Jump to content


Senior Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Scotty99

  1. Space time is something that was created by einstein because it is vague. Its much easier to imagine time contracting (time isnt a thing its an idea) than it is a physical object (speaking to the michaelson-morley experiements obviously). As to your question it is neither, it is simply a fudge factor.
  2. Maybe i am alone in this but i feel the word intelligence needs a redefine. Really, how "smart" are we? We have done a lot of cool stuff obviously, but i feel big brains have far more negative consequences than positives. Mental illness in animals is like 1 in a million, humans is like 1 in every 3? I dunno, we just pat ourselves on the back far too much. It is very possible we have just gotten to smart for our own good.
  3. Is it not entirely possible that is how it's supposed to be? Ive had the thought more than one time humans are not the smartest species on this planet, which would be a whole other thread.
  4. Fair warning, i was just a bit triggered by strange's comments which i thought were trying to minimize the implications of discoveries such as this (which he has since stated a couple times, was not his intention).
  5. Possibly, i mean i know a few leading theories. I know multiverses are still being talked about along with string theory. I know some people think "nothing" means everything. I even know some people are trying to validate our current theories with dark matter....but you cant ever see it or touch it ever (i dont mean classically, i am talking this is a new suggestion....just accept it exists, ill try and find the link later). But honestly, nah that isnt me. I know the smartest person who ever graced this planet is alive right now, and we need to find him!
  6. Then why haven't theories such as the ones ive touched on been scrutinized to the levels they should be? Who is doing work on this?
  7. I am whatever in that regard, i just know something is off. Like i said earlier....what is the harm? I mean seriously, why cant a group of seriously well respected scientists (in case they find something, they wont get immediately shunned) just backtrack a ways until things start to line up? Way too much ego going on in science, i truly believe this is why we are stuck atm. Just hit every major theory going back ~400 years and apply what we know now to then, see what adds up?
  8. We can do better strange. Surely you don't believe the sharpest individuals to grace this planet are dead and buried now do you? We have gotten better in almost everything on this planet, science seems to be the exception. Usain bolt keeps breaking his own olympic records, cars can drive themselves, ive seen cats living with dogs even....madness! Seriously tho, i am not bashing how hard people are trying to figure this out good on them, but we aren't reaching the finish line until we start over.
  9. There you go, that is what im talking about! Now, how about we take that passion and do exactly what you said we are capable of and apply that to where we are today. We can do this, but we need to backtrack. This isnt a changing of mindsets, it is going to have to be bigger than that...you are going to have to change everything strange. A reset is the only way we can come to a realization of how this lonely little universe ticks, who is going to start it?
  10. No that isnt being humble, jesus. Being humble would be able to go back on HUNDREDS year old theories and rethink where we are at in science today instead of trying to make them fit out of pride. I am not claiming the cosmological principle is incorrect in this thread, but if you take a deep hard look to where science is at how can you come to any conclusion other than the framework was warped from the start? Lets trace our steps backwards until things start to make sense, what is the harm?
  11. Strange...i get its all or nothing for you but i will oblige. You love minimizing statistical anomalies especially when they are at odds with a scientific backbone like the cosmological principle. If i am honest it does not matter how small they are, you still cannot explain why they are there when the theory predicts otherwise. I just cannot grasp why i have not seen more of this in mainstream media. I mean shit ive seen everything from nasa needs help to corral an asteroid to how the recent failures of the LHC are actually wins because "nothing" is important. Science is always ready to pat themselves on the back, but how about we take the humble approach for once?
  12. Well i think it would have to be the latter here ajb. Cosmological principle is something that is not questioned very often in science, if it were to be changed we would have to consider entirely new possibilities of reality without that filter. Someone could easily argue the CMB is at odds with the cosmological principle as well. That is two examples from someone who does not pay attention to science as much as he should shedding light on a possible scientific revolution? (id assume if the cosmological principle were falsified that could be classified as a revolution yes?). This is what i love and hate about science, so much to learn but so few willing to.
  13. Lots of weird stuff in the paper you linked. Do people regularly refer to the outer reaches of space as "sky"? What does "projection of a shell" mean? "voids and string-like formations are common outcomes in a large scale structure" Even tho you get through all of that stuff that makes my brain hurt they came to this conclusion: Why again do i post articles that are a rather big deal in science, but you almost never see them talked about?
  14. So i understand what you mean by this, there was a 1 in 100,00 chance that temperatures would be variant in the pattern they were described? To me temps werent the thing that caught my attention, it was the massive zones created by the temperature differences that seemed to be at odds with the cosmological principle...but hey maybe thats just me.
  15. I want you to say why the anisotrophies could potentially be important, just so i know we are speaking the same language. I dont want to make the about the CMB but one more question, do you and strange say the anisotropies are small because of the temperature variations alone? I just dont understand how someone can look at pictures of the CMB and call those anomalies "small".
  16. Riiiiight, but you aren't dense enough not to understand the implications of the CMB being anisotropic.
  17. Nah, sorry. You cant have both ajb its either the cosmological principle or nothing, there is no in-between here bud...no matter how much you and strange want to minimize the findings. That is the CMB, how about we talk about the actual thread at hand. Is this as big of a story as the CMB? Im not sure, but it sure is something that deserves a closer look.
  18. "A question of scales" you say eh? Why did they send up so many satellites then? If it was as minor as you and strange say, why didnt they write it off in 1982 or whenever the first time they mapped the CMB?
  19. Is that a serious question strange? Have you seen the pictures captured by wmap and planck? I find your question trollish if i am honest. Literally google "cosmic microwave background" and tell me all of those images you see are homogeneous.
  20. http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/largest-structure-in-universe-discovered/ I stumbled across this today and thought to myself, didnt i hear about this a while ago...and after a bit of searching yes the original story was reported a year ago by royal astronomical society: https://www.ras.org.uk/news-and-press/2693-5-billion-light-years-across-the-largest-feature-in-the-universe Has any headway been made on this particular discovery? Sorry but after reading the original article a few times over, i cannot get over this line: Most current models indicate that the structure of the cosmos is uniform on the largest scales. This ‘Cosmological Principle’ is backed up by observations of the early universe and its microwave background signature, seen by the WMAP and Plancksatellites I have tried to keep up with CMB data as much as i can, and none of what this particular article states can even be jokingly taken as fact. Nothing about the CMB is homogeneous at all. Max Tegmark is someone at the center of the CMB research and the last thing he would admit is that the the universe is homogeneous.
  21. I don't know why my mind works this way but i value truths over anything, and i feel a lot of scientists dont work that way. Its all about following the method, even if it goes against their common senses (assuming they have any to begin with).
  22. You cannot tell me the pyramids were built with ropes and logs, nope not buying it! As impressive as the great pyramid is, there are other ancient structures just as unexplainable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumapunku https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfinished_obelisk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baalbek https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karnak Honestly the list goes on endlessly, our best guesses being unbelievably primitive techniques that are woefully insufficient in explaining how or why these sites/structures were built. LET ME GET OUT OF THE WAY I AM NOT A ANCIENT ALIEN NUT. I simply believe that there is far more to our history than what the record books show, and man is that exciting to me. There is no getting around the engineering aspect of the whole thing, take the obelisk linked above....we literally dont have a crane on the planet that can even LIFT that stone lol. Yet we are supposed to believe it was done with ropes and logs. This subject is infinitely interesting to me, does no one else ponder this stuff? I just want to know the truth, and none of our current theories are satisfactory to me. I have no idea where i should have posted this thread i only posted it here because of the gobekli tepe thread.
  23. What else can i provide other than what exists? Those are 3 good examples of what you asked for, holes that could only have been made by some sort of machining technology.
  24. What "knowledge" we do have strange i cant take seriously. Id love to see a proper explanation of how we built these structures, but my brain will not allow me to accept ropes and logs. You are looking at the wrong pics i made a bad link, http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-SAA2PKUnvrM/TrQFyK9whhI/AAAAAAAAAYQ/sHyBOucrNS0/s1600/puma-punku-em-tiahuanaco.jpg or this https://therh.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/pumapunkadrilledholes.jpg or this http://ancientufo.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/puma-punku.jpg
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.