If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(io9)   New scientific theory on origin of universe: Somebody left the intergalactic fridge door open   (io9.com) divider line 28
    More: Cool, universe, Big Bang theory, big freeze, University of Melbourne, Perimeter Institute, state of matter, theoretical physics, transformations  
•       •       •

3661 clicks; posted to Geek » on 23 Aug 2012 at 3:38 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



28 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-08-23 03:17:18 PM
What Quach and his team need to do now is find the cosmological equivalent of these "cracks," or defects.

Found one.

img534.imageshack.us
 
2012-08-23 03:47:33 PM
They will be locked behind gates.
 
2012-08-23 03:53:55 PM
Consequently, Quach and his team are making the case that the start of the universe should not be modeled as a Big Bang, but rather like a Big Freeze - akin to water transforming into ice.

Great, what is that, 6 years of TV they have to rename now? Sheldon is gonna be PISSED!
 
2012-08-23 03:58:28 PM
 
2012-08-23 04:06:18 PM
Intergalactic planetary or planetary intergalactic?

/boom boom boom
 
2012-08-23 04:08:53 PM
Sorry. I was looking for the leftover Chinese and someone rang the doorbell.
 
2012-08-23 04:21:51 PM
This made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.
 
2012-08-23 04:35:49 PM
According to lead researcher James Quach, the early universe can be compared to a liquid - a state of matter that has no definable form.

So basically:

"And the earthuniverse was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God quantum graphity moved upon the face of the waters.

And Godquantum graphity said, Let there be lightcracks: and there was lightcrack." 

And I just smoked that crack.
 
2012-08-23 04:40:16 PM

Mentat: What Quach and his team need to do now is find the cosmological equivalent of these "cracks," or defects.

Found one.

[img534.imageshack.us image 800x450]


tvjunior.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-08-23 05:21:48 PM
I can't believe I'm the first, but:

cdn.whatculture.com
 
2012-08-23 05:33:27 PM
Alex Lustig points and laughs

/hopefully not obscure
 
2012-08-23 05:34:04 PM
Interesting. Are they saying the structured universe crystallized into matter-time, and before it was some superheated super fluid plasma? I'm a bit confused.
 
2012-08-23 05:34:41 PM
Our universe is the result of a supermassive black hole?

/this really ruins my plans for Saturday...
 
2012-08-23 06:25:07 PM
Hey, can we blame humans for Universal Warming?
 
2012-08-23 06:48:26 PM

TheOther: They will be locked behind gates.


l-userpic.livejournal.com

What gates?
 
2012-08-23 07:57:17 PM
Is it me, or does somebody need to learn the difference between scientific theory and hypothesis?
 
2012-08-23 08:57:38 PM
Quantum graffiti?
 
2012-08-23 10:49:48 PM
the creature in the sky
got sucked in a hole
now there's a hole in the sky
and the ground's not cold
and if the ground's not cold
everything is gonna burn
we'll all take turns
i'll get mine, too
 
2012-08-23 11:00:02 PM
Maybe a black hole is what happens when a star becomes so dense that it cracks through the "ice".
 
2012-08-24 12:52:15 AM
A competing scientific theory regarding the creation of the universe? Well obviously that means the Bible is right.
 
2012-08-24 05:18:09 AM
So our next presidential election will be won by this guy, as soon as we can find a crack for him to come through.
i143.photobucket.com
 
2012-08-24 08:42:10 AM

urban.derelict: Our universe is the result of a supermassive black hole?

/this really ruins my plans for Saturday...


This was the first thing I though when Hubble showed that we weren't experiencing entrophy (slowing down) but that actually things were speeding up; so I thought "what could be pulling on something to make it speed up" and my conclusion was a black hole type thing of unimaginable proportions. Just a thought - who the fark is going to really be able to figure this out.
 
2012-08-24 10:34:09 AM
www.batmanwallpapers.com

wanted for questioning

/hey universe... chill out!
 
2012-08-24 11:01:21 AM
Why does it matter what started the Universe? What would constitute scientific proof in this anyway?

This whole scientific enterprise is meant to refute or reinforce the one or another of the various mythologies, the question itself being one science cannot answer. Why not accept that and get used to it?

"Shiat happens" and "Who cares?" work just fine for me.
 
2012-08-24 12:53:09 PM

The One True TheDavid: Why does it matter what started the Universe? What would constitute scientific proof in this anyway?

This whole scientific enterprise is meant to refute or reinforce the one or another of the various mythologies, the question itself being one science cannot answer. Why not accept that and get used to it?

"Shiat happens" and "Who cares?" work just fine for me.


"Why do we need science always asking these questions?" asks the Fark user posting on the internet on a computer constructed from futuristic plastics and alloy metals drawing electricity from a unified powergrid.

It's a good thing a few people before you decided "Who cares" didn't work just fine for them.
 
2012-08-24 03:54:33 PM

The One True TheDavid: Why does it matter what started the Universe? What would constitute scientific proof in this anyway?

This whole scientific enterprise is meant to refute or reinforce the one or another of the various mythologies, the question itself being one science cannot answer. Why not accept that and get used to it?

"Shiat happens" and "Who cares?" work just fine for me.


So we can figure out how to do it ourselves, so some super villain wannabe can "accidentally" destroy this one and start over?
 
2012-08-25 06:21:35 AM

indarwinsshadow: Interesting. Are they saying the structured universe crystallized into matter-time, and before it was some superheated super fluid plasma? I'm a bit confused.


Yes, this is basically what they're saying as I understand it. The singularity was liquid possibility that became matter, physics, space, and time when it "froze" after no longer being compressed.
 
2012-08-25 12:37:51 PM

OceanVortex: The One True TheDavid:

Why does it matter what started the Universe? What would constitute scientific proof in this anyway?

This whole scientific enterprise is meant to refute or reinforce the one or another of the various mythologies, the question itself being one science cannot answer. Why not accept that and get used to it?

"Shiat happens" and "Who cares?" work just fine for me.

"Why do we need science always asking these questions?" asks the Fark user posting on the internet on a computer constructed from futuristic plastics and alloy metals drawing electricity from a unified powergrid.


YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT. The subject is not what's IN the Universe, it's about what STARTED the Universe.

Science is a good thing; cosmogony, which Wikipedia says is 'any scientific theory concerning the coming into existence, or origin, of the cosmos or universe, or about how what sentient beings perceive as "reality" came to be,' is a waste of time.

E.g., theory that YHWH created the Universe ~6000 years ago does not make alloys and plastics impossible. Ask any fundy Pentecostalist, or use common sense: the odds are good that the guy who came out with the Bessemer process believed in God, Jesus and Genesis, as did most scientists of his place and time.

"Where does the Universe come from?" and "How do we make stronger iron tools?" are two entirely separate fields. (The former is a parasite on the latter, strictly speaking.)

And no, I don't see any real diference between "scientific" cosmogony and Creation Mythology: we're expected to take it on faith that the Big Bang is correct. E.g., the article is about how difficult it is to prove the Big Bang theory scientifically correct with the scientific methods they're using, and that other scientists can come up with other "scientific" explanations.

As technology changes so will science's prevailing theory on the Origin of Everything: in another 6000 years we might be taught this Universe was created by alien scientists from another dimension.

My point is that whether YHWH snapped his fingers, or whether something froze or exploded, or whether Cthulhu and 57 shuggoths created this Universe in a particle accelerator, is not only unproveable but even more it's irrelevant.

We obviously don't need to know origin of the Universe to know how to use what's in it. I'm sure even Sarah Palin accepts that atoms are composed of protons and neutrons with electrons revolving around them and that by scientific means you can make a bomb with some of them.

Get it yet? Or have you yourself found absolutely certain proof that the Universe was created in one way and not another?

Graduate 8th grade, then get back to me.
 
Displayed 28 of 28 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report