Fermi paradox problems.

truth. one of my physics professors in college worked for SETI for years, and despite being an earnest believer that life HAS to exist elsewhere in the universe, as a man of science he relented that there is literally 0 evidence for it. unless you count ancient aliens.


problems arise with any idea of infinity, because if you want to apply math (which most scientists do), the use of infinity basically fucks over any attempts to quantify things.

elaborate on this please. why is this thinking a fundamental error?

I'm assuming its because its mathematically impossible to figure it out or very hard to figure out.
@oats you gotta degree in physics?

Quantum physics scares the shit out of me.

Not directly connected to the topic, but it is indirectly, and I just wanted to tell someone.

It is weird tho for real bros.

fermi paradox.

applying them to astrophysics is craziness. string theory is fun stuff.

regular quantum physics are becoming a reality, which is super exciting. the sheer concept of calculating all possibilities at once is ridiculous. a tangible use will revolutionize civilization. quantum hard drives and computers already exist (though on a functional level, the modern equivalent of a 60ft 1940s DOD punch card "computer")

Agreed. Read my post on the second page of this thread.

have morgan freeman explain it to you

relaxxxxxxxxxxxx

Morgan Freeman shows up at my college all the time apparently but I've never seen him. Forreal. But if I do see him ill tell him to explain whatever it is that you're talking about.

He already has. Google it. The Universe with Morgan Freeman.

THROUGH THE WORMHOLE WITH MORGAN FREEMAN

but diode you are incorrect

the universe is infinite

my opinion is fact. your opinion is false.

@Mike Wrecka it's a logical fallacy. It's like saying "all men are human, therefore are humans are men." Space is nothing. Our association with space is planets, stars, celestial bodies, etc, but those are all examples of things in space, not space itself. Space itself is the absence of matter, in the same way that cold itself is not a force, but an absence of heat.

So let's work under the assumption that space is infinite. The error is: since "nothing" (space) is infinite, the potential for things (matter) must also be infinite.

The problem with that thinking is, at this point, our understanding of the physical universe is that matter can't be created or destroyed, which means there is a finite amount of matter in the universe. To be sure, white holes are highly theoretical, so we're operating under things that have a legitimate amount of evidence. This notion could change, but as of now, conservation of matter is considered a scientific law.

To summarize, the fact that the absence of matter could potentially be infinite, it does not necessitate that matter to occupy that space is also infinite.
@Zenland I didn't, but I took a number of physics classes in college and used to teach high school physical science (physics and chemistry), so I had to pass the content competency tests and all that as well. I'm no expert by any means, but I know a thing or two.

how come people think black holes, are HOLES

for real tho i never understood that. a black hole could just be a rock we don't know about. that is so dense or whatever, its gravity is insane, so instead of shit disappearing into a hole, its really just getting sucked into a gravitational force beyond comprehension that warps whatever it is, and it gets pulled ONTO not INTO the rock.

its the same idea, it just cuts out the fairy tale of it being a weird hole that makes no sense unless you want wormholes and whiteholes to exist, when they dont.

but word. not even light can escape the gravity of the weird rock. so it appears to be a hole. really its just rock with crazy gravity yo

makes more sense to me

oats is smart

Yeah, we literally have no idea what is really going on past the even horizon.

I think we use the term black hole kinda like we use the term dark matter, it doesn't really mean anything because we have no idea what it is, how it works, why it works, it is just a loosely fitting tag for something we are currently almost completely ignorant about, we know something is there but we don't really know what it actually is.

that's all very interesting. so you are saying that while space is infinite the matter within an infinite amout of space is finite. I have some problems with this.

if space goes on forever, but the matter in space comes to an end are you extrapolating that either

a) the matter in space is equally spread out throughout the infinite space? which would in turn make the matter infinite

b) that matter is finite in an infinite space which means that the matter eventually stops but space keeps going. which means that the space beyond that point is a total barren empty waste land going forever and forever? that doesn't sound realistic to me. it almost harkens back to the we are the center of the universe theory of the middle ages

care to keep going and explain a little further? im enjoying this conversation

@Mike Wrecka in regards to point A, many people believe that something to that nature will eventually happen (The Big Freeze, as it's been dubbed), though our knowledge of the history of the universe tends to disagree thus far. Meaning, the very fact that planets and galaxies exist at all is because of gravitational discrepancies from the Big Bang. If everything was distributed evenly, then heavier elements would have never crashed into/combined with lighter elements and formed any sort of order. The concept of planetary evolution itself flies in the face of thermodynamics, too, but that's neither here nor there. But to answer your question, matter is not equally dispersed, and likely never will be.

As far as point B is concerned, there are differing views. I think it was you who mentioned the Doppler Effect, that the universe is expanding (we know this by viewing the red shift of other objects in space, which indicates that things are moving away from us). The traditional scientists believes this is the ripple effect of the Big Bang, that the force of it caused everything to continue in motion, with no force to slow it down or stop it. Others believe there are white holes, which are pumping matter into the known universe and causing it to expand. Truth is, we don't know. Or at least, I don't know. In terms of space being barren, all space is barren. That's what I mean about the fundamentally flawed understanding of what space is - space is nothing, it's an absence. So yes, assuming the Big Bang happened, matter is moving into an infinite absence of matter, unless there are eventually other universes (which M Theory suggests). Again, we are still figuring out things like dark matter and antimatter, so our perspective of these things is extremely limited at this point.

good shit oats. I tackle these type of questions more from a philosophy stand point without actually knowing much of the science involved.

but I think that you are thinking too much of the observable universe. the big bang could just be one of an infinite number of big bangs. we will never know. and that's why its fun to try to figure it out

I think science is at its best when pursued with a sense of artistry and creativity. Problem is, most people skip the parts about actually knowing what they're talking about and go straight to the imaginative explanations of things. I call this "stoner science," and it is usually delivered with a false sense of certainty and authority, and it's annoying.

So I say to you, in all respect, that it is easier to focus on the philosophy of things than the actual science, probably because thoughts without any factual base are above criticism, whereas actual science can be debunked. I'd encourage you to start on the opposite end of the spectrum and earn the right to creativity. That's when it gets really fun.

That being said, I agree with what you're saying though. There could have been plenty of bangs, there could be virtually any other possibility you can imagine in this universe or the next. I'm just a little more interested in the things that can be supported by more than "it's not impossible."