Wapsi Square Forum

TazManiac wrote:

Atomic wrote:

Alkarii wrote:Something I didn't consider until yesterday or so:

If an object is truly at rest, from dimensions one to eleven, how would we know? Could we even detect it? And how do we know that our entire universe itself isn't moving?

That calls the question: "Compared to what?"

And that's where you discover it's turtles all the way down!

Don't forget the Elephants!

Most people don't know that one of the turtles is a tortoise in disguise.

--FreeFlier

The elephants wouldn't happen to be pink, are they?

*looks around to make sure none of them are in the room.*

AnotherFairportfan wrote:

TazManiac wrote:

Atomic wrote:And that's where you discover it's turtles all the way down!

Don't forget the Elephants!

Different cosmology.

But that's where modern genetic engineering can help out.

We just need to splice up the DNA-stock for a big herd of turtlephants, and we can achieve true cosmological unity in our time!

I like my turtles and elephants Glowing-in-the-Dark...

Oh, so you want teenage mutant radioactive ninja turtles?

Those are special-order, and cost extra.

And don't ask about phosphorescent elephants. You can't afford them.

Bwah ha ha ha!

I love you guys!

Alkarii wrote:So let's just assume it's this universe, with the point where the Big Bang occurred being the center.

According to current theory as I understand it (can I get a few more weasel words in there?) the point where the Big Bang occurred is... everywhere. Space itself is actually expanding - at an increasing rate.

But then I have an alternate hare-brained theory that reduces or eliminates that expansion, while both greatly reducing the need for dark energy and providing a source for it. (It involves dark matter absorbing and re-emitting photons... at a very slightly lower energy, i.e. red-shifted, while preserving their *direction*.)

Alkarii wrote:Well, by "at rest," I meant in relation to the universe itself, not the objects hurtling through it.

But then, there's also the question of whether or not the universe has an actual edge, or if it's just empty space forever. Or if there are entire universes so far away (and probably also "young" enough) that their light hasn't reached ours.

So let's just assume it's this universe, with the point where the Big Bang occurred being the center.

Do you think that people from a civilization a billion years older than ours commonly prank their coworkers at the office by causing random objects (for example, what amounts to a coffee mug) to reach a state of absolute rest?

there was an interesting story about someone who managed to make an object 'at rest' .. with a big problem... when the special team answered the alarm, they found a clean 'hole' going through the desk, floor, etc, etc... they had forgotten that *they* (the planet, the system, etc...) were moving!!! :O

Warrl wrote:

Alkarii wrote:So let's just assume it's this universe, with the point where the Big Bang occurred being the center.

According to current theory as I understand it (can I get a few more weasel words in there?) the point where the Big Bang occurred is... everywhere. Space itself is actually expanding - at an increasing rate.

But then I have an alternate hare-brained theory that reduces or eliminates that expansion, while both greatly reducing the need for dark energy and providing a source for it. (It involves dark matter absorbing and re-emitting photons... at a very slightly lower energy, i.e. red-shifted, while preserving their *direction*.)

you need to look up 'cosmic background radiation'...

Alkarii wrote: But then, there's also the question of whether or not the universe has an actual edge, or if it's just empty space forever. Or if there are entire universes so far away (and probably also "young" enough) that their light hasn't reached ours.

the cosmic background radiation is not an 'edge' its the 'beginning' of the universe, it has taken light that long to get to us... Now, if you could somehow instantly get to that distance, you would not see it, you would see MORE universe!!

there was a theory about an 'infinite' universe... but the point is, that much mass would cause it the curve in on itself, forming a sphere... it would be a billion times a billion times a billion times a billion LY across, but...

Doc Smith's "Galactic Patrol" stories assumed the existence of a luminiferous "ether" which was the medium through light propagated, and was essentially motionless.

Faster-than-light travel was achieved by means of a device called a "Bergenholm", which 100% neutralised the inertia of an entire ship and its contents. Inertialess, or " free", matter instantaneously assumed the velocity in which the driving force was exactly matched by the friction of the medium. There was no acceleration. Or the rate of acceleration was infinite, take your pick.

The interesting thing was that, since the ether was at rest everywhere, when you went inert {cut the Bergenholm}, you instantly resumed the e act velocity - speed AND vector - that you had when you went free.

...and it could be straight into an asteroid at several hundred Km/sec...

I never got hooked on doc smith, Asimov and larry niven got me first...

illiad wrote:I never got hooked on doc smith, Asimov and larry niven got me first...

My dad had the signed/numbered first edition of Smith's books.

Also Astounding/ANALOG from 1941 up, and F&SF from Number One...

AnotherFairportfan wrote:

illiad wrote:I never got hooked on doc smith, Asimov and larry niven got me first...

My dad had the signed/numbered first edition of Smith's books.

Also Astounding/ANALOG from 1941 up, and F&SF from Number One...

- Heinlein & Niven (mee too) &

- Besides the step-mom throwing out (the very day) the whole cardboard box of DC comics (Superboy, et al) that had been 'donated' over the back fence by the neighbor & more so my own mother getting rid of the Astounding Science Fiction et al that Pops had left behind ("why..., WHYYYY!!") I am certainly affected by stories of old pulp SciFi.