Back to Home

Blackholes Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | Blackholes I | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Re: BUT THEN THERE CANNOT BE AN ENDEDGE!

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by William G Melchiorsen Jr on September 30, 1998 17:09:15 UTC

: : : : I can comprehend the (nothingness) of the universe, : : : it is necissary for matter to (exist) within, and if : : : it does (exist) how can we define it with our terminology : : : which is based upon (being) or (sensed) by our organs, : : : but the brain is an organ and we (sense) the makeup of : : : atoms, but the problem with nothingness is not only that : : : we cannot sense it, but that it is not there to sense, : : : although it is very much a part of our universe and its : : : workings. : : : Absolute zero, a limitless viod, actually, could this : : : nothingness be infinite? After all, matter exists and : : : tackes up some (very little) of that space, so I guess : : : it is'nt a perfect infinite, but close enough so that : : : matter has no chance of overcoming its (existance). : : : Anyone want to help me out with TERMS? Or even disscuss : : : this undiscussable subject? : : : BILLY :)

: : I don't really know why I'm responding to this one, but I'll give it a shot. I believe that everything is made of points of force. You can call it energy or waves, doesn't matter. Now because all these points have distance between them, that means that the ratio of nothingness to matter is 1 / 0. : : The nothingless is only a messure of the distance between different substances and all it ever will be is a number. All these points move at light speed, but most of them rotate others to form subatomic particals.

: YES, I AGREE THAT SPACE IS NOTHING, AND THAT IT IS ONLY A NUMBER MAN HAS IMAGINED, BUT THEN HOW CAN WE ACCEPT THE WHOLE BIG BANG THEORY AND THEORY OF RELETIVITY IF IT IS BASED UPON CURVED SPACE (WHICH IS NOTHING?) : OR HAVE I BEEN HUNG UP ON TERMS AND MISSING THE POINT THAT THEY USE THIS ONLY TO EXPLAIN OR PREDICT WHAT HAPPENS TO MATTER IN RELATION TO OTHER MATTER AT CERTAIN SPEEDS?

I FORGOT TO MENTION, THERE COULD BE NO END TO IT EITHER!

Follow Ups:

    Login to Post
    Additional Information
    Google
     
    Web www.astronomy.net
    DayNightLine
    About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
    Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
    Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
    "dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
    are trademarks of John Huggins