multi

question:

In an infinite universe every possibiltiy would occur an infinite number of times right?

MrL_JaKiri said in post #11 :

 

The universe isn't infinite in that sense though. It's infinite in that you'll never reach the end if you travel for ever, but in size it is always finite.

Hense the reason I did not say it was a certanty...

sorry can't answer on the probability or likly hood not my field i'm afraid...

In an infinate universe the probability is very high that it does occur as in an infinate universe all probabilities are likely.

...If of coarse it is possible which I have no idea on ...

it would not be a moon of the planet if it was not orbiting the planet. It would be a smaller planet or moon orbiting the sun with the same peroid as the planet it was eclipsing.

moving planet sized objects...you guys are ambitious I was refering to his first line of moving small moons of planets and asteroids...

Boy some of those quotes were great

because he asked.....

Don’t let the bastards grind you down kid. For a 14 year old you are doing fine, your age is against you it makes you rash and prone to say stupid things. Keep the attitude that you can do anything and you probably will.

As for the spelling loads of extremely intelligent (not knowledgeable)

people are poor spellers.

As for this "Allot of training and education goes into becoming an electrician"

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah hahahah ahahaha hahahah.......hahah...hehheh

yep that would work but it would take a really really long time and the cost of shipping the beans would be astronomical

What about a high output laser constantly bombarding one side of the moon? This would "burn" off smalll areas causing a small amount of thrust that cumulativly over a large time span could alter the orbit or trejectory...

and it would be cool to sit in front of it and drink heavily and throw stuff into it

Cool I want one... just for laughs.

If you had half the bars comming up from the floor and half coming down from the top of the door you could reduce the vibrations, and if you mounted the whole thing in a big several foot thick rubber gasket it would quiet down quite a bit...

Jakiri I ment to put an emoticon there with the laughing guy but could not find them and was too lazy to look.. No offence intended

A little light but a good grounding in the fundamentals.

And Hawking does not get the physics wrong. He just tones them down so your average jaki can understand them

Back to the original question of "what can stop it being gravitationaly pulled back in again and blowing up" we may want to think Dark matter It is neat and it accounts for the missing matter in the universe.

The problem with the weight on the spring analogy is that with the closed system it all re triggers with the big bang. if you put this over to the weight with the spring deal a closer analogy would be allowing the weight to reach its resting point and then flicking it with your finger every time it came to the top. it would then never come to rest unless your finger got tired

skirting a pretty fine line with the brick on the shelf. yes the brick has potential energy but to call it a gravity starage device is well pushing it a bit no?

I am missing something here. If sub atomic particles "derive mass wholly through the presence of an electrical charge" it still stands to reason that they do have mass no matter how it is derived. As such why would one not be able to view them?