Youtube comments of Brandon (@gravoc857).
-
2100
-
116
-
99
-
94
-
58
-
Simplest way to explain the creation and annihilation of virtual particles: You already laid the foundation in this video when you said energized particles pass their energy to the next particle in line. Same applies to whatever the quantum field of reality is. Think about the quantum field as an ocean, being tugged and pushed on, by our moon. This quantum ocean of what we perceive as nothingness, stews and sloshes about. This creates points of congestion, and points of emptiness at random intervals, in random places, Just like tangible and virtual particles, the quantum field of reality cannot be destroyed. Therefore, a large energy spike within the quantum field of reality (empty space, or a vacuum), results in the strong nuclear force creating a pair of virtual particles. Instead of the applied energy overwhelming and breaking the quantum point of space. The quantum field reacts by pushing energy away via particle creation and annihilation. Consider virtual particle pairs to be nothing more than a temporary transportation vessel to move energy away from one point, to another. This is the balancing act that generates the pair of particles, and creates a stable fabric of reality for more complex particles to exist. Why this mechanism is in place is unknown. Some attribute it to divinity. Scientists just don’t know enough to make an accurate theory of why. We have some unproven theories. But even if we prove these theories. It just moves the goalpost of “why” back further, as additional layers of complexity need peeled back to get to the root cause of everything.
The reason for the need for the creation and annihilation of virtual particles in the vacuum of space, is because there aren’t any other tangible or virtual particles around to pass that energy off to. Our intuition lets us easily understand the passing of energy in the world we see, because we see it all the time. Such as when you microwave food, or making a camp fire, or generating body heat from exercising. You experience with your own senses the build up, and release of energy from one particle, to another. In the void of space, where these mechanisms for passing energy aren’t available. The creation and annihilation of virtual particles takes on that role. In absolute absence, the universe creates, rather than passes along.
Back to the point - These particles are supposed to self-annihilate. Which is why Hawking radiation works, but also why it’s so confusing. If a pair forms right on the event horizon of a black hole. One particle can escape, becoming a permanent virtual particle (black body heat radiation), and the other particle also remains as a permanent particle, sucked into the abyss of the black hole.
Since we know that virtual particle pairs aren’t creating themselves from nothing. We know that some of the mass & energy of the black hole is being used in this process.
57
-
50
-
47
-
46
-
45
-
44
-
44
-
43
-
39
-
38
-
38
-
36
-
33
-
32
-
27
-
27
-
23
-
21
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
@Gareth Evans As our universe observation technology continues to become sufficiently more advanced, we’re realizing how easy it is for super or hyper intelligent civilizations to find us. Humanity already has technology to see if there’s lights on a planet that’s billion(s) of miles away. Meaning if we think a planet has a possibility to host intelligent life, we have ways to look & test for it.
Every solar system has a natural telescope powerful enough to see images in stunning detail from unfathomanle distances away. This telescope is called the sun and it’s accomplished by something called Gravitational Lensing. A type 2 civilization would be capable of exploiting this advantage. Hell, humanity might have solar sail probes capable of reaching the suns gravitational focal point before we become a full type 1 civilization. It’s only 625 astronomical units away from Earth. Minimal distances when you consider humanity is already in the process of developing very fast drones to explore Proxima Centauri.
Now the real question is intelligent life there? Does it exist at the same time as us? Is it actively looking? Remember, humanity has been here for a blink. Our first radio waves haven’t even traversed 1/3rd of our galaxy yet.
Earth has 3 forms of higher natural intelligence. There’s social intelligence formed from mammals, mastered by us.
There’s hive intelligence, which is a relatively new concept to our planet, mastered by ants.
Then there’s solitary intelligences, mastered by Cephalopods such as octopus & cuddle fish.
So we know 3 classes of what’s considered higher sentient consciousness just here on Earth. We see lots of opportunity for life just in our solar system. We know of countless Extremophiles here just on our planet. We know the observable universe is incredibly vast, with billions of galaxies, trillions of stars and planets. We know water is common throughout the universe. We know our star is common in the star family tree. We know Earth like planets around the habital zone is fairly common. Our technology continues to reveal more to us & its beginning to become odd that we aren’t finding life. It’s why we need to push harder for answers. There’s more reason to believe life not only exists, but thrives in the universe rather than is extremely rare. So where is all of it?
That’s where the Fermi Paradox comes in. If you’re interested, I strongly encourage you to research it. It provides several logical answers to why we’re not finding life. Whether we’re alone or not alone. Both answers are equally exciting and horrifying.
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
Your assumption is that an abundance of galaxies, stars, and planets guarantees abiogenesis elsewhere in the universe.
Unfortunately, it doesn’t. We don’t know how likely abiogenesis is. We can’t even figure it out here on Earth. To speculate on the odds of it occurring elsewhere in the universe, is to lean on ones conviction, rather than logic.
The logical counter argument to your statement about more stars in our galaxy, than grains of sand on Earth. If the chances of abiogenesis is say: 1 in an octillion. Then it’s statistically likely that we’re alone in the galaxy, as well as humans are a statistical impossibility. Earth would be unfathomably lucky to have abiogenesis occur.
Alternatively, if the chances for abiogenesis is say: 1 in a trillion. Than it’s likely that there could be a few civilizations existing, or who have existed within the Milky Way Galaxy.
If it’s 1 in a billion. Then it’s statistically likely that there’s life within 100 light years of us.
If it’s less than 1 in a billion. Than statistically speaking, our galaxy should be full of life.
Until we discover how abiogenesis happens, and how likely, or unlikely it is to occur. We cannot make biased assumptions based on our conviction with any sort of degree of confidence. It’s speculation in the absence of data. There’s nothing wrong with speculation. I just think it’s important to highly that for every argument that claims the universe has life elsewhere, has an equal argument in favor of the opposite. Vice Versa as well. Until more data is available, all options are equally as probable. Whether that be a desolate universe, or a universe full of life, or anything in-between.
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
@konkyolife I still struggle with it myself.
In its simplest form that I can explain: Our mathematics take logical constructs and work them to completion.
Meaning, we have formulas regarding the universe that can only be considered resolved if additional functions are added. In this case, the functions being added are additional dimensions. They can be added in higher, or lower dimensional settings. Meaning bigger or smaller from the perspective of our 4 dimensional reality.
We can have sound mathematics up to 24 higher dimensions and 6 lower dimensions. Some monster math can get up to 110 higher dimensions to make the formula mathematically sound.
It’s all the theoretical as we don’t have proof of higher dimensions (yet).
What higher dimensional theory suggests is that there are constructs in the universe that are above our perspective. Quantum physics is still too young to determine if the quantum realm is truly smaller dimensions or just the micro manifestations of our macro world. This also indicates that if higher dimensions exist, we’ll likely never figure the universe out completely. We’re incapable of seeing higher dimensions, and if they exist, these higher dimensions surely influence the process and mechanics of this universe. Or higher dimensions could indicate a larger construct, hosting multiple separate 4 dimensional spaces. AKA different universes.
Human intuition crumbles completely when considering anything above 3 dimensions. We can realistically only articulate higher dimensions in a mathematical sense, and even that is highly confusing.
If we were 2 dimensional creatures. We would only see one plane of existence. Meaning a 3 dimensional object passing through our 2 dimensional space would look like an object appearing out of nowhere, growing in size, then shrinking in size, and disappearing, That same concept is applied to 3D objects viewing a higher dimensional object pass through its space. It doesn’t appear to our dimension as it does to the higher dimension. This means the higher dimension has the ultimate perspective on us, and we can only see the higher dimension through the restricted lense of our dimension.
9
-
@immortalsofar5314 Because the shoe box by itself doesn’t do it justice. People still get caught up in thinking about “well, both know that the other has the corresponding pair, so they have a full set!”. This indicates a thinking that some how you can come to a forced measurable result. Kipping explained beforehand that it’s entirely random, and that no matter what you do to the entangled pair, it always results in a randomized dice roll that provides no relevant information if you only have half the set. In other words, if you get a left shoe. You don’t know that you have a left shoe, unless you can see the data of the other party. The shoe is only a left shoe, relative to the other previously entangled particle. Without knowing the state of the other particle, you’re left with an annoyingly undefinable particle.
This is also where the Heisenberg uncertainty principle comes in. Measuring for one vector, increases the uncertainty in another vector. Measure it’s location, and the speed becomes blurry. Measure the speed, and it’s location becomes blurry. You need multiple measurements, but only one measurement can be applied before the super-positioned entanglement ends.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
Yup.
Not only is it incomplete, what we do have filled in could be wrong.
Quantum advancement in the field is challenging Einstein’s General Relativity.
One of those elements being challenged is gravity. Gravity might be gravitons. Or perhaps gravity isn’t even a force at all. The more we begin to understand about space and time dialation, the more we realize that gravity doesn’t need to be a force. Rather, gravity is simply the mean average between two or more zones of dialated time. This would cause the curvature we see.
So to manipulate space is to manipulate time. To manipulate time is to manipulate space. Einstein seems to have been right in his assumption that spacetime exists together as one.
This would fundamentally change the way we view time and gravity, should It ever be decided gravity is not truly a force. This has other potential consequences. Such as the speed of light could be the speed of time. Or that black holes might not actually condense to an infinitely small point. It would be possible that the curvature of spacetime gets so extreme, that time stops flowing at the center of a black hole. This would freeze gravity and prevent an infinite collapse in on itself. Meaning that at the center of a black hole, it could contain the most basic elementary particles, but frozen in space and frozen in time. Their energy existing both in a state of perpetual activity around a physically frozen form. This would explain why Hawking radiation works, as quantum fluctuations would still apply to objects inside black holes. A quantum energy spike would trigger the strong nuclear force to form a virtual particle to compensate for that quantum fluctuation. With s very small chance the particle would be created outside the black hole.
All of this would suggest too that perhaps the present is being created actively. That there’s some sort of universal mechanism responsible for all of this happening. It seems to be processed at the speed of light, or in this case the speed of time. This would mean the future doesn’t exist yet within this universe, and the past truly exists.
So much to wrap the mind around. I can’t wait for more scientific discovery.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
@hwoods9773 It has to do with my original comment about people not trusting and feeling angst against the courts. It’s not about protesting the courts, per say. It’s about a more inherent part of the human condition.
This woman saw something very impactful. Something she feels went wrong because of the officers. This is her perspective. The court is asking questions that challenge her perspective, and in better words, her reality. Done so in a tone and manner to paint innocence on the officer.
While yes I understand this is the duty of law to equal representation & a honest attempt at pleading the defendants case. It’s a very hard pill to swallow for those doubtful of the legitimacy of the legal institution, or in the witnesses case the reality to what she knows she saw.
You may call it stupidity, I call it challenge of perspective. I’m asking you to understand the perspective of the doubtful in the same way you would ask to understand the perspective of the advocate of the justice system. I’m not asking you to change your position.
I’m merely attempting to point out that both the legal system & humanity are complex. That its difficult to develop and maintain a system that can unequivocally ask/demand of its participants & receive participation. That the human instinct and human condition are much deeper. That these things cannot be reduced down to “just do it or she’s stupid”.
That to develop a more fair and just system is to understand both perspectives.
I understand your perspective. I spent the majority of my life as a patriot who held the institutions of the United States in high regards. I used to once fill your shoes. My perspective (my reality) has challenged that belief. Because I’ve now filled both shoes, I have a better appreciation for both stances, since I’ve experienced them personally. I now know that both are wrong, and that our system can be done better. Our system as currently stands is a system designed by humans, but does not incorporate the human condition. It is our societies best current attempt at ascending and holding ourselves to a higher and more just standard. It worked for a while, but it’s not working as intended now. We can do better. I see the flaws in the establishment and the flaws in human testimony while watching this trial. I don’t blame corruption. I blame the issues of scalability to both the human condition & the human constructed centers of establishment & control.
It’s why I’m very excited for the possibility of AI-ran government. It’s apparent that our complexity is surpassing the capability of humans. We humans are very smart. But individually we lack the required perspectives and knowledge to be sufficient at managing society. It’s a strange problem to have. Being so successful as a species that we outpace our physical evolution. This overburdening of knowledge we now face tends to make people resort to reductionist conclusions, in order to feel we sufficiently understand the overwhelming complexity we find ourselves in today. It’s how a brain whose design surpasses its capability copes with that. It’s how we hold sanity in a world we do not understand. It’s the limitation that leads to the flawed human condition. It’s what makes us, us. We’re special but we’re really bad at managing things. We could use some help.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@astrumspace While Hawking Radiation is still an unobserved theory. It does have circumstantial supporting evidence that suggests it’s existence.
Black Hole Thermodynamics. Two of them have been proven (observed). Hawking radiation falls under black hole thermodynamics. So, the more laws of BHTD we observe, the higher the probability that Hawking Radiation is correct.
The larger a black hole is, the cooler it is. This has been observed and happens for two reasons. First reason is the larger a black hole becomes, the larger it’s Eddington Mass limit becomes. Meaning, the black hole feeds with greater efficiency, and ejects less energized material at its poles. Therefore, the black hole appears cooler. The second reason is because the larger a black hole becomes, the less energized particles are at the event horizon. Small black holes will cause objects to begin Spaghettification, before passing the event horizon. Usually starting around the accretion disk. For ultramassive and above sized black holes, Spaghettification occurs inside the event horizon. Therefore, we see less energized particles, showing a cooler black hole. The temperature of black holes is referred to as Hawking Temperature.
Black holes have finally been proven to show entropy. Using gravitational waves, scientists measured the merger of two black holes, resulting in the surface area of the two merged black holes increasing. This is called the Hawking Area Theorem.
I recommend looking into the company “Technion”, and their work with artificial analog black holes. They call them “dumb holes”. Fascinating stuff. They proved the sonic equivalent of Hawking radiation exists, and behaves exactly how Hawking Radiation is theorized to behave. They proved sonic radiation is stationary, just as predicted for photon radiation-based Hawking radiation. This is strong circumstantial supporting evidence for the existence of Hawking Radiation.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@NephilimHunter1959 Then look to nature and materials science for the answer. Nature has safely stored radioactive materials since the planets formation. The answer lies there on where to store it.
The how to store it comes from advancing materials science. We can make artificial materials that can outlast the half life of uranium. Then tens of thousands of years into the future, humanity will have convenient access to lead deposits.
This technology has already began work. Thanks to Chernobyl for emphasizing the importance of materials science. By the time the new dome becomes obsolete, we’ll likely have a permenant solution. This solution will also be applied to nuclear waste storage. Or, we can just launch it into space. All of humanities nuclear material generated from the time of our first reactor, to now is a minuscule amount of nuclear material. Our sun releases more nuclear material in 1 minute than we’ve generated artificially, ever. Skyhooks, space elevators, scram jets and near orbital industrial infrastructure makes transporting nuclear to space very safe. Especially paired with next generation artificial alloys and compounds as storage containers. We’ll have those technologies by the time nuclear waste deposits start to become a serious issue.
The answer is never to regress. Regression in science and technology equals extinction. If 1% of America’s power grid goes down, the whole system collapses. Electric, renewable and fossil fuels aren’t enough. Nuclear alone isn’t even enough. We need a diversified energy source, and that includes nuclear.
Also, are you well versed in next generation portable mini box reactor technology? They are incapable of generating enough impact to cause a global disaster. We need to stop referencing an era where humans were indeed acting like belligerent toddlers with nuclear bombs and power as the reason not to have nuclear. That era needs to be referenced as why we have to do nuclear safer. Which guess what, we already are. We need better tech. Guess what, we’re already building it.
Natural fission reactors is a relatively new discovery too. Nuclear physicists, Geologists and biologists are teaming up to thoroughly study them. Can a billions of year old natural construct teach us how to be safer and more effecient with nuclear? Yes. Can it teach us how life has been historically impacted by nuclear? Yes. Can it teach us the optimal way to store nuclear material? Yes.
We’re also just now starting to understand how nature adapts and evolves when nuclear enters the equation. Thanks again to Chernobyl for majorly advancing our understanding of life, ecosystems and biology. Biological life also might be a solution. We now know of mushrooms and bacteria that convert nuclear energy to chemical energy.
5
-
5
-
Sort of. What it’s saying is that underlying anxiety causes men to look for problems in the world that are unsolvable by them, then use that unsolvable problem as the root of their struggles. It’s essentially a rejection of feeling and finding a coping mechanism to keep that feeling suppressed. The coping mechanism is generally latching onto a lack of control, because it’s a safe vector for men to share their thoughts, without actually facing their feelings bluntly and truthfully.
Instead of saying, “My job is having a negative impact on my mental state, because I don’t know how to emotionally process these difficult tasks in a healthy, productive manner”. A man with underlying, untreated, and often-unknown anxiety might instead say “This job is killing me. It’s unreasonably stressful and it’s my employers fault for not hiring enough people, for not paying me enough, and for placing too much responsibility onto me”. While some of the latter may be true in this individuals case. They fail to recognize that they have allowed the environment to mold their consciousness in uncontrollable ways.
This is an issue, because men are generally conditioned into this mindset. Societal norms are unintentionally generating men with anxiety, who have a lifetime of precedent telling them to not face it.
Men need to learn how to prevent their environment from changing or controlling their mental state in uncontrollable ways. Learning to comfortably confront your feelings is a critical skill. It’s required to understand what environments do to your state of mind, how to mentally conquer those environments, and when it’s truly time to pull the plug on an environment that is mentally untenable.
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@JoJo-xz2px yes. Humans already have adapted for hotter weather. It’s why we lost fur, are the sweatiest of mammals and have the only skin known that gets purposely darker with more sun exposure.
Modern day humans evolved from a very unique species of mammal. Homo Erectus engaged in a very unique hunting strategy called persistence hunting. To this day, homo erectus and modern day humans are the only species known to utilize persistence hunting.
Persistence hunting is a combination of tracking, sprinting, jogging & walking. It’s when a slower species runs down a faster species by exhausting or overheating its prey with relentless persuit. Persistence hunting means actively engaged in one pursuit and that pursuit could take days. It means to not give up when outpaced. No other hunting species is known to do this. Other species will give up on the pursuit & try again later. Not Homo Erectus. It goes until it chases its prey down.
For Homo Erectus to achieve this, it evolved several adaptations. Homo Erectus began losing hair. It’s ancestors were significantly hairier. It began developing a significant amount of sweat pores, far surpassing any other mammal in terms of total sweat pores. We are also the only known mammal with skin designed to be exposed to the sun and build resistance to the sun with added exposure by getting darker. This means our glands also have an unprecedented ability to develop melanin. This ability to generate large amounts of melanin is shared with for example: Octopi & Chameleons. Homo Erectus was also one of the only mammals, apart from modern humans, to be able to engage in intense physical activity for 4 hours strait. This means Homo Erectus was able to better store and regulate water usage in the body than other species.
Humans are quite the oddity and alien in our own right. We developed and evolved down a very unique evolutionary path. Even if you don’t consider our massive prioritization of the brain and frontal cortex, modern humans have evolved some seriously interesting traits. But going back to your original question. Yes, we evolved to be hot, and we’ll continue to evolve towards environmental fitness. Both on an evolutionary standpoint, but also on an intelligence standpoint. Humans have a unique advantage not granted to other species. Our superior intelligence grants us the ability to adapt much quicker than other species can. Humanity is already beginning to show signs of adapting to this hotter world. Stuff like Saudi Arabia’s Line City, or Operation Cool Singapore. Heck, scientific engineers are playing with the idea of developing “artificial ice” to replace our planets natural heat mirror. The polar caps melting means our dark oceans absorb more heat. The idea that we could prevent this compounding warming effect by installing artificial & biodegradable materials that are cheap and scalable to industrial levels is simple & incredibly effective. You have an entire science and industry designated to building economically viable carbon scrubbers. We’re basically there mate. Carbon scrubbing is already profitable in some cases & it’s something that entire industries are looking to adopt into their business structure. You have scientists working on artificially engineering bioplankton that can survive a hotter & more acidic ocean. You have an entirely new generation of farmers beginning to focus on sustainable farming. Can’t forget to mention the growing industry of vertical hydroponic farming. Which can be done in factories or underground. Water desalination is slowly but surely becoming more viable. The first commercial fusion reactor is set to be completed and operational by 2035. If this commercial reactor is able to prove concept, humanity gains access to enough energy to explore our entire solar system. This means we have access to 100 million times more resources than we have on Earth. This allows us to make colonies on several moons & Mar’s. This significantly increases the species chances of survival, as well as humanities chances of surviving on & restoring Earth. With fusion, sky hooks and space elevators. We would have enough technology and infrastructure to bring massive quantities of water to space & vice versa. Why would we want to bring water to space? If we bring water to space, we can let the near absolute zero temperatures of space freeze the water into ice. We then can take this ice back to Earth & cool the oceans and/or replenish the ice caps.
So as you can see, humanity has a lot of ways to adapt & evolve to survive this new world. It’s not guaranteed, but us humans are crazy smart. If you need further inspiration. You can look to those who live in the most hot parts of the world. See how they live and adapt to the heat.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@captain_context9991 Technically, keeping beyond next generation technology secret is the best way to become a billionaire. More like a trillionaire with that technology. You would stand to gain way more by keeping that technology to yourself, than selling it to others. If these craft are truly capable of transmedium travel. Then they are priceless and are far more valuable being a technology that the rest of the world do not have. At least to the indivual(s) who own or control them.
Also, claiming everyone is out to be a billionaire, is massively reductionistic and narrow minded.
So by claiming the Fermi Paradox is complete bullshit out of the 1950’s. By that standard you are also claiming the world renowned physicists and scientists such as Hitoshi Murayama, Lisa Kaltenegger, Caleb Scharf, Susan Schneider and Sara Walker are also completely full of shit. Considering they‘ve been on record advocating and discussing the possibility/viability of the Fermi Paradox, Kardeshev Scale, Barrow’s Scale, Drake’s Equation and the Great Filter on a number of occasions. Don’t take it personally random internet person. I listen to the most brilliant minds of the modern era. I’m unflinched at your claim of bullshit.
Atomic science was considered magic, impossible, bullshit or whatever you want to call it, until it wasn’t. You can remain skeptical about the quantum realm. I don’t think anything about the experimentation of particle physics is bullshit. Case and point look at the Muon G-2 experiment which intertwines dark forces, particle physics, general relativity and quantum physics together into one large experiment with READABLE DATA. There’s observable and quantifiable data being generated. Yet you call it bullshit and magic? You need to spend some time listening to world renowned scientists. You sound an awful a lot like the Hawking and Einstein skeptics in their day who were turned into schmucks and fools by history.
I’ve seen the videos of hobbyist scientists attempting to debunk GoFast, Gimble and Tic Tac. They don’t provide enough evidence to prove their claims. World renowned scientists tend to take the angle that aliens don’t exist. If world renowned scientists could debunk these pentagon releases, they would absolutely be screaming it from the rooftops. They aren’t though. The top scientific minds today aren’t commenting on it. Pretty telling when these scientific howitzer’s who are generally very vocal on subjects pertaining to the nature of reality and the universe, aren’t.
Want to know what science is being vocal about? Quantum physics, advancements in black hole understanding, and most recently, the worlds first viable warp drive formula. You can keep watching sensationalist bullshit like Thunderf00t. I’d suggest you go read up on some big boy stuff. I recommend starting with Alexey Bobrick, Gianni Martire and Erik Lentz. They are well respected scientists, praised by their peers who are challenging our notion of what’s possible or impossible. All while adhering to the laws of nature and Einstein’s General Relativity.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@MagnusQuake Certainly! Space is an interesting, yet difficult subject to get into. The elementary stuff is easy to find. But discovering the truly interesting concepts, is difficult. Such as photon spheres, Boltzmann Branes, Ergospheres, dark matter stars, conformal cyclic cosmology, etc.
To answer your question: Nothing can escape beyond the event horizon of a black hole. Anything beyond it, has a chance to escape.
The event horizon is the point in spacetime, in which the gravitational pull of the singularity is so strong, that not even light can escape it.
The singularity is at the center of a black hole. It’s a point of spacetime, in which gravity has become the dominant force, due to matter collapsing in what we perceive as an infinitely dense point. Whether it’s truly infinitely dense is still unknown, and highly debated amongst the scientific community.
It’s important to understand that many forces affect the flow of time. Such as speed and gravity. For black holes, time progressively slows down as you approach the event horizon. Once you pass, spacetime begins to disintegrate, until eventually, space and time cease to exist.
This slowing down of time, means that matter cannot freely flow into a black hole all at once. Consider this analogy. You’re driving your car on the highway. As you travel, the lanes begin to decrease. Let’s say your exiting a city interstate, and entering the country. You’ll go from 5 lanes, to 3 lanes, to 2, to eventually 1. If you’re the only car on the road, you won’t experience a slowdown of traffic as the lanes decrease. However, if the roads busy, you’ll experience a traffic jam, as people begin funneling into increasingly less lanes. The speed you travel at slows, and at some points, you come to a dead stop. If traffic is bad enough, people will begin finding alternative routes.
If we’re to relate this analogy to a black hole. The cars are matter, or light, or both. The lanes are spacetime. The decreasing of lanes is matter or light approaching the event horizon. The eventual decrease to one lane, is the matter passing the event horizon. The slowing down of speed driven, is the slowing down of time as you approach the black hole.
If a lone object travels into a black hole. It gets absorbed with 100% efficiency. But what happens if matter funnels so quickly into a black hole, that it forms a traffic jam? Well, the matter never actually passes the event horizon. Meaning, it was never absorbed, and still has a chance to escape. This traffic jam is what we call the accretion disk. It’s a disk of highly energized material, that is gravitationally attracted to a black hole, and is in the final phases of passing the event horizon.
If you’ve seen the movie “Interstellar”. When they approach the black hole, it’s very bright and has this glowing boarder. That’s the accretion disk.
When too much mass passes into the accretion disk at once, the black hole cannot eat it all at once. Therefore, the excess spills out at the north and South Poles of the black hole via jets of highly ionized radiation. We call these quasars. You’ve probably seen these as diagrams of two jets venting out on opposite ends of a black hole. Typically, these are found in ultra massive black holes at the center of galaxies. The black hole at the center of the Milky Way galaxy used to be a quasar. It still is today, but not nearly as powerful as it once was.
Going back to time dilation. The slowing down of time, limiting the rate at which a black hole can feed is called it’s Eddington Mass Limit. The larger a black hole is, the bigger it’s Eddington Mass Limit is.
In the simplest analogy I can think of. Think about a black hole as a funnel that you pour water down. The size of the funnel, determines how much water you can pour in. The bigger the funnel, the more can flow through at once. If you pour too much water in too quickly, excess water spills out the side. The Eddington Mass Limit is essentially the size of the black hole funnel, or in this case, the size of its event horizon.
Lets look at an example black hole. Lets assume we take the mass of 8 Mercury’s, and crush them all together to form a black hole. This black hole, the size of 8 Mercury’s will form an event horizon about the size of a bowling ball.
Now, let’s assume this bowling ball is traveling through the cosmos at 50,000mph, on a direct collision course for Earth.
When it hits Earth, it immediately starts eating material that passes its event horizon. However, the Earth is HUGE, and this black hole is only the size of a bowling ball. Meaning, the black hole can only eat the surface area of a bowling bowl at any given time. Since the black hole is so massive (8 Mercury’s), and traveling so fast. It doesn’t slow down as it punches through Earth like a bullet through jello. As it flies literally through the mantle and core of earth. It eats as much material as it can. But it’s restricted by it’s Eddington mass limit. Since the mass limit is capped out as it flies through the Earth, the excess material is vented out on the north and South Pole of this bowling ball-sized black hole. This material is extremely energized, generating energy levels far beyond ALL of our nuclear warheads combined. This venting of energy is so intense, it would shake the very foundations of the planet itself, and generate the largest earthquakes ever recorded around the ENTIRE globe.
After merely a few seconds, the black hole will punch through the other side of earth, and continue its path through the cosmos as if it never even passed through a planet at all. This thing is so powerful, that punching through a planet doesn’t slow it down.
The majority of black holes in the universe are little. Ranging from planetary masses, to star masses. The giants are for the most part, secured at the center of galaxies. There’s a few outliers, but we don’t have the worry about those. Humanity needs to worry about the prospect of a rogue small to medium black hole hitting us.
Now, if humanity creates a black hole here on Earth, and pushes it inside the planet. It will devour the whole planet, as it’s not accelerating faster than the planet itself. It will take a while, and it will be an extremely violent event. Alternatively, if a big enough black hole hits us from space, it will eat most of all of the planet. This is unlikely though. We’re more likely to have a large rogue black hole come in, and throw us out of orbit. Potentially slingshotting us into space at speeds so extreme, people would be crushed by the planet, or flung into space.
2
-
@MagnusQuake I can answer some more :).
Black holes spin. They spin really freaking fast. They spin, because stars spin. Angular momentum is preserved as a star mass object implodes into a black hole. Since angular momentum is preserved, this means the black hole will spin really fast, in order to match the angular momentum of the star.
This spin creates a zone around the black hole called the Ergosphere. Black holes spin so fast, that they generate inertia, almost as powerful as gravity. For reference, angular momentum is how humans will likely make artificial gravity devices, when we inevitably start sending humans far beyond Earth.
Angular momentum has an impact on the flow of time, just like gravity. This means the Ergosphere will have really trippy physics, and will experience time dilation. For example, if you were to float into the Ergosphere while wearing a space suit. It would be like being tossed around in a whirlpool. But instead of water, spacetime is what is tossing you around. The Ergosphere is defined as the boundary of the black holes’ external influence via its angular momentum.
To help you visualize better. The Ergosphere is like the atmosphere of a black hole. It has an oval shape, and you’ll enter the Ergosphere a good distance away from the black hole itself.
The next layer is the accretion disk. We’ll return to this later.
The next layer after that is the photon sphere. We’ll also return to this.
After the photon sphere, we have the outer event horizon. This is the point in which not even light can escape.
Once you’re beyond the event horizon, you’ll accelerate towards the center of the black hole.
As you accelerate to the center, you’ll pass through the inner event horizon. This marks the end of spacetime as we know it. Time ceases to exist, and so does space. It will take both an eternity, and an instant for you to reach the center. For without a benchmark to measure space or time. A trillion years, and an instant are essentially the same.
After the inner event horizon. You’ll reach the core. The absolute center, known as the singularity. What happens here, is unknown.
Going back to your question about black holes eating stars. If I interpreted your question correctly. I believe you’re referring to spaghettification.
Spaghettification is the scientific term used to describe a phenomena of extreme gravity. Black holes have such an extreme gravitational influence, that the tidal forces in front of you are much more powerful than the tidal forces behind you. What this means is that the black hole is essentially stretching you out. It’s pulling away the atoms in front of your body, faster than the atoms in the back of your body. This process gets more extreme, the closer you get to the black hole. It’s called spaghettification, because eventually the force becomes so powerful, that it disassembles you entirely, and you become just a stream of ionized radiation, flowing towards the singularity.
This is better visualized with your sun question. As a star orbits a black hole, and gradually approaches the event horizon. The tidal forces begin to lift material off the sun itself. Until eventually, it disassembles the entire sun into a stream of energy that joins the accretion disk.
A clarification on the accretion disk. If the black hole is not feeding on matter or light, it won’t have an accretion disk. It will be a true black hole that is invisible to us. These are called dormant black holes when they’re not actively feeding. Rogue black holes are likely to be completely dark, and therefore dormant. But just because it’s dormant, doesn’t mean it can’t move through spacetime. This is why humanity should be concerned about rogue black holes. A dormant and completely dark rogue black hole could be hurling towards earth as we speak.
The accretion disk forms once a black hole begins to feed again. A black hole can have an accretion disk, without becoming a quasar (venting ionized radiation at the poles). It only becomes a quasar, if it’s Eddington Mass Limit is reached. So long as the black hole remains under the mass limit. It can feed on all the material within the accretion disk.
Remember that the accretion disk isn’t the point of no return. It’s the point just before the event horizon. Matter can still escape at this point, if it has the right speed, the right angle, or if it gets bumped out of orbit. Unlikely though, as the forces of the black hole are immense. For humans,. We’ll likely not want to venture beyond the Ergosphere.
The reason why black holes have poles, is because they spin. Interestingly, this also means that black holes have equators.
Next up is the photon sphere. This is a less known, but interesting layer of a black hole. Before we get into them, a bit about orbits.
An orbit occurs when the velocity of an object is equally matched with the gravitational influence exerted onto that orbiting body. Let’s look at the sun and earth, for example.
Gravity bends spacetime. The sun being so massive, means that earth is in a constant state of free falling towards the sun. Good news for the earth though. We are accelerating away from the sun as quickly as the sun is dragging us in. Extra good news. Per the laws of physics, an object in motion, stays in motion until acted upon by an equal or greater force. Since Earth is floating through the void of space. There’s nothing to slow us down. Therefore. We’ve built a harmony with the sun. We are forever falling into the gravitational well of the sun, while equally accelerating away. Therefore, we have a stable orbit.
Going back to black holes and the photon sphere. If a photon enters the orbit of a black hole at precisely the right angle. It will find itself in a harmonic orbit with the black hole. The speed of light will be equally matched by the gravitational pull of the black hole. Meaning, light can have a stable and permanent orbit around a black hole. This has interesting ramifications. Black holes might be a map to the universe. Black holes might have the highest resolution image of the universe, ever. Black holes might allow us to see beyond the observable universe, as they will have been collecting light from objects during the great expansion of the universe. Black holes may allow us to view a montage of the development of the universe, as it’e been collecting light data for billions of years.
There’s other extremely cool concepts about black holes if you’re interested. Since black holes create immensely deep gravitational wells. It’s possible that black holes can form wormholes, by connecting two gravitational wells at different points in the universe. The assumption here is that our universe is a 4D hypersphere, and we live on the surface (3rd dimension) of this hypersphere. Per Roger Penrose, black holes may outlive the universe themselves. Black holes may also be used as the last refuge of hyper advanced alien civilizations trillions of years into the future. If we live in a repeating universe, where we continue to Big Bang after the death of the universe. Then black holes may leave ripples on the primordial universe, which we call the cosmic microwave background radiation. Or the eternal TV static. Hyper advanced civilizations might be able to use ultra-massive black holes to imprint information onto the next universe. Whether they leave a blueprint for their return, or a message to the next generation of life in the fresh universe. The angular momentum of black holes can be harvested for energy. We could also create a “black hole bomb”, generating the largest explosion in the universe by exploiting its angular momentum. We could use black holes as time machines into the future. Black holes can also blue shift light (energizing). Therefore, black holes might be fueling stations for hyper advanced space faring civilizations. There’s an interesting artificial solar system concept. You place 9 sun like stars in orbit around a supermassive black hole. This would create a stable orbit, capable of hosting 512 earth sized planets. A type 3 civilization might use these to make life refuges for themselves. These structures cannot occur naturally. If we ever find something like this in the universe. Then we just found unequivocal proof of aliens.
Another weird quirk of black holes. You see the front, back, top, and bottom of a black hole. It’s sort of like taking a cube, and unfolding it back into a two dimensional shape, where you can see all the faces of the cube at once. This occurs for the sphere of the black hole. The reason we see all sides of the black hole at once, is because photons orbit multiple times around black holes, before leaving the orbit and hitting our eyes. Nowhere else in the universe can light orbit around objects. Objects can curve lights path, but they will never be strong enough to cause a complete orbit around the object, or multiple orbits.
Finally, black holes can die. They release Hawking radiation. Perhaps the most interesting property of a black hole in my opinion. A black hole losing mass, because of particles coming into existence from almost nothing at all.
I can discuss Hawking radiation more if you want. It will be a big post as well, as we’ll have fo go over the strong nuclear force, the quantum field of reality, and the creation./annihilation of virtual particle pairs in the void of space.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@TheFinalsTV Aquatic life would thrive in planets with stronger gravity. Gravity doesn’t really matter when the stuff you’re surrounded by is all the same density.
A super earth with lots of water could breed oceanic giants.
The challenge for life on stronger gravity planets is gravity will be unforgiving to ocean life once it tries to transition to land. It will require bigger bones, stronger muscles and a clever cardiovascular system. These are all very expensive evolutionary traits. But just because they are expensive doesn’t mean they are impossible. Take a look at humans and octopus for example. Both have very expensive brains that are big & slow to develop. When humans were prey, our brains were a disadvantage to us and got many of us eaten by predators. Whether it be a mother needing labor or giving labor. Or the process of keeping a helpless child alive longer than what is needed for other species with smaller brains or even our curiousity. Our brains allow us to be fascinated by the world, which in turn means some of us would have died out of curiousity of predators. Something smaller brained animals generally do not succumb from. Yet, octopus and us are still here.
A planet with stronger gravity will favor different evolutionary traits. For example, insects here have a biological version of hydraulics. A planet with stronger gravity might have life that favors biological hydraulics in larger species as a way to cope with increased gravity.
Stronger gravity isn’t all just cons though. Like I mentioned in my above comment. A planet will strong gravity will have a dense atmosphere at the surface. This makes flight much easier on these planets than it is on Earth. Meaning, you don’t need to achieve apex evolutionary traits that allows avian creatures on earth to fly. Flying creatures on these planets will have a much easier go at it, meaning many evolutionary paths will allow creatures flight, that aren’t specialized in it. Like how earth has mammals that specialize in gliding. These planets would have an abundance of creatures that come up with secondary mechanisms to achieve partial or full flight. Kinda funny but not farting might be a mechanism. At these densities, lighter gases will have a lot more desire to float up than they do here on Earth. A small creature might accidentally discover temporary flight after eating something gassy and finds itself floating. After thousands upon thousands of generations of trial and error. The species may master eating certain foods to generate internal gas, and then lower themselves from the air by releasing the gas.
Smaller gravity planets would favor massive frames but they would be light. These frames would benefit those attempting to reach up or across. Or those wanting to run faster in a lower gravity environment. Or those wishing to live in extreme environments such as mountain overhangs. Or those who want to jump higher and farther, or fly higher and faster.
So in short. Strong gravity worlds favor massive creatures as the sheer size is needed to cope with the gravity. The oceans would be capable of evolving giants. Those giants might eventually move to land.
Small gravity planets will allow more versatility and flexibility in frame evolution. There won’t be a strong demand for big bones, strong muscles or complex systems to cope with the excess gravity. Therefore these species will prioritize evolutionary advantages that assist them in surviving their environment, rather than surviving the forces around their environment.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@S3aCa1mRa1n The actual hype is that evidence of a 5th force of nature was discovered that challenges both Einstein’s general relativity & quantum mechanics at the same time. This 5th force is theorized to be dark matter & this is perhaps our first proof of its existence, beyond “well galaxies need 80% more mass to stay together, so we think...”
Yellow blobs were discovered in our galaxy which turned out to be the primordial stage of star formation. Before this, we just assumed stars formed rather quickly once hydrogen and helium hit a critical gravitational effect and collapsed. Now we know that hydrogen and helium can take thousands of years to gather, giving off x ray light, until the x rays slowly convert into visible light and a star forms. If we ever become a galactic species, we can use these yellow blobs to discover stars at their earliest phases of life & go explore them.
Major advancements in geology and biology here on Earth has given us amazing insight into the early days of Earth. Natural nuclear fission was discovered underground & occurred for millions of years. The heat from fission, paired from the conductive force of friction in our core is responsible for triggering the melting of global ice in a few hundred years that was stable for hundreds of millions of years. The great flood was the closest Earth has ever been to an utopic Eden & caused an explosion of complex micro organisms which evolved into several different forms.
While not confirmed and just a theory. Natural nuclear fission in the Earth has given rise to a new way of thinking about our moon formation. Since the moon and Earth and virtually identical in terms of composition, we can accurately guess that the moon and earth used to be one mass at one point. The commonly accepted theory is a large object hit us & surface blow off eventually reformed into the moon. This new theory suggests a natural supermassive nuclear explosion within the Earths mantle is responsible for our moons formation. Since Uranium has a half life, Earth had a lot more nuclear material billions of years ago. Nearly all of it has half lived away into stable compounds. But back then, a critical mass could have formed deep underground and something like a mega earthquake could have triggered the largest nuclear explosion right here on Earth. Blowing a massive chunk out of the planet that eventually formed our moon. The Earth was hot and active enough back then that the Earth would have been able to correct its shape and return to a sphere.
It is now becoming widely accepted that birds use quantum mechanics in their eyes to literally be able to see Earth’s magnetic field and navigate. That their eyes contain proteins that are stable when not illuminated by photons, but become unstable once illuminated by photons. Once illuminated, the proteins become unstable and start quantum super positioning. This causes quantum pulses to occur in their eyes and the pulses literally make Earths magnetic field visible. This is exciting because it opens an entire new field of quantum biology. There is now lots of interest in discovering other biological forms that evolved to use quantum forces. One major candidate is humans. There is an untested theory that claims that our superior human brains might be due to us utilizing quantum biology. Our brains are incredibly complex, often referred to as the most complex structures in the universe. For good reason too. Studying the brain breaks all senses of our intuition. Same exact way quantum mechanics breaks our sense of intuition. It’s possible our brains reached such confusing complexity by utilizing quantum mechanics. We humans may owe our very intelligence to the quantum realm and I cannot wait for experiments and data to come that either confirms or rejects this theory.
We just flew a drone on Mars. The first successful off world flight, ever.
James Webb telescope will push the observable universe further out for us and will allow us to study SEVERAL unanswered questions and phenomena. Once this thing launches, there will be an explosion of universal scientific discovery.
We are experimenting with solar sail probes and may eventually see some launched to several interesting points new us. Such as to our closest star, to better understand our Oort Cloud and beyond.
Fusion is gaining major ground. KSTAR held a stable fusion reaction for 20 seconds. With the goal of maintaining a stable reaction for 50 seconds by 2035 when the first commercial fusion reactor goes live. USA, Russia and China are in a modern day space race to get to the moon and begin mining helium 3 for fusion fuel.
A new thesis was released on the only known possible warp drive by current physics. There are 4 classes of theoretical warp drives. 3 of the 4 require sciences that break the laws of nature. 1 class works entirely based in our current understanding of how the universe works. While not easy to make, it’s the only one we know of so far that doesn’t break the laws of nature to achieve warp speed. It’s achieved by making a space ship as heavy as a neutron star, accelerating it and allowing time dilation to make it appear to travel faster than the speed of light. The issue here is 100 years would be say, 10,000 years on the outside of the space ship. This could be problematic. However, it’s equally as problematic as taking 20,000 years to reach the nearest star. The takeaway is we have a theoretically functional warp drive that doesn’t break the laws of nature & does not require unknown sciences to achieve.
I could keep going on. We live in the most exciting of times. There’s just so much going on that people tend to not notice the massive advancements happening.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Moloch is a fictional demon that was formed as a thought experiment to explain a real phenomena that occurs within game theory and evolution.
The simplest way to explain Moloch is to visualize a crowded sports stadium. One individual stands up, which obstructs the vision of the individual behind them. Therefore that individual also stands up as a response. A domino effect gets triggered, and soon you have an entire section of the stadium that is standing up. Essentially it’s a situation that is lose-lose for everyone, as the choice to sit is revoked. Any individual who decides to sit is disadvantaging themselves as they won’t be able to see, and the likelihood that others will sit in response is incredibly low.
Another example is the Instagram beauty filter. Using beauty filters is bad for society as a whole. Yet influencers need to use them, because their competitors are using them. If an influencer doesn’t use a filter, they place themselves at a disadvantage as their competitors will continue to use them. Therefore Moloch is the requirement to use a beauty filter if you wish to stay competitive & maintain the minimum standard of the influencer system.
Moloch is essentially a byproduct of competition in which everyone loses & the winning choice is strangled out of the equation. It’s a closed looped system that demands conscientiousness & effort from several involved individuals to break the cycle. Which is why it’s so difficult because Moloch, group think mentality & the bystander effect go hand and hand.
Moloch in AI development is the forgoing of safety and wisdom in the development of these systems, in an effort to achieve sentient AI first. There’s a capitalistic aspect and a national competition aspect. Whichever company gets to it first will reap immense financial reward. Competitors who aren’t racing to the finishing line & considering the safety & security of these systems are placing themselves at a disadvantage. Nation states have similar incentives, as whichever nation gains sentient AI first, will leapfrog immensely forward in terms of power. Which creates the disadvantage situation of not having this tech. The only way to defeat Moloch in AI development is to convince all parties involved to pause the race & allow the time & thought space to consider safety, security, legislations, and even just the bare bones definitions of these things. Otherwise AI could be a rat race towards the downward spiral of humanity.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I hope to god it’s aliens, but we have to look at this through a scientific lense.
I recommend investigating the following scientific concepts:
Barrow’s Scale, Kardeshev Scale, Drake’s Equation, The Fermi Paradox, The Great Filter, Stellar Engines and Dyson Swarms.
It also helps to have an understanding of the age timeline of the universe. For example, heat death of the universe occurs roughly 100 trillion years from now, and the universe is 14.6 billion years old. It helps to understand that the universe is becoming gradually more hospitable to life as galactic orbits settle into states of lower chaos. But at the same time, space time is expanding and making it significantly harder for life to sprawl out.
It also helps to understand the vast distances of the universe. From our understanding, there appears to be no galactic or intergalactic civilizations out there. We are studying hundreds of millions of galaxies, and wherever we look, we find phenomena explainable with natural origins. According to human development and expansion rates, we should be fully galactic in 2 million years. That’s a blink of an eye to the universe. So if we’re capable of that, why hasn’t it already happened? We should be able to see ancient relics and effects of older galactic civilizations. We don’t. So where is everybody? That’s the conundrum presented with The Fermi Paradox. We know space is virtually stealthless, so we know species can’t hide well. So why can’t we find them? It’s likely that humanity has passed a great filter. I believe life is very common in the universe. The transition from simple species to capable intelligence seems to be so incredibly rare, that humans were the only ones to achieve it in our observed universe. It could be so rare that intelligent species could be separated by billions of light years. The closest one might be beyond our observable universe. But who knows. We still have vast amounts of the observable universe to study. Hopefully something changes, or else astronomers will continue finding natural phenomena.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mydogbrian4814 In the case of virtual particle pairs, either the particle or anti particle can escape a black hole. It’s not that one type always goes in, and the other goes out. Either can escape by chance, due to positioning around the event horizon at the time of particle creation & annihilation.
Regardless of which particle enters, and which particle escapes. The result is a net loss in energy/mass of the black hole.
Anti is a bad name to give to particles. It implies some sort of opposite energy. Energy is energy, regardless of anti or normal. This naming convention is a great way to simply explain what’s going on, but it’s also lead to mass confusion when going into more complex levels. It’s a great intuition tool while learning the fundamentals, but this assumption needs to be broken, to understand the more complex levels of this topic.
What determines if a particle is anti, or not, is it’s spin.
Spin itself is also a horrible naming convention for the higher levels of understanding. Again, a great model to intuitively visualize, but it’s not an actual representation of what’s truly going on.
Think about it this way: Can clouds in the sky spin? While yes they can, a cloud isn’t a singular particle. It’s a blend of many particles. When people picture a spinning particle. They imagine a ball shape, spinning. Well, virtual particles aren’t spherical little spinning balls. They are a cloud of probabilistic locations where the particle could be at during any given time. So, how does a cloud of probability spin? It gets even more confusing when you realize that certain particles have to complete a spin and a half, to complete one “spin”.
I think the best way to visualize a spinning particle, or anti particle, is to envision it as a cloud of probability that interacts with causality. The type of particle, and whether it’s anti or normal, determines its interaction with causality. Particularly, the way it resists against causality.
Normal particles move with causality, but still resist it.
Anti particles move against causality, while also still resisting it.
This perceived spin and anti/normal particle conception is just a simplified way of showing how energy reacts and responds to the field of causality. Causality, in simplified terms is what provides spacetime, mass, and possibly the other fields of reality. Whether it exists as one construct, or several independent fields is heavily debated.
This fact that an anti particle moves against causality, is why particles and anti particles annihilate. Causality moves really fast. It moves at the speed of light. Which is why there’s claims that light itself doesn’t move, instead, light is pushed and carried by spacetime itself. It’s also why there are claims that anti particles are moving backwards in time, or, backwards in causality.
But back to the original point. The black hole actually isn’t doing anything at all when a pair of particles form. The black hole merely just is in the way, disrupting a cosmic scale mechanism of energy fluctuations in the field of reality. The field is self is doing all the work and action. This field steals energy from the black hole to generate the pair of particles. Anti or not, energy is still energy. So long as one particle escapes, whether anti or normal, the black hole results in a net loss of energy/mass.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JCAH1 I’m not disagreeing with quite a lot of what you’re saying.
Obama proved to be an establishment shill in just about every aspect, climate change included. I used to be the biggest Obama enthusiast but he seems rather right leaning after I discovered true Progressive views.
I don’t think we’re at immediate threat of ocean levels rising. I think it’s a problem for our grand children. Unless something were to trigger a rapid cascade of change, which is entirely possible.
Look at Venus. Billions of years ago, Venus resembled Earth. Hell, it’s possible life used to exist on it. Back then, our sun burned 80% dimmer which put Venus in the habital zone. There’s a common misunderstanding today that Venus became a hellscape because the sun started burning brighter. That is incorrect. Venus experienced an era of hypercarbonization which turned its atmosphere into a pressurized inferno. The landscape became uninhabitable before the sun got brighter.
Same thing with Mars. Mars likely had liquid water once. Something happened that destroyed its atmosphere.
The point is irreversible things can happen in ecosystems that destroys them forever. That alone should make us want to be more cautious with our environment. It’s one thing if an external force destroys our planet. It’s another if we’re responsible. So why keep pushing Mother Nature to new extremes, just because Obama, Al Gore & the elite own some ocean front property?
I agree, renewables alone can’t power our grid. At least not right now. A civilization with sufficiently advanced solar harvesting and storing capabilities could do it. But not us. We don’t have Dyson swarms and hyper conductive storage devices.
Solar isn’t clean, either. The process of gathering energy is. But the process of building & transporting solar panels is dirty. So is the industry of battery power storage. Even if we went 100% solar, we wouldn’t reach net zero carbon. So we either need to radically rethink the dirty part of solar, find other sources, or both.
Wave power harnessing devices have hope.
I’m a fan of new generation portable small “box” nuclear reactors. They are practical, safer and significantly cheaper. I’m not a fan of old fashioned nuclear.
I’m a fan of fusion. Fusion will power us to a full type 2 civilization alone if and when we finally master the technology.
Renewables will become more viable once we have an industrial orbital infrastructure. Micro gravity opens up a world of mass-scale superconductor production. Which Earth’s energy grid desperately needs the ability to store and transport energy with significantly reduced energy loss.
Solar will be the ultimate energy source. A sufficiently advanced civilization will most likely have solar outpace the practicality of fusion, as that civilization gains access to multiple stellar masses.
Which routes back to what you’re saying about the utter unreliability of renewables. It’s not sufficiently advanced in its current form. It doesn’t mean it’s not worth pursuing.
Also, coal & fossil fuels hosts the largest global death toll. People all over the world are dying from chronic exposure to emissions-generated airborne carcinogens. Nuclear is one of the lowest global death tolls of any energy form.
In the long run, humanity needs to perfect renewables, fission & fusion. We need off of coal, natural gas and oil ASAP. We need to have a grid powered by a diverse source of energy.
Venezuala isn’t a good example. Yes they are in an energy crisis due to hosting one type of energy. But it isn’t the energy sources fault. Any energy source can fail. It was the countries fault for only having one energy source. Same way it’s Texas’s fault that their energy grid collapsed. Kleptocracy’s can’t be trusted to provide long term reliability and sustainability. America is a Kleptocracy now. It’s why our energy grid is destined to fail in the long run and it’s why I don’t trust old fashioned nuclear. I trust the tech. I don’t trust the Kleptocracy responsible for ensuring the tech doesn’t fail.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@idgaf2461 It is possible that the cosmic speed limit (the speed of light) isn’t actually speed at all. The speed of light is the flow of time. Which is why faster than light travel is unlikely.
Quantum physics is quite amazing and challenging all of our perspectives of classical physics. The speed of light being the speed of time explains how photons can exist in both a particle and energy state at the exact same time. Something classical physics cannot explain.
Why this matters: While the speed of light is undathomably fast to humans. It’s incredibly slow on a cosmic time scale. If humans are forever restricted to the speed of light. Then we are doomed to extinction. If humanity unlocked speed of light travel today. Then 94% of our observable universe is already beyond reach and is forever lost to humanity. Every second that passes increases the % of the observable universe that is unreachable. The longer time goes on, the faster cosmic inflation becomes. The longer we wait, the faster that 94% grows.
Science speculates and theorizes that there is more universe beyond the observable universe & it’s probably full of a lot of the same stuff. If humans achieve x100 the speed of light today. We would still never reach the most distant objects in our observable universe, let alone anything beyond.
So unless we discover something much faster than x100 the speed of light, or teleportation or traveling between multiverses. We’re restricted to our local cosmic neighborhood. That’s great for a species looking to survive millions of years. That’s bad for a species looking to survive to the end of the universe & colonizing the entirety of it.
Humanity will be unlikely to survive long enough to see a new era of the universe. We certainly won’t make it to the heat death where civilizations would survive around brown dwarf stars and black holes.
The ideal time to be a living being would have been the early universe. A few million years after the Big Bang, everything was a lot closer and denser. The ambient temperature of the entire universe was similar to warm bath water. There was no stars and little to no planets back then. Hell, primordial black holes were likely a rarity back then. If life existed, it existed as beings that survived on cosmic dust and the heat from the rapidly cooling universe. It’s unlikely complex life or intelligent life could have formed. But simple forms such as single celled beings could have formed. This period would be ideal because this life would have traveled more of the universe via cosmic filaments than humanity will likely ever travel. These beings could still exist today. They were nurtured in an ideal environment and had billions of years to evolve biological machinery that gives them resistance and durability to the elements of space. It’s possible that all life in the universe could be seeded by these elementary and early forms of cosmic life.
It’s possible that complex and intelligent life could have formed on primordial exoplanets. Whether or not they could have become a stellar or interstellar species without star light is up for debate. At least in our observable universe it does not appear that any primordial intelligent forms existed. Of were successful. They would have existed during an era of the universe where it would have been much easier to colonize other stars and galaxies. A successful species from the primordial planet and star creation days should theoretically have colonized thousands, to millions to possibly even billions of galaxies.
We just don’t see that anywhere. Maybe we don’t know what we’re looking for and there is signs of intelligent life all over our universe. We can’t rule that possibility out, but we have a pretty good idea what we should be looking for. We don’t see mega structures. We don’t see artificial dimming of star light. We aren’t detecting signs of energy emissions required for intergalactic structures to move at or beyond the speed of light. What we instead see is an empty universe where everything that happens has a natural explanation, rather than artificial.
It could be that intelligent life (us) formed too late. Or it could be that we’re early. While the early days of the universe was ideal for expansion into the cosmos. The increased density of the universe back then made it undesirable for sustainable life. The universe was exceptionally violent during the star and planetary formation era. We know it took life on Earth 4.6 billion years of evolution to go from single celled to complex & intelligent life like us. 4.6 billion is an exceptionally long time to go without having a cataclysmic event that exterminates all life. Earth has had major extinction events but nothing that exterminated 100% of life. Maybe that’s why we’re lucky to be early to the cosmic game of life.
One positive consequence that comes from the expansion of space time and the passage of time, is that the universe becomes more gentle. Time allows for solar systems & galaxies to stabilize their orbits & eject or destroy any rouge planets, comets, asteroids, stars, etc. This will allow future planets to have decreased odds of total extinction. The expansion of space time affects all objects, even gravitationally bound objects. Gradually, the distance between all objects grows greater. This also decreases the chances of total extinction events. The later universe will also have less mega stars, supernovas, pulsars, etc. Star production will slow and produced stars will be made smaller. This is also ideal as smaller stars last longer and are more stable.
Intelligent life in the later stages of the universe might be restricted to their galaxy, their solar system or even their planet. They’ll look up into the night sky and see a pitch black universe with no stars. They won’t articulate the concept of cataclysmic extinction from asteroids, their sun, etc. These species may believe their world or stellar neighborhood is the universe & may believe it’s eternal. This era of the universe is likely to be the most hospitable era for life. It’s likely there will be complex and intelligent life everywhere, but everything will be so far apart that none of them will know about each other. It could be that this is intentional. When major sources of matter are so far apart that no being restricted to the laws of nature will ever be able to reach. We might as well have mini universes within our universe. It could be that the purpose of all of this is to create an environment ideal to foster isolated life & we are an outlier that exists at an era of the universe we shouldn’t. Our consequence being existential dread about cataclysmic extinction or the fact we can see but never reach 94% of our observable universe. The reward for existing at an unintended time is we see what was not intended to be seen. We know there is more out there. Therefore we may attempt to reach it. We see the larger mechanisms of the universe and we may attempt to hack it in order to do what we cannot within the natural laws of the universe. We may ascend higher, or we may be stopped if a higher creation does not intend for us to do what we set out to do.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hans-joachimbierwirth4727 Exactly. Nothing is incapable of existing. Nothing is defined as nothing. That’s a logical fallacy, because to defining nothing, is to give it substance and tangibility.
So if nothing cannot exist. That only leaves something.
The universe was never created. It always was. Our universe was created. We’re a beyond-microscopic complement of the greater universe. We only exist within our dimensional plane. Once ours ends, the other planes continue.
Ours doesn’t truly end either. We just approach the end of a meta stable universe. Once we pass beyond meta stability, time stops existing. Therefore, space stops existing. Only the quantum realm remains. At which point, it can spend 1 second, or infinite googolplexes as quantum energy. The universe will be incapable of telling the difference, & a standard of time only begins once tangible matter exists within the universe. So it will spend the undefined quantum period, awaiting for the next event trigger, which drags micro to macro. All of which, will occur instantly from the quantum perspective.
Roger Penrose Cyclical Universe theory & quantum field theory is what I am referencing above.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@informationageenterprise2184 Scientific Publication in the journal Science Advances, titled “A Global Deal For Nature: Guiding principles, milestones, and targets.”
An example would be if Human population grows to 1 trillion humans. Even if 100% of our energy was via renewables. Something as minor as 2% heat waste from solar panels, would be enough to trigger cascading climate change on a global scale, due to the immense energy requirements of 1 trillion humans.
Modern humans have existed for roughly 400,000 years. What I’m defining as modern, is the development of the human brain. If we had a time machine, we could kidnap a human baby from 400,000 years ago, and mentally, they would be capable of being raised as a normal modern day human. Minus the fact that their body would be rampaged by viruses and bacteria of modern day.
The human brain has changed very little in 400,000 years. A blink of an eye on cosmic and geological scales. Hell, it’s even a blink of an eye on evolutionary and biological scales. Of those 400,000 years of modern humanity. There’s been roughly 12,000 generations of humans. 97% of them were nomadic hunter and gatherers where survival was a daily struggle. Such a small percentage of humans have lived with agriculture, towns, cities, industry, and globalization. Even wilder, 80% of humans who have ever lived, are alive right now.
We’re becoming victims of our own success. We’re exponentially multiplying, and the planet has been flashing warning signals for decades that it can’t keep this up.
Interesting and scary fact about America. Aquifers supply the vast majority of drinking water to most American’s. In a little under 200 years, we’ve nearly tapped the aquifers dry. These aquifers take hundreds of thousands, to millions of years to accumulate.
Population control is often confused with eugenics. Population control is a complex moral question, that humanity isn’t ready to have yet. If we don’t do it ourselves, Mother Nature will start doing it for us. It is a slippery slope to totalitarianism, but so is a bunch of other stuff humans already do. We got another 50-100 years to start thinking about the long term of humanity, before it truly starts becoming too late. The dinosaurs managed to maintain harmony with the ecosystem for a little over 100 million years. Humans haven’t even been around for 1% of the time dinosaurs were here. Dinosaurs lasted so long, that dinosaur fossils started appearing while dinosaurs still lived on earth. For reference, there are no human fossils. Just bones and mummies.
Humans as a species can live for tens, to hundreds of thousands of of years more. Hell, we could even go for million(s). Our planet has roughly 500 million years left before the sun gets too hostile for habitable life to exist on earth. A species that chooses to focus on the long term survival of their species, will understand the importance of population control & sustainability. It will also understand the importance of knowledge, and becoming interplanetary, and possibly even multi-stellar. If humans adopt this long term focus. We may even progress to the point of engineering our planet to survive our warming sun. We may even be able to push the planets orbit out further, to survive the sun going red giant in roughly 1 billion years. Or, we could make star lifters to reduce the mass of our sun. If we reduce the size of our sun by 8%, it significantly slows down the rate at which fusion occurs within the core. It would extend the current phase of our sun by 2 billion years, giving humanity 3 billion years before the sun goes red giant.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cash9140 It’s possible. I do entertain multiple possibilities. The only possibility I do not entertain is that these are demons and the rapture is coming.
My list of possible explanations to UAP’s:
Higher dimensional objects passing through a 3 dimensional space.
Brilliant humans discovered a way to make a functional subliminal warp drive in complete secrecy.
It’s from another planet, star or galaxy. Or maybe an intelligence developed right here on Earth before us or alongside us and haven’t revealed themselves to us. Possibly living inside the oceans or inside the Earth? Maybe the live within the lava tubes on the moon?
It could be a eons-old AI. If it’s true that these particular objects have been seen for thousands of years (unfortunately there’s probably no way to ever prove that claim). Then it would be reasonable to conclude that an AI is watching life on Earth for whatever reasons it has. Perhaps it’s responsible for seeding life on Earrh billions of years ago. Or perhaps it’s responsible for why humans far outpaced any other life on the planet in terms of the several different types of intelligences that form our humanity and civilization today.
Maybe they are human time travelers with far superior technology thousands or millions of years more advanced than ours.
Maybe alternate universes do exist and they’ve found a way to lift the veil that separates ours and their universe? Maybe they exist on an alternate Earth and they are us, but different?
Maybe they are probing craft sent on intergalactic scouting and reconnaissance missions. Perhaps when they found us, some craft stayed here to observe and gather intel. Then some craft began returning to their point of origin to report that they discovered life. Maybe it’s traveling thousands, millions or billions of light years. Meaning that by the time the probes find us and by the time the entity responsible for the probes reaches us. Humanity could be thousands or millions of years more advanced. Perhaps we’ll be extinct. Perhaps the Earth won’t even exist anymore. Perhaps the being is hoping we survive long enough for it to reach us, or perhaps it’s banking on us no longer being around so it can claim this solar system as free real estate.
Perhaps it’s natural phenomena that we don’t understand yet. Not like swamp bubbles, a weather balloon or Venus as so many skeptics claim. But perhaps natural physical or quantum phenomena that science does not yet understand.
Or like you said, maybe it’s an elaborate 70 year government cover up and false flag, designed to deceive the public and our enemies for the sole goal of furthering the interests of our federal and military entities.
Like I said. I entertain many possibilities. Everything is on the table, until it’s not. The only possibly I don’t entertain is demons, religion, rapture and that UFO’s is Satan baiting humans with unnatural curiousity.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Grand Unification Epoch, AKA the Big Bang, AKA the Great Expansion. This is the first second of our universe. An incredibly hot and dense quantum plasma heated to quadrillions of degrees, experiences grand unification of the 4 (possibly 5) forces of the universe. This unified force is only possible under the most extreme conditions. It’s called the Strong Electronuclear force.
Something has occurred exactly once in our universe. This something, is responsible for us being here today. This something triggered the formation of our universe. We don’t know why, but we do know that at the Grand Unification Epoch, there was an imbalance. Something allowed for the harmonic balance of virtual particle creation and destruction, to be broken. Either anti matter was being destroyed before eliminating with its matter counterpart, or matter-matter pairs were momentarily possible to form.
A huge influx of particles at every point of our universe simmered into existence at the exact same time. With no anti matter to self anhilate with, these particles are forced to interact with one another. A quadrillions of degrees-hot ultra dense quantum plasma. These ever expanding packets of energy triggered the creation and expansion of spacetime. Gravity doesn’t even exist at this point. Under such extreme conditions, atoms don’t even exist either. This quantum plasma is unevenly distributed, which is attributed to the chaotic and randomized nature of the quantum soup that continues to create virtual particles, at every single point of spacetime to even this second.
As these packets expand and unpack in their newly found permenant forms, they begin to cool in temperature. As temperature drops, it eventually passes a threshold where grand unification fails. The four (possibly 5) forces split apart, which triggers the complex interaction between permenant particles now existing in our universe. As these newly formed forces interact, they begin to find interaction balances resulting in stable evolutions into tangible particles. The moment that the atom was created, is when uneven pockets of spacetime collapse into black holes. For what existed before tangible matter, was virtual packets of energy. These packets do not adhere to the same rules of the universe we do, which means they can exist in states beyond what matter could support. Therefore, these virtual packets cannot form into black holes, until these virtual packets reach the required conditions and interactions necessary to form a tangible particle. Then once the tangible particle is formed, it will collapse into a black hole instantaneously at the moment of existence. Therefore, black holes are spontaneous events that occurred at the exact moment of the creation of matter, and continue to this day. These primordial ultra massive black holes, have potentially trillions of years of a head start, in terms of mass. The larger the black hole, the slower Hawking Radiation can emit away. Meaning, these ultra massive black holes will far outlive the universe itself, and be the last matter to emit away. The true immortals in our universe. They will see both the exact moment of creation, and destruction of the universe.
Another quick interesting fact is that life itself may have been given a millions, to billions of years headstart. There was a point in which our universe existed at an ambient temperature of 85 degrees. There was no light and vast clouds of hydrogen, with some small formation of more complex matter, even up to solids. It’s possible a Goldilocks zone could have existed for simple life to flourish in the first few millions of years of our 13 billion year old universe. This is the great expansionary period, in which spacetime was just decompressed enough to allow for complex physics to exist, but compact enough to allow for much quicker travel through the universe. If these theoretical Goldilocks zones could exist back then. Then it’s possible that simple single celled organisms may have thrived in the dark, warm and dense hydrogen clouds & small chunks of rocky formations beginning to appear. They may have hitched a ride throughout the web of galactic filaments, before the expansion of spacetime became so extreme. This primordial life may have seeded vast distances of the universe with abundant organic matter, which allows for life to take a root in even the most extreme conditions, such as the early Earth. Or possibly even the clouds of Jupiter. It’s possible that airborn microorganisms could exist in a Goldilocks zone high up in Jupiter atmosphere. That it would be warmed by the heat from the planet, the sun and it would feed on Jupiter’s hydrogen clouds. If we ever find life on Jupiter, then it means it’s highly likely that life could have existed & thrived in the primordial hydrogen clouds. This would have huge implications of the possibilities of life across the universe.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AlfaPT Fusion is quite awesome! The awe and scale of it is what makes it precisely so hard. To put it in perspective, to generate fusion requires to emulate conditions that of the early universe, or that of the core of a star. In essence, humanity is trying to make a controllable heart of a star, and it’s turning out to be really freaking hard. Stars can pull it off with gravity because they have unfathomable gravitational forces crushing down on them. We humans don’t have access to that level of gravity (thank goodness). So, we’re stuck trying to achieve fusion with light, electromagnetism, and quantum physics. Turns out these forces can behave like gravity in terms of generating star core-like conditions, but they really, really, really don’t want to. Using these forces to generate fusion is like forcing together two like-charged magnets. You can do it, but inevitably the magnets will push apart. In this theoretical example, the cost of keeping the “magnets” pushed together is higher than the energy that is produced by having them pushed together. Whoever can solve that problem by generating more energy than spent, will go down in history & usher in the era of near-unlimited clean energy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Bud, 1.5 degrees global average temperature increase means that earths atmosphere holds an additional 75,000,000,000,000,000,000 joules of energy. Those 7.5 exajoules (18 zeroes) lead to more severe and frequent storms.
Do you carry ANY kind of insurance? If the answer is yes, then you are impacted. Congrats, your insurance already is more expensive than it needs to be due to the surge in storms & the fact that humans keep building cities on climate & geologic hot spots for severe activity.
Are you being taxed? Congrats, you are being taxed a higher amount because the government needs additional funds to support relief efforts for the increased frequency and severity of storms nationally.
A nuclear winter would reverse climate change & return us to a cold house global climate. Also, a global thermonuclear war is not guaranteed. What IS guaranteed is you are already financially paying for the consequences of climate change, and those financial burdens will only compound with time. Maybe you should be concerned about the thing raiding your pocket, and stop worrying about global thermonuclear war.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This is a rather close minded and reductionistic take.
Biological hardening via genetic engineering. Hybridization with technology (cyborgs). Digital conciousness upload into virtual/machine bodies. Mind fusion with AI’s.
There’s also the possibility of Interstellar starships, containing raw biological material and human genome blueprints. Nothing says humans have to be alive for the start of a journey to another system. So long as they’re alive by the time they reach their destination. Motherships containing AI, could begin creating humans from the genome blueprint, when it’s a few decades away from its destination. The AI would be tasked with nurturing and teaching the humans, and preparing them for their destination.
Speaking of destination: Biological hybridization with local flora and fauna is a possibility. Life, native to an environment is already the perfect biological blueprint to build human-enough forms capable of surviving a local environment.
Also, who says we actually have to live on planets/moons/around stars/etc? Shell cities in space are a possibility. If there isn’t a habitat suitable for humans. They can always engineer an artificial habitat for space living. We still have eons of meta-material development left to do. The threats of space will be conquered. I’m confident an alloy will be developed, which is fully capable of blocking gamma radiation completely. Might even happen in my lifetime. But it’s next-to-guaranteed in the next 500 years.
There’s a whole bunch more I can keep going on about. I’m not trying to hit you with a wall of text though. So I’ll start wrapping up.
Point is: Space travel seems impossible based upon current technology. We’re far from finished refining and innovating on our technology. Hell, I’ve seen COUNTLESS technologies go from “impossible” to “conventional” in my short life. We’re snowballing our tech. I’m confident we’ll have advanced propulsion systems by the end of the century. Oh speaking of. I don’t know if you follow the actual science behind warp drives, or other exotic forms of propulsion’s. The warp drive has seen continuous progress over the decades. We recently had a major scientific leap with the May 2020 scientific publication - The Alexey Drive. We’re still a ways out from a functional prototype. But tangible progress is being made. The Alexey Drive is a MASSIVE improvement over the previous most scientifically-based Warp Drive. That was the 1994 Alcubierre Drive. That one broke General Relatively & required a fictional science known as negative mass energy. The Alexey Drive works within General Relativity, doesn’t violate any laws of nature, & does not require fictional sciences. The issue is it’s scale to create one, is far beyond the capabilities of humans today.
I’m optimistic that we’ll find a much more viable alternative, once we finally locate the Graviton, or come to an understand of what exactly gravity is. I got my money on Anti Matter providing us the knowledge we seek about gravity. But anything is possible. From particle colliders, to string theory, to quantum field theory, to gravity not being a true force, rather a consequence of spacetime dialation. There’s a lot of minds and theories working on this subject. All it takes is one breakthrough, in one subject.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It depends on which conspiracy theories you’re referencing. I don’t know if you’ve went down the Ufology rabbit hole. I have, and the rampant speculative and non-evidence based theories are insane. People talking about hallow earth, hallow moon, flat earth, space isn’t real, birds aren’t real, dinosaurs were an advanced civilization, etc.. It’s nuts dude.
What Fravor, Graves, Elizondo, and Grusch are speaking on is tangible data, and hearsay of other top officials. Basically this hearing boils down to that pilots are encountering and interacting with unidentified advanced objects routinely that is recorded on multiple sensory devices, and Grusch is alleging to have been told by other high ranking officials the existence of secretive projects that have retrieved both crashed & intact non-human craft, and non-human biologics.
This puts the governments statements about Roswell into scrutiny. It discredits the governments official stance about not seeing evidence for non-human origin craft. It brings into question if Project Blue book was actually a good faith investigation into UFO’s, and if the government truly stopped investigating UFO’s after Project Blue Book.
But this doesn’t support the wild speculative rabbit hole of Ufology. Got to draw a line somewhere. In comparison to the beliefs of Ufology, this hearing is just the tip of the iceberg.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Energy isn’t being created. Precisely as you’re on about, it’s being conserved as the input/output remains the same.
The piece you’re missing is ignition. This is a sustained fusion reaction. It’s a bit different than a domino effect in fission. In fission, the domino effect exponentially snowballs if not controlled until it results in a nuclear explosion. This right here is what makes fission a really good and controllable energy source as you can control the chain reaction to produce a steady supply of convertible energy. In fusion, there is no exponential snowball. There is only ignition, and then the termination of ignition.
Humanity can easily reach ignition. We’ve been able to ignite fusion reactions since the 1950’s. The challenge comes from sustaining ignition. It takes a HUGE amount of energy to reach ignition, which is why fusion hasn’t been viable as a fuel source. As once ignition is reached, the fusion reaction fizzes out before a net positive of energy gain can be reached.
There’s two solutions to sustaining ignition. The first one is to pour energy continuously into the reaction, which obviously isn’t ideal as we’ll always be net negative with this approach. The 2nd solution is the one that scientists and engineers have been working on for basically 70 years. That solution is to spend the energy to trigger ignition and then enclose that ignition in an environment in which it can sustain itself. It’s been incredibly challenging and honestly the problems are so vast that I don’t know if true fusion will occur in my lifetime. But anyways back to the point. What makes a self sustained ignition a net positive energy gain? Where is this energy coming from because it certainly seems like it’s being created thus violating conservation of energy. The solution is simple. It’s alpha particles. When fusion occurs, a neutron is released, alongside alpha particles. Humanity cannot harvest the alpha particles and convert them to usable energy. That’s the role of the neutron. Humanity harvests the neutron and converts it to human-usable energy. The alpha particles that get knocked off the elements during fusion will add energy back into the ignition. If humanity can build an enclosed environment that is efficient enough at trapping the alpha particles within the reaction, then they can indefinitely sustain fusion until the fuel source is spent. Again this is where they’re currently at and no one has quite found the answer yet. Whoever can make an economic and industrially scalable containment device that achieves net-positive fusion ignition stands to make unfathomable wealth.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bobwallace9753 Lmao I am having a fact based discussion. You just don’t like my answers.
Solar panels aren’t efficient. 85% of absorbed solar rays are turned into black body radiation. Only 15% is turned into usable energy.
There are efforts to figure out the physics behind efficiently harvesting energy from black body radiation (heat waste). There are also efforts to increase the efficiency of the solar panel, so it more efficiently absorbs the solar energy.
The issue is even if we get it to a point where only 5% of solar rays turn into waste heat, and if we find a way to harvest 3% of that 5% waste heat as energy. Humanities energy consumption requirements will grow so immensely big, that even 2% heat waste will be enough to trigger cascading climate change.
Solar panels change the environment. The surface of the planet, and the vegetation absorbs and reflects light in a very specific way that has maintained equilibrium for millions of years. Humans building cities is changing that. Solar panels compounds the problem. You’re replacing the problem of greenhouse gases, with the problem of unbalancing the light equilibrium of our planet. This issue compounds with humanities exponentially growing population and energy requirements.
For example, if we utilized 50% of the Saharan desert as a solar farm. The result would be the Saharan desert becomes a tropical biome, while turning x4 of the landmass around it into a desert. Those new deserts would affect the biomes around them as well, which triggers a global domino effect of adverse climate change.
The climate is an incredibly complex mechanism. You’re right, the sun bathes us with enough energy to sustain humanity comfortably into a type 1 civilization. How do you harvest that energy without negatively impacting the climate? Is that enough facts for you?
You keep saying “It’s time to stop screwing around”. Duh, people aren’t screwing around. While you’re being a climate champion online. People are actually working on resolving fission, fusion, and the problems presented by solar. They’re also working on other energy gathering methods, such as harvesting the tidal forces from the oceans, lightning, and tectonic forces. Maybe it’s time for you to stop screwing around, and get out in the field to advance the subject.
No one is disputing nuclear has a high startup cost. You need to clarify, are your numbers based on new generation uranium reactors, or thorium reactors? Last I checked, America and Europe aren’t building thorium reactors. I’d look up what the fuel cost of thorium is compared to Uranium. Likely will be tough, seeing as China is the only country actively building commercialized thorium reactors that do not require enrichment, and Thorium is easier to extract from the ground and is much more abundant & dense than Uranium deposits. I also bet their building costs are reduced, as they aren’t having to build enrichment facilities and processes. Breeding reactors will have lifespans of 100-200 years, and generate an excess of energy that justifies the startup expense. That old saying that men who grow trees whose shade they won’t get to enjoy….. If humanity chose to go the Thorium route 70 years ago, we would be comfortably enjoying an excess of cheap energy today.
Also, let’s test your knowledge. Without googling, what’s the difference between fissile and non fissile material? What’s a breeding reactor? What’s the difference between U-235 & U-238, not in terms of isotopes, but how they react within a nuclear reactor? What is enrichment? Why does thorium not require enrichment, while uranium does? What elements does thorium fuse into? What elements does uranium fuse into? What’s the half life of those fused elements? Which fused isotope is non fissile but highly radioactive?
Also, I got to say that you sound incredibly foolish when you you say people will revolt over the high cost of nuclear. LOLLLL!!! Are they revolting at the rampant financial corruption on Wallstreet? Are they revolting towards the rampant military industrial complex? Are they revolting at the literal hundreds of billions being pumped into countries around the globe in the name of geopolitics? I doubt nuclear startup costs is the straw that will break the camels back.
1
-
1
-
People like to point towards US “Star Trek” patents, the Nazi’s who played with electromagnetic propulsion, America and its immensely vast black projects and the fact that both Russia and China are heavily investing into hypersonic technology.
They also like to point towards science, such as the Alexey Warp Drive.
It’s possible that humans are responsible for beyond next generation technological advancements. But how unlikely would this event be? It’s unlikely to be aliens based on our current scientific understanding about the possibilities of life. It’s unlikely to be a hoax due to the sheer complexity of it and how long it’s been going on.
So ultimately, we have three possible explanations and all three explanations are inprobable. Where does that leave us? One of those answers has to be correct, or it’s some other explanation entirely.
Which leads to time travelers, multiverse, alternative dimensions, higher dimensional objects entering a 3D space or macro manifestations of quantum energy. All of these are exceptionally unlikely events as well.
No wonder people get obsessed with this stuff. We see something is definitely happening. However, none of the possible explanations prove to be logical. We must be missing something, otherwise a miracle is happening right in front of our eyes.
1
-
@dankmemes7658 Let me clarify: Our current understanding of life suggests that life forms are common in the universe. We don’t have conclusive evidence yet, but the scientific logic points towards life being a common thing.
For example, it is estimated that the probability of life occurring on Earth was a 10 to the 47th power chance of happening. For reference, there are roughly 10 to the 47th power of water molecules here on Earth. So we have a 10 to the 47th probability occurrence, with a 10 to the 47th power of water molecules relentlessly interacting with other molecules, over billions of years. That’s a lot of chances for a very improbable event to occur. It only needs to occur once as well.
So to our understanding, Abiogenesis isn’t a Great Filter.
So that means the Great Filter is likely the transition from consciousness, to civility consciousness. The formation of complex artificial bodies. Governments, militaries, buildings, ideas and technology. So our understanding of alien science states that it is extremely unlikely that other higher intelligent species exist around us. Earth and our solar system is exceptionally unique. It’s likely that the extraordinarily stable conditions of our solar system has nurtured our complex life.
So since science thinks there isn’t life close to us, we’ve started searching much further out. If there was any civilizations capable of communicating with us or reaching us. We should be seeing their signatures everywhere. For example, it’s formulated that it will take humanity 2 million years to fully colonize the galaxy, assuming we don’t go extinct on Earth or our solar system first. 2 million years is a really short time on cosmic scales. Therefore we can assume other species in our position would have sprawled out to their entire galaxy, or potentially thousands of galaxies. We should be seeing artificial voids from them harvesting entire stars or building stellar engines, Dyson swarms, etc. Instead, we see only naturally explainable phenomena, everywhere we look.
This leads to several possible conclusions.
1.) We are the only life.
2.) We are early to the life party.
3.) We are late to the life party.
4.) Other species are at a similar level of development to us and neither is sufficiently advanced enough to make contact.
5.) Complex life is such a rarity that it could be seperated by billions of light years.
6.) Life might transcend this reality if it’s determined to be possible and if it’s determined that it’s too difficult and dangerous to traverse the immense distances in this universe.
If Quantum mechanics can prove its claims on parallel universes, multiverses, alternate dimensions or higher dimensions. Then it’s likely we as humans will aim to explore these worlds before we explore our own universe. Why go through the dangerous and painstakingly slow process of universal exploration, if you can simply portal into another world.
So I’d like to end with that I understand our modern scientific thinking is incomplete. Our determinations on the probabilities of any of the above stuff could be completely wrong. But it’s the best we have, based on the most supported theories and achievable evidence. It’s why I love funding scientific projects because they have the possibility of revolutionizing the world. Even though our thoughts on alien probabilities are likely wrong. It’s amazing how well humans actually understand our universe. Granted we still don’t know so much. But the stuff we do know, we have a masterful understanding of it. Therefore it’s really odd that we can’t find any signs of intelligent life beyond Earth. What is it we’re missing? Time and effort will hopefully tell.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1