Cool pictures of my physics project.

My physics project for a level :

http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/0052/

( The crab nebula )

Obviously high in CG, but they do look quite cool - tell me what you think ?

 

Btw, anyting revolutionry happened around here? I havnt visited in a couple of weeks...

Er, cool?

very cool.. :smile:

Looks good, but you are a fewl for ever choosing such a boring subject, sure some things are cool and interesting, but everything else is soooooooo boring.

maybe I don't understand. a physics level? is this some wierd brit school thing?

Not "a physics level" but a "physics A-level"

It's a qualification, when you're about 16/17 you do 2-4 A-levels, I won't complicate this thread by talking by AS levels! They just confuse matters when explaining the system to other country people, don't know why, it's a pretty simple concept...

Physics are an interest of mine as well. As orph said. Very cool.

xconspirisist said:
My physics project for a level :

http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/0052/

( The crab nebula )

Obviously high in CG, but they do look quite cool - tell me what you think ?

I was one of the few people who trialed your new Physics A-levels a couple of years ago, it's such a joke now (managed to get 100% on exams in first year, one of the questions was 'estimate the width of your finger'!). I did dark matter & energy for my little project, but it ended out average because of the stupid restrictions and guidelines you have to follow, such as commenting on sources and your 'own thoughts' and all that junk. I'd be wary about doing something space related to be honest (unless the project marking scheme has changed...) because it doesn't tie in with what the retards who designed that course want.

Its only a very minor project. Besides, space rocks :smile:

Here is a concept that really annoys me, you're traveling through space, in 'yer rocket, and see a sign. ' Space stops here ', what is beyond the sign ?

And one that really freaks me out, when your dead, your dead for enternity. And if you were consious, you'd be pretty damned bored, for eternity.

I would have thought that, the result of the electro signals, and neuro kinetic gibberish that occurs in your brain, is a form of conciousness, and depending on what kind, depends on what electrosignals are going on, how then could you be concious when dead? Because surely the electro signals stop?

I don't know what I'm talking about, just taking stabs in the dark....but hey! :smile:

How do you know 'space' isn't expanding at the speed of light and is thus impossible to escape?

Leperous said:
How do you know 'space' isn't expanding at the speed of light and is thus impossible to escape?

i to believe in the big bang theory, but i have always wondered, of space is a bubble expanding at a given rate, whats on the outside of said bubble?

this is the only part that gives me pause..

Why should there be anything outside it, surely anything that's outside it is space? What's outside it IMHO is 'properly nothing', nadda- normal space you can move through, even though it's empty there must be something in it saying "this space exists and you can be inside it or move through it". Whereas outside probably lacks this 'spatialness' so you can't actually exist in/move through it and for all intents and purposes it's not there... an analogy- programs can be stored and exist inside a computer, but they can neither leave nor exist outside one!

A group of scientists approach God, and state the simple fact, that he is not needed.

"We can explain pretty much everything on this planet, and off. And, now technology and science allow us, like you too make life from soil! There is little we can't do that you can."

God ponders this for a moment before responding, okay take a handfull of soil and do as you say, anything...

The Scientific representative bends over and goes to collect a handfull of soil when God says

"No no no, get your own soil....."

Leperous said:
Why should there be anything outside it, surely anything that's outside it is space? What's outside it IMHO is 'properly nothing', nadda- normal space you can move through, even though it's empty there must be something in it saying "this space exists and you can be inside it or move through it". Whereas outside probably lacks this 'spatialness' so you can't actually exist in/move through it and for all intents and purposes it's not there... an analogy- programs can be stored and exist inside a computer, but they can neither leave nor exist outside one!

  sorry, but i cannot decipher all this, cause it sounds like jibberish..

but i cannot accept any theory that says there is something expanding into nothing..

the very fact that it is going someplace precludes any other concept as it must be going into nowhere..

yeah, sounds stupid to, but with only 12 years of school to draw upon, its the best i can come up with..

call it simplistic, but there has to be an edge to space, if the big bang theory is correct.. and as such, one inch on the other side of that edge, has to be someplace.. :smile:

Leperous said:
Why should there be anything outside it, surely anything that's outside it is space? What's outside it IMHO is 'properly nothing', nadda- normal space you can move through, even though it's empty there must be something in it saying "this space exists and you can be inside it or move through it". Whereas outside probably lacks this 'spatialness' so you can't actually exist in/move through it and for all intents and purposes it's not there... an analogy- programs can be stored and exist inside a computer, but they can neither leave nor exist outside one!

So lemme put this into an analogy, Space = Gas Bubble within a rock? And the bubbles expanding but, the rock is infinite so doesn't expand. (Due to the fact that it is not ordinary matter, volume is irrelevant)

 

How does that sound?

I'm not saying the Universe is infinite, I'm just saying that what's 'outside' doesn't exist. The Universe isn't expanding into anything. Assuming it is, of course. What I'm basically saying is that what's outside of it doesn't exist and you can't exist inside it as you won't have a location- Orph, think of my computer program analogy, it can exist inside of one but outside there's no processors or anything that can run it..!

Leperous said:
I'm not saying the Universe is infinite, I'm just saying that what's 'outside' doesn't exist. The Universe isn't expanding into anything. Assuming it is, of course. What I'm basically saying is that what's outside of it doesn't exist and you can't exist inside it as you won't have a location- Orph, think of my computer program analogy, it can exist inside of one but outside there's no processors or anything that can run it..!

__________________FLATLINES___________________

sorry, i don't doubt you, nor am i educated enuff to do so even were i, its just not within my ability to grasp..

the concept of a computer program not being outside a PC doesn't cut it with me because, we are outside of a pc, and i can imagine it inside the computer, and i am real enuff.. if the universe were a pc hard drive, then something must be outside looking at it as well..

anyways, you have surpassed my ability to follow the conversation.. i must bow out and return to a casual observer.. :sad:

Physicists are irritating :razz: If you say "what is the universe expanding into, or if it does have an edge then what is it sitting inside" they usually retort with "thats a stupid question" or so forth..

IMO it is not in mans intellectual capacity or interests to even begin trying to understand space and the universe, wasting money which could be spent on far more pressing issues... but that's just my 2 cents :smile:

What was before the big bang... sub atomic tunneling in the quantum vaccum of course! So what was that inside? THATS A STUPID QUESTION!?

These theories about what's beyond 'that which we can percieve', may as well be theories about the secret lives of Seamonkeys.  It's comparable to an Ant, looking up, pondering human nature - he'll never have the big picture; as we will never be able to percieve beyond our actual point of perception, without injecting human error, and imagination.  Therefore, debates about this stuff, I find dizzying and very circular.

I've had a similar reaction to relegion, and It's theories. 

---

I find this interesting, obvious, yet profound in my eyes, and is my choice of metaphysical fantasy: 

-At the macro level, we see the structure of a solar system.  Sun, being center - planets and other bodies spiraling around that point.

-At the micro level, we see the structure of an Atom.  Nucleus being center, and electrons spinning around that point.

So, obviously we witness a repeating system, or structure - at both extremes of our perception.  We also see from nature, that life likes to take simple patterns (fractal) and systems, and repeat them at different heirarchal levels.  Put these two observations together, and It seems pretty likely that these structures and systems would continue on, far beyond our perception, in both directions (macro and micro), leaving us, (our percieved universe) as a speck; a neutron, within an atom, within solar system, within a universe, etc.etc.

To me, this is at least the most romantic theory.

Bulit into this thread are assumptions about the geometry of space.  It is tacitly assumed, by many people, that space is a Euclidean geometry.  They don't have to know what a Euclidean geometry actually is to make this assumption - there are all sorts of natural geometrical assumptions that we make without knowing anything about mathematical geometry.

Basically, a Euclidean geometry is flat.  Why shouldn't we live in a curved space?  Why not in a closed space (like the surface of a sphere)?

In fact, there seems to be overwhelming evidence that we do not inhabit a Euclidean space, but rather a space that exhibits at least some local curvature.  Why not global curvature too?  How could we observe this?

The universe expands. Saw it on Discovery channel :dorky:

Finger said:
-At the macro level, we see the structure of a solar system.  Sun, being center - planets and other bodies spiraling around that point.

-At the micro level, we see the structure of an Atom.  Nucleus being center, and electrons spinning around that point.

The cosmic and the quantum are actually very dissimilar- electrons don't really 'spin' (kind of..) or 'orbit' a nucleus, and on that scale there are 3 'strong' fundamental forces acting (unlike it being really just gravity on the cosmic scale). Although it is interesting to note that we're 'in the middle' of the scale :smile:

And Gollum, I'd like to see this "overwhelming" evidence for there being some local curvature, I wasn't aware there was any (barring black holes and whatnot deforming space). For the global curvature, cosmic background radiation tells us it's pretty flat, but I guess since we've only existed long enough to get a single 'snapshot' of the universe we can't really tell without making a whole tonne of dodgy assumptions..!

Damnit Lep, why did ya have to go shooting holes in my romantic, laymans, view of the universe.

Believing in something is beyond reason, when you get down to the deepest, most driving parts of the soul. What I can't stand for the life of me is when people talk about the meaning of reality, the existence of God, and they start talking evolution.

To which I ask - what part of the evolutionary process explains why sentience was first developed? (Adult) Animals and plants continue today with two basic instincts, to live and to make life. Humanity's forefathers lasted thousands of years without a thought in their mind save judging the distance to the next branch.

Finger is right. Parallels are found all across the world, except with humans. There is nothing on the Earth that can match the wonder and the meaning of a single human thought.

Sorry, I have to continue this post later, I have to leave ATM...

Cassius said:
Sorry, I have to continue this post later, I have to leave ATM...

cass, and his f**king "cliff hanger" posts

now i won't be able to sleep for moments tonight thinking about what comes next..

.... damn you cass :biggrin:

Cassius, you're assuming animals and our distant ancestors aren't sentient, by which most people mean having a consciousness, being self-aware. I'd have thought that the simple answer to your question is that all animals, and maybe other animal kingdoms, have some level of consciousness and that the things that go with it- cooperation with other beings, being able to predict what may happen and respond accordingly, being able to 'act against nature' to some degree, etc.- will give those animals an edge over others, it's certainly worked for us!

Apologies if I'm sounding like a 'know it all' now, just I've been there/got the T-shirt with these convos many times :-x

Much of the information cosmologists draw on these days in terms of the nature of the universe, is the relativly newly mapped cosmic microwave background radiation. Gollum is quite correct that it is unlikely that we live in Euclidean space. I went to a presentation at my university by a mathamatician who is trying to prove that space is actualy spherical. you might imagine this in terms of going around our planet (a two demensional example), go far enough in one direction, and you come back to where you started.

it's a very interesting theory, as is most of cosmology, but you can't really understand it without a basic grasp of the equations that describe the model being presented. mathamatics is the only way to truely understand physics, or any other science for that matter.

A dog can become lonely, as can a person. A person becomes lonely because 99.9% of the people on Earth require companionship to live, but a dog becomes lonely because deep down in it's mind, there is a sticky note saying that "if there is nobody else around to help you hunt, you will die".

These feelings probably stem from the same root, back millions upon millions of years ago when both species were mice hiding under rocks. However, while humans developed civillizations and societies, dulling down their raw instincts in some areas, dogs lived in the wild up until relatively recently.

To be continued again, unfortunately D:

I'm turning 30 in October.  All of the girls I went to school with, are like friggin timebombs going off in unison "babies, babies..must have babies...oh, and a lexus..and MORE BABIES!!!"  If you ask half of these girls why they want babies all the sudden - they can't REALLY tell you.  They just do.  It's just programmed into their biology.  Just like a dog is programmed to seek a pack of other dogs, or chase smaller animals, or lick his balls.  Our desires are so deepset, we can rarely pinpoint exactly what inner architecture is pushing us to be the individuals we are.  We just feel, and do.  Just like any other creature - only we have the ability to recognize it.

Ok..to go very far out on a limb here.  If you want to fantasize about the function of life, and go back to the idea of fractal patterns, and repeated structures.  I like to think that life keeps growing, not only outward (as in the universe expanding) but also inward, folding into itself over, and over - creating levels of awareness, within levels of awareness, within...you get the picture.  Example: 

-Earth grows organisims.  Organisms evolve into man, which become 'aware' of themselves. 

-Man grows virtual worlds (computer realms? A.I.?).  Virtual beings develop awareness. 

-Virtual beings, create their own virtual-virtual worlds, which devleop self awarenss....etc.etc.

All of this, is serving the simple function of life: to expand, grow, thrive, repeat. 

Ok, back to earth, and off to bed for me.

Tracer Bullet said:
Gollum is quite correct that it is unlikely that we live in Euclidean space.

Ok I'm confused now, is there a difference between what you're saying and Euclidean Geometry? We're pretty damn sure the Universe as flat as Kansas (i.e. more so than a pancake)- e.g. Universe 'proven flat', or even better, Boomerang backs flat universe

Anyway, open/closed universes, inflation theory, dark matter etc. etc. are much more interesting than nebulae and you can probably go further in your physics project with them :wink:

hmm, if the universe is expnading, alledualy from the big bang, then, it will eventualy start to contract, blow up and invert. Think of that when you go to sleep tonight :-d

Also, there must be something in space - if it were nothing, it wouldent be anytihng, it must concist of some sort of element we havnt discovererd.