I can't answer all your questions but I can ask you how you can assume that universe/s can OR can't be boundless. Either way it is incomprehendable, irrational in this plane of existence. If we could actually fly through the universe at will and somehow get to the end, and find a wall there, like we were trapped in a box, that would not make sense, it would freak us out real bad though. If there wasn't an end that would freak us out. My point is who can say anything about universe/s? All we know is what we see and we don't even know what we see a lot of time. Matter always possesses energy, we don't have a clue why. Antimatter is just a descriptive word, but it doesn't mean "nothing" as in vacuum. Whether the universe had an end or not, existence itself and a space to exist in are the fundamental questions.<quoted text>
How can you assume universes are boundless? If matter is created in one universe at exactly the same time as it is destroyed in another universe, then one can be expanding while the other is shrinking. Or, If universes are boundless who is to say that they can not share the same space and time. What about antimatter?
There are 1703 comments on the www.scientificblogging.com story from Feb 15, 2008, titled Ben Stein roused by suppression in the science versus religion debate. In it, www.scientificblogging.com reports that:
Best known as the lovable, deadpan economics teacher in "Ferris Beuller's Day Off," Ben Stein takes his role in the movie "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" very seriously but with perceptible passion.In the controversial documentary which opens this spring, the former presidential speechwriter, economist and self-described "scold" travels the world speaking with scientists, chemists and philosophers asking, "Were we designed or are we simply the end result of an ancient mud puddle struck by lightning?"
Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.scientificblogging.com.
#1745 Mar 21, 2008
#1746 Mar 21, 2008
I am not making any assumptions. I just threw that out there as a possibility. So, we know antimatter exists because it is measurable mathematically. Just because we can't percieve it with our senses doesn't neccessarily mean anything. My point is that human beings have evolved senses over the years to help us percieve things that keep us alive. For example we can only see a narrow part of the complete light spectrum without machines. So the limiting factor in our understanding of the universe is mathematics. String theory is supposed to be the way to prove alternate universes beyond our sense or comprehension. It makes sense mathematically be not when you produce it as a mental picture.
Since: Oct 07
#1747 Mar 22, 2008
What do you mean we can't perceive antimatter with our sense???? Positrons (anti-electrons) were first found in the 1930s! We regularly use anti-protons at particle accelerators and detect them *all the time*. This is NOT simply mathematical measurement! This is honest to goodness real measurement in the lab.
Add your comments below
|D.C. Lottery Vendor Avoids City Law (Apr '13)||Apr '13||Playslip||2|
|Consumers hoping to end economic woes spend pre... (Jan '09)||Jan '09||Mangler||8|
|As economy falls, lottery sales rise (Jan '09)||Jan '09||Resident||11|
|Many states' lottery sales are rising in recession (Jan '09)||Jan '09||Living In Margari...||1|
|Wednesday Options Outlook: BJ, ORCL, XHB, DTV, ... (Sep '08)||Sep '08||raquel||1|
|St. Jude quarterly profit up 27 percent on defi... (Apr '08)||Apr '08||Gary||1|
|Darwin Day 2008 - the comprehensive list of art... (Feb '08)||Mar '08||Cvvl||207|
Find what you want!
Search Scientific Games Forum Now
Copyright © 2017 Topix LLC