that the EM force carriers are virtual photons. that covers everything you experience except gravity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_carrier#Forces_from_the_particle_viewpoint

>>6194778
Your mom

>>6200670
That doesn't mean they actually exist. That just means it's how we model these interactions.

Consider electromagnetic attraction. Photons carry momentum in the direction they travel. So how does the diagram of the virtual particle interaction look? Photon exits stage left, photon enters stage right. Like Pacman going through the warp door.

Does this seriously seem to you like something that actually happens?

It's just how we model it.

>>6200707
That's not how virtual particle interactions work. Your opinion on the matter is irreverent. It is the best model.

>>6200732
It is an abstract model.

It's like calculating the rate of nuclear reactions with "cross-sections". Now, we know that there aren't separate little spheres for each uranium atom, which grow and shrink depending on the "temperature" of nearby free neutrons, for it to deflect or absorb a neutron, but we calculate it as if there were, and in this way we get a very good approximation of what actually happens. This isn't an indication that the cross-section model is true, we know it isn't, it's prima facie silly and false.

You can't take this stuff literally. It isn't reasonable if taken literally. It's just a way for us to have a framework to tune the math until we get useful statistical predictions.

We don't have a clue what's *actually* going on at that level. We can't observe it. Nobody has ever seen a virtual particle and there's no evidence for their actual existence. They are simply artifacts of the model.

>>6200762
With a Femtosecond laser the've photographed individual atoms and electrons.

>>6201706
>With a Femtosecond laser the've photographed individual atoms and electrons.

Don't be stupid... they used an Attosecond laser for that.

>>6194787
Pasta flavored taffy

Models are useful, a 1:1 map of something is not useful.

But remember, models needs to be representations of real things. (re:testable) That is to say, useful.

>>6201714
Dat pic.
Saved

>>6201725
HAVE ALL THE PICS

>>6201725
>>6201714
bottom of it is still shit

Anon, now I have to start dumping pics. All the cool Anons are doing it.

>>6201730
It clearly goes from level of purity down to levels of shittity.

>>6201730
Yea the bottom of it is retarded especially Chemistry -> Evolution -> Biology
But the top is 10/10

>>6201733
It;s missing chemistry -> Biochemistry -> molecular biology-> micribiology-> more intermediate steps.

The Crème dela creme

>>6201751
We meet again. Anon

>>6201758
oh shi-
it's you again?

>>6201760
As in, a week or three weeks ago when we where doing this?

>>6201763
I think so


this was in a paper I was reading

>>6201766
And now its mine.

>>6201783
at least it fits on a page.

>>6194816
mmm quantum soup
I mean soup
dammit

>>6201783
yeah, but most of it is negligible

>>6201799
Took me a long time, but I lol'd

>>6201787
not really, since i might not always have those equations fresh in my mind all the time

I know this seems more like /tg/ that /sci/ question. But I’m sure theres enough NEETS, freshman and high schoolers to answer this.

What would you do if you could travel to alternative histories and possible futures?

Besides solipsism driven madness over the futility of your actions having any consequence if the infinitude of possibilities are open to you?

With an infinity of universes to visit, conquer, or save from disaster, there is no reason- if you can but discover the means- that you can't live forever.

>>6201842
waifu

>>6201842
>>6201855

Made it into a thread.

>>6201850

>>6201765
You can't prove that it doesn't!

>>6201727
Isn't statistics just a collection of rule-of-thumbs based on probability? Much like engineering is based on physics.

>>6200707
Best analogy I've read on attractive forces created by virtual particles (Hydr0matic):

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=1371755#post1371755

>>6194816

now i want some soup
when can science give me soup on demand?

>>6202057
You can. If we remove the engine, we would have a strong correlation.
We can run tests, remove any statistical bias.

>>6194784
/thread.
I'd've said the rest of the universe, but close enough.

>>6203410

why? that's a baseless assumption.

>what's beyond the land mass of Africa? more landmass

no there's an ocean, and then there's space...

>>6202057
Unicorns work in mysterious ways