rigney

The saddest part of the situation is that this volcano, by itself; has wiped out the last five years of trying to save our planet by the green team. What if Vesuvius, Krakatau, "Eyku" and Mt. St. Helens all decided to go off at once, other than having Al Gore's reputation either expunged, or at least highly questioned? Hydrocarbons?, "WOW"

I can't imagine huge balls of matter floating along in a universe running at hyper-speed no more than clouds doing the same thing. I'm just saying something must have caused them to coalesce into huge masses that could have been the forerunners of galaxies. Heck, we're maybe talking about billions of light years to get it done?

The new hadron collider at Geneva (Cern) is on the verge of bringing bits of matter together at speeds of about 99.999% that of light. When some of them do slam together, the heat generated is supposedly in the billions of degrees K. My question is: are we looking to find what matter was prior to the BB, or is it the instant following, when everything was a plasma?

After the dust settles, just what is gravity? While many equations have been laid down explaining it, beginning with Newton; it is still only theoretical? Even the word graviton is make-believe. What we have defined as gravity absolutely works to perfection, probably better than the (other three forces combined?) but its physical presence is still unproven and unknown. Perhaps it isn't physical at all, but possibly made up of several other properties?

Pioneer, while I appreciate your input, you were head and shoulder over my thoughts. I'm sitting here wondering just what to say next? Since I've never learned to interpolate fourteen billion years, I can only express my wonder. Perhaps after reading your reply fifteen or twenty times, I may absorb just enough to get out of this stupid funk of mine.

Let me mull your reply over for a while. Thanks, rigney

Was just reading a thing Stringjunky left. http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/bigbang.html.

While I can't or won't dispute it, I do wonder at its validity? Not a Physist by any stretch, I just can't imagine an explosion, large or small; not being spherical if possible.

Suspision?:! Growing up, a friend of mine had a couple coal miner friends of his Dad living in his home. While being congenial and well spoken, Andy, one of the two; was a professed atheist. Andy died and a very dignified wake was held in his honor at my friends home!!.

I didn't witness the event, but supposedly some of the peasentry gathered to do him honor, were heard to remark: "Look at poor Andy, All dressed up and no place to go.

Ignorance is a blessing in disguise. Walking in its midst daily, most of us never suspect being a part of it.

Merged post follows:

I've never met a religious person without wonder, and never met an Atheist without doubt?

Gotta' to run this by you to check your humor!

A hog ate a peck of beans before it started

Ran a mile befor it f--ted

Give me the total distance before it s--t?

Cm'on, I had a feeling someone would go there, but honestly; give me a position on the issue??

Another aspect. What if our universe is entropic and maintaining balance through its constant vectorial reach and systematic circular pattern systems, in a continuum?

Just a thought.

What is our "Universe", in relation to the "Continuum"? Is there a Continuum? If so, what Is the connection, or is it only the universe and what we theorize?

What is our "Universe", in relation to the "Continuum"? Is there a Continuum? If so, what Is the connection, or is it only the universe and what we theorize?

"Fantastic Moontan". My main aim is to look for answers just like the one you presented. Other then Physicist who brobe the absolute depths of our universe, the rest of us leave it to conjecture??

Thanks for the reply Zolar V. And while I cant refute, dispute, or even argue your assessment, I believe accretion thru magnetism was responsible for matter forming into these giant balls. I'll probably get the rath of Zoar down on me for this next statement, but I honestly believe gravity is only an offshoot of magnetism. I'd say thanks, "which I do", but you'll still think I'm lying!!

What if Galaxies and Quasars were huge orbs of matter long before becoming their present configurations as galaxies and super-galaxies? When particles, (sub-particles) began coalescing into atoms, there must have been reasoning for becoming something other than just gasses? As a guess, I believe magnetism was responsible?

Then they don't necessarily have to be the axis of a galaxy or a quasar? I'll read on it!

Thanks again JohnB. I'm not trying to circumvent questions or answers at all. But my entire philosophy is based on ignorance, but concept and reason. Like you, I know there is briliance out there that rattles my brain. And other than the concept of what baryonic means, I'm dead in the water. Can I just ask a few questions for a while? Physics is far beyond my means.

By the way, W.V. means "West Virginia", and five generations of us Rigney hicks!

Thanks JohnB. Appreciate your knowledge. As an aborigine from West Virginia, I'm not overly endowed in either Phisics or, "Snake Handling". While I do like asking questions about both, if I should outwear my welcome, just say scram! I've already been run out of W.V.

But on the subject, I worry about Pandoras box. You know, the one sitting on her dresser?? Should we go so far so quickly? And then, just how far do we go before someone or something gets hurt?

Merged post follows:

Thanks JohnB. Appreciate your knowledge. As an aborigine from West Virginia, I'm not overly endowed in either Phisics or, "Snake Handling". While I do like asking questions about both, if I should outwear my welcome, just say scram! I've already been run out of W.V.

But on the subject, I worry about Pandoras box. You know, the one sitting on her dresser?? Should we go so far so quickly? And then, just how far do we go before someone or something gets hurt?

Into this life we are let, first only asking; then to our fame.

Oh! so quickly do we leave, taking not; but as we came.

Is there any real proof that black holes exist other than as axial points of galaxies?

I'm not an advocate of "bean counters or politicians", but what if after ten or twenty years of analysis we find this latest big gun "has reached" the ultimate level of matter? What then? Would our search continue beyond this point to search as to how or why the boson or quauk was created? This is the pale I'am speaking of. Even with a fabulous wealth of intelligence amassed ready to make such a search, would it be wise? Remember, we're not "in" there now just looking for an America, Greenland or China!

How does the old adage go:? A coward dies a thousand deaths, a brave man only once!!

Love your input JohnB, but what "if it does"? Do we then try peeking behind this onesided slice of bread?

What if this "Big Boy" in Cern finds that, either the Higgs Boson or the Quark to be a finite level of matter? Do we try going beyond this pale, or are there some things we best leave alone?

StringJunky (Atom) Today, 11:11 AM #3

Its best to imagine the Universe as only the surface of an expanding balloon with currants stuck on it...as it expands the distance between the currants increases...space is created between them. It's important to realise that there is *nothing inside or outside above or below this balloon... the surface is all there is...it doesn't expand into anything...there is no volume of space around the balloon. the surface of the balloon is all there is.

This is only an analogy but it shows how the distance increases between objects without having an edge...spherical surfaces lack an edge. The Universe was much smaller than it is today but current models suggest that it was still infinite in dimension...get your head round that!

*Total absence of anything..not even space.

http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/bigbang.html

______________

"If I have seen a little further, it is because I am standing on the shoulders of giants" -Isaac Newton

" The man who never made a mistake never made anything. "

Stringman(junkie)

If this analysis is possible for a single surface area, could not the same be applied for multiple inside layers also? The currant thing?

"Probabelity" is the thought that something may happen!

Thanks guys for your response. I'm not educated in our universe but I have a lot of questions. I'd like to keep this thread open if only to get answers to some of these ideas.

Merged post follows:

While I hate the expanding balloon theory, what if we could look at it as a balloon inside a ballon, inside a balloon, inside a balloon, etc! Perhaps millions or even billions of levels deep? "Just not balloons". Would that make sense?

Could it be possible that a quark may be the offspring of a "QuauQ"? You know, that elusive slice of bread with only one side? I ask this simply because I know absolutely nothing of physics, other than X-Laxs.