Staredit Network

Staredit Network -> Serious Discussion -> Black Holes
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-09-12 at 05:54:01
Thank you l)ark for explaining "dimensions" better than I could ever have done. Often people get confused because of the games they play... "2D and 3D".

In the world of dimensions, you'd have to understand what things you see on a black hole really looks like... ( Not that it matters that is ) Please, just refer to your science teacher!
Report, edit, etc...Posted by WoAHorde2 on 2006-09-12 at 09:36:35
In String theory,they propose several more dimmensions "curled up" so to speak in one dimmension.Let me find my book that explains it...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-09-14 at 18:45:38
dont post unless you want to post all. String theory has nothing to do with black hole as of currently. You've never made anymore statements than "let me find my book so i can explain it." and all the links you pull require massive time. if you want to prove that anything that you say has anything to do with "black holes" which i doubt highly are all theoratical and take massive amounts of time to listen to which we won't take our precious time.
if you knew how to debate, you should first state "WHAT THE HELL IS A STRING THEORY!" and after that you explain what the string theory is in a nice summarized up sentence, with a nice link on it that has coherence to the topic. With that, we could easily decide if it really belonged in this topic or not. But as you already know it doesnt.
because your little "string theory" is quantum mechanics ( obviously from the explanation ) While Black Hole is a mere concept of "black hole". Which has no torn space or ripples whatsoever or have to do with dimensions because black holes are obviously what we can identify, but not see. but these "scientists" you believe in will go "omg... the black hole is invisible to visible spectrum... it must be dimension 11!"
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Gamma on 2006-09-23 at 21:20:22
I remember doing a "copy and paste" project in the six grade about Black Holes a long time ago. I learned quite abit about them, but have now forgot most of the facts. One thing I do remember is that they are believed to have come from a Sun exploding. Also, I remember there are supposed to be millions of stars within how far away we can see.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Laser_Dude on 2006-10-08 at 18:22:34
An exploding star is called a supernova.
A collapsing star is called a black hole.
Most stars explode, and then collapse in on themselves, creating a black hole.

And please! Don't skip over long posts, because I had a long, highly discriptive post a ways back, and people have been arguing about, and posting similar info.

QUOTE(Laser_Dude @ Sep 4 2006, 09:04 AM)
Now, according to string theory, forces are given out by "particles" gravity uses the graviton, electromagnetism uses the photon, The weak force uses the Z and W particles, and the strong force uses the gluon, these are the tiniest little bundles of energy you can get.

In a 1-dimensional world let's say there's these beings (how they manage to function is of no importance) they have two "eyes" one on each side of their body, but they're continually looking at their neighbors, because there's no way to pass each other and get to the other side.  Now, in between their eyes is the insides of their bodies, well there's no way to get to the inside without going through the eye, so the eye is like an outer shell to them.  A doctor would perform surgery through one's eyes.  Now, let's say that they try to imagine a universe where, people can get past each other, they would never of course be able to imagine this.  Now if they were to enter a 2-dimensional world, they could of course get past each other.  But now their insides are showing.  A doctor could perform surgery by simply going up to the side of one of these beings, wouldn't even need to make a cut.

We can always imagine things several dimensions down, and still have symmetry.

Now, let's say you have a meeting, in a big corporate skyscraper.  To get there they have to give you several peices of info. Like the street, the avenue of course, but what about the floor, and the time? these are all dimesions we're familiar with.  Now, let's say you get to the right floor, of the right building at the right time, and there are numerous conference rooms? What would you do?  You're missing a piece of info, and that's equivelant to another dimension, you go in, and he hasn't told you where to sit, of course, these are all areas within space, in the universe, you would be at one point in space, time, and several other dimensions, but these other dimesions are incredibly tiny, so we don't notice their influence.

In a one dimensional universe, to get to a meeting you would need one piece of info,  where on the line?
In a 2-D universe, you need 2 peices of info, i.e. width and length
In a 3-D universe you need 3 peices of info, i.e. width, length, and height
In a 4-D universe you need 4 peices of info, i.e. width, length, height and time.
In a 5-D universe you need 5 peices of info, i.e. width, length, height, time and point in another dimension i.e. strings at every point in the universe
In a 6-D universe you need 6 peices of info, i.e. width, length, height, time, latitude and longditude on a sphere...
...In a 9/10/11-D universe you need 9/10/11 peices of info, point in space(3), point in time(1), and point on a calabi yau shape(they're at every point in the universe)(5/6/7)
According to many famous scientists, we live in a universe with 9/10/11 dimensions
NOTE: my examples of info are just examples, since the entire universe is symmetrical, you could swap any parameter for any other, i.e. a 2-D universe with length and time

They're all symmetrical, they just have different lengths, Most people(including certain physicists) beleive that time is special, not similar to other dimesions.  They beleive that the universe is finite, but you can never fall off(like the earth in a 2-D(plus time) world, it is finite, but you can literally, keep on going, and going and going.  I beleive that time is the same, after a certain amount of time, we will end up in the exact same situation as we are now, probably after a very long time.
[right][snapback]555601[/snapback][/right]


EDIT: upon re-reading it, I realized that maybe time is like a basketball, we zoom outwards, but then gravity pulls us back, and we go back to the big bang.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-10-08 at 18:32:59
I read that Syphon said Time is not a dimension.. why not?

A 3d file has 3 dimensions - width, height, and length, which allow you to see a realistic object at one stage.

And the difference between a 3d file and a 2d animation? In a 2d animation, the 3rd dimension is time, just like length. It's possible to take an animation and use its frames to create a 3d object by placing the frames one after another, though it probably won't make much sense unless you made it for exactly that purpose. Likewise, you can transform a 3d file into a 2d animation by taking away 1 dimension, which gives you however many 2d pictures of infinite thinness that can be arranged to form a 2d animation.

Just sharing what I thought of while walking to the store. I won't pretend to understand dimensions 5+.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Cole on 2006-10-08 at 19:44:18
I think it all really defines how you define "Time".

For instance:
I'm standing infront of you.
Your standing behind me.
A lightning strike happens infront of me.

I seen it first because i'm closer and light does not travel instantly.

The time at which the lightning had striked is different for me then it is for you. However the lightning only struck once and we simply percieved when it happened differently. The lightning had striked at one time.

So how do you define the word "Time?". Do you define it as when something happens or when you percieve it happens?

Then heres another question? Without energy would we have time? Meaning, lets say everything in the universe is at 0 kelvin. There is no energy in anything. Nothing is moving, vibrating, etc.. Nothing. Is time still moving?
Is time just a unit of measurement?
Then again you can measure height, length, and depth.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-10-08 at 19:49:26
The time that the lightning hit was the same. The time at which you detected the lightning is different. The 'definition' of time in this example has nothing to do with it.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-10-09 at 02:54:21
I should kill the superstitious philosopher who tried to define time.
Time we usually refer to is the definition of measurement in event occurance.
There is no such material or energic existance called "time" and time has nothing to do with a super massive singularity that can suck in light.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by lonely_duck on 2006-10-09 at 03:13:23
It's suggested that a black hole can stop time because of it's masssive gravitation, I say that has something to do with it.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-10-09 at 07:27:43
Suggested. I think you should read it more carefully from a more secure source. It has been suggested that the out sider's view of a visible thing or material being sucked into a black hole will stop giving or reflect light, and thus you will see the material as stopped. But what my belief is completely false, and time means nothing to the black hole. The light is very speedy, after the material passes on it will completely disappear as if it were destroyed. Now thats a much more logical explanation.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-10-09 at 08:06:10
I wasn't trying to connect time with black holes, just correcting Syphon's error.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by l)ark_13 on 2006-10-09 at 20:53:07
Black holes are a singularity, thus their mass and volume is infinate (this is the easiest explanation, its not exactly infinate, but w/e). Thus, as light enters the black hole it gets warped and bent, and bent so extremely that would take forever to actually get sucked in.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-10-10 at 03:16:47
you would not notice it, since it is so bent and it does not come out, it's unpredictable.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Chronophobia on 2006-10-10 at 13:31:48
QUOTE(l)ark_13 @ Oct 9 2006, 06:52 PM)
Black holes are a singularity, thus their mass and volume is infinate (this is the easiest explanation, its not exactly infinate, but w/e).  Thus, as light enters the black hole it gets warped and bent, and bent so extremely that would take forever to actually get sucked in.
[right][snapback]573967[/snapback][/right]


So you are actually saying that a black hole is like a extremely huge spiral, and everything that's sucked in is simply twisting around in that spiral forever?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-10-10 at 19:04:34
No. It would still be a sphere. and black hole is a singularity as said above. A massive particle where tons of atoms are smashed together into one massive particle in lesser size much less compared to the one before.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-10-12 at 15:43:45
I don't think it's necessarily 1 particle. It could very well be 2 or 3. It depends on the strength of the gravity, varies from black hole to black hole.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by EcHo on 2006-10-12 at 18:32:57
All theses theories seems like bull. None of the scientists ever went into the black hole. No one was even near it.
Did anyone ever even see it?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-10-12 at 18:47:54
Thats what science is. Bull. If Science wasn't so successful until now; I wouldn't believe it.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by EcHo on 2006-10-12 at 18:52:12
Not all science is bull. Some are just common sense.
Next Page (4)