steevey

How do you know that though? What about the electrical currents between neuron ends? Nothing is "observing" the charged particles when they are moving between the neurons, so the charged particles which carry brain information could take a wave form which may effect how signals are transferred all over the brain.

That's one theory, but I've heard of dark matter being really dense and simply existing in regions around the galaxy holding it together. But I'm saying if there's no positive and negative charges holding it together, then in order for it to exist in any measurable amount, it would probably be compacted since gravity would be too weak by itself to hold the material together unless its on a massive scale. So if there's a large amount of it like the size of a white dwarf, it would probably be very dense.

If it's not expanding into an emptiness, how is there room for it to expand?

I mean particles are occupying space as waves rather than single points which we perceive.

Well if the planet is too small, it will not be able to hold atmosphere. If it is small but has atmosphere, then highly heated atmosphere might escape from its gravity.

I was explaining the circumstances for convection for any chance of having any forest fire in the first place. I mean, there's a reason why people in sci-fi don't right about volcanically active planets the size of Pluto, and its because they aren't in real life. He's basically asking people to confirm that. Maybe he saw a movie where a forest fire occurred on a small isolated planet and the cause was convection. That wouldn't happen in real life. Not enough pressure on the core of the planet to cause massive heating up and moving plates which if you look closely at my first post, answers your gravity question. Smaller planets don't produce as much pressure on the core, so generally when smaller planets are isolated, they don't have an active core.

When you observe something, it gets sent to specific places in your brain, but since your not observing or sensing every part of your brain, shouldn't particles be undetermined in your brain? I mean, there's not even any nerve cells directly on your brain.

Anti-matter is basically matter, but with reversed charges. In anti-matter, protons are negatively charged and electrons are positively charged. As far as observation shows, there is no "outside" of space, only visible matter. It's likely that the space outside of the space of the universe goes on indefinitely.

Before the Sun's solar wind blew the dust away, Earth was already in a rocky formation and was forming an atmosphere. There is no contradiction between Earth having methane and the Sun expelling it from the solar system in outer space.

You look at the surrounding masses. As you've showed in the pictures, there are two different scenarios which light can be bent. And generally, physicists will be able to see those surrounding bodies of matter bending light the specific way that it does.

Convection can sometimes be impacted by gravity. The Earth is big enough where it doesn't need gravity to put pressure on the core and heat it up, but smaller planets don't have that. But, if they are close enough to a big planet like Jupiter (making them a moon) or a star, then the gravitational effects would cause plates to rub together and create massive amounts of friction and possibly cause convection if the core is heated enough and the outer layers heat up enough. These gravitational effects can be seen on Jupiter's moon Io.

Fractals exist in the sense that patterns at an infinitesimal level create specific things at an infinitely increasing level.

Dark matter interacts with gravity, but not the electromagnetic force which is why it would have to be super-dense (since gravity is the only thing holding it together). Dark energy is it's own thing which works against the effects of gravity. Different "dark" things aren't the same and don't have the same properties.

What's your question, and why does that picture suggest other life?

A quasar? Neutron Star collision?

What experiments have proven this?

That's a good idea, and while we're at it, let's post things helpful to this topic starting with the next post after this one. There may be a hologram-like property of multiple planes of existence, but even if there is, its still the same probabilities of all the same matter.

Your getting it all wrong. Math and science are systems of logic based on observation of the universe around you. There's nothing magic about it. The reason math works isn't because of magic, it's because that's how its logically summing up how things observational work. And quantum mechanics, well the proven things are based on observation, not magic, meaning I'm saying "look, that particle acts like a wave" and not how you seem to think it is where "I got a PhD and through no observation this logically makes sense"

Then why doesn't light warp the fabric of space time? And how do you know that? What about that graviton theory? Why don't things warp the fabric of space more as they gain more energy instead of mass? Why would black holes form from gamma-ray bursts? How come an atom of hydrogen with the temperature equal to 72 degrees F has the same gravity as a hydrogen atom with a temperature of -275 degrees F? I don't see temperature anywhere when calculating the gravitational effects of an atom? Unless are you trying to say something about density since generally objects with more energy are less dense? Or are you assuming the Gauge Boson theory is true (which would make sense, but then there would be no fabric of space that's being warped)? I'm not trying to say your wrong, it's just that these are the questions I have that arise from your statement.

Most of the stars in the galaxy are usually above several light years away from each other anyway. And since the direction is random, some stars and Magellanic clouds would be closer to others and probably still form a super-massive black hole for the other matter in the region to circle around.

Space is suppose to be warped because of mass. Photons have no mass so they shouldn't warp space and both matter and anti matter should be able to warp space the same if they had the same mass and density.

I'm not saying your wrong, I'm saying to me, your theory doesn't make sense, and that the reason I brought up contemporary sci-fi time travel is because they make sense to me. Since yours doesn't make sense to me, there's no way I can agree with it or disagree with it, and bring up something that you probably know.

If the singularity universe had a wave function, then there wasn't a big bing, but just an extension of that singularity which contained 0 volume since it's probability would extend to what seems to us as everywhere. Everything would be made out of the same singular thing containing 0 volume.

The approach is just yours, and doesn't makes sense to me. The sci-fi ones not only makes sense to me, but are used more often which means more people agree on it as well.

Even in contemporary sci-fi travel, matter doesn't "blink" out of existence while you time travel, its that the time traveler that is preserved while the rest of matter is still going about. If you stood in one spot on the Earth for 100 years, you'd still be in whatever position you were in before, assuming the Earth hasn't been destroyed. Like I said, position is relative to an object or region. It doesn't matter if I keep mentioning Earth, there are likely many other planets life could have been on where I could have made the same logical argument. But, since life is based on Earth and not much of it travels outside the realm of Earth, the main thing to compare locations to is Earth.