what do you think/believe is out there, anon?
If there are intelligent beings out there, they're very similar to living beings here on Earth including us
>>17855648
Even so, if they're outside of the Milky Way,I really doubt we will reach them.
>>17855657
seeing how time works in space of they did see Earth it would probably look like it did billions of years ago
>>17855644
I think there are other humanoid beings similar and not similar to us. Beings like the being from lucy. Being of pure energy which are concious and can or cannot manipulate their form to different densities and realities and other things we have yet or cannot fathom. I also believe there is something containing the vaccum of space. I feel that space and the universe is contained in something and that thing which contains it has something else beyond its borders.
>>17855657
Well we pretty much know that life beyond Earth exists, however I agree with Hawking's theory on why we should not try to contact them (if they are intelligent enough to hear us/reach back).
However it's kind of like wanting closure for a lot of people, they want visual or some sort of legitimate proof that we're not alone in the universe.
You're looking in the wrong places.
I'm interested in what kinds of simpler life forms might exist out there. Given the biodiversity of earth, imagine what could exist on alien worlds
then again earth could be the model for how all life typically is throughout the universe
>>17855644
nothing whatsoever. because if the Earth and Life are based on random chance then it takes trillions of planets and stars offering almost infinite combinations just to achieve life.
>>17855644
>>17855644
I suggest you to watch these
https://youtu.be/sNhhvQGsMEc
https://youtu.be/1fQkVqno-uI
Also kurzgesagt best youtuber
>>17855926
Damn you, I wanted to post that
>>17855877
>random chance then it takes trillions of planets and stars offering almost infinite combinations just to achieve life
well, good thing there are a lot of planets and ours cant be anything special
>>17855926
>9gag
>>17855644
>what do you think/believe is out there, anon?
The same shit that's in our solar system, and our galaxy.
Funny how recognizing patterns is such a prominent characteristic of human behavior, and lead to the creation of the mathematics we've used throughout the ages, and yet so many of us fail to see and accept the patterns that are clearly visible throughout the cosmos.
Where energy exists in the cosmos, gravity exists, and given enough time, energy and gravity create the same shit over, and over, and over again.
This is made blatantly obvious by simply observing the billions and billions of galaxies, with the same kinds of stars, and the same kinds of matter produced by those stars.
We are not special by any means, as life the creation of life is simply what the cosmos does, and no different than creating any given star.
>>17856046
this
It's called the cosmos for a reason
>>17855644
Different expressions of the quantum foam collapsing in on itself.
Says a lot, huh?
>>17855738
This is something I think about rather often too, there must be the equivalent of fried chicken or a fat, juicy bit of beef out there.
there is more land on the earth
>>17856229
Compared to what?
>>17856232
what?
there is just more land
>>17856232
what you see
>>17856229
Psh you're just hyped about the Dark Continent in HxH. I know I am. Makes you think about how possible it is that the wool is being pulled over our eyes.
>>17855644
Every possible thing that can exist in this specifically possible thing, except things that can't exist inside of this possible thing.
Some possible things, including some of everything that is "here", exists in places or in ways that cause them to be far out of our (tangible/meaningful) reach, and we can only know/draw bad crayon doodles of them through indirect (?) means. This can include rocks, sapience, things that are truly alien, and your pets. I'm also out here, so that's cool tool.
>>17856046
>>17856144
>>17856911
its being pulled over your eyes maybe
A lot of amazing things that we'll literally never see.
>>17856911
>stealth flat earth post
Guy pls.
>>17855644
According to the law of coincidence, the answer to your question is - everything. Litterally. If something goes to infinity then every single thing that you can imagine can happen. Not only that but the multiverse theory makes this claim even stronger since it sugjest that there are multiple universes but whats more important, each universe had its own laws of phisycs. That should put it into perspective.
Every movie you ever watched is real.
Everything you ever imagined yourself doing is real.
Every book you read, every song you heard. Mother. Fucking. Spongebob. All of it is real. Why ? Pure,no spoopster no demon no god or angel, mathematics.
Do you feel small ?
>>17857136
thats a very common misconception and just not true.
Think of it this way:
You can roll a die ad infinitum, but you will never roll a 7
>>17855644
Small scale? Aliums. Guaranteed. The universe is infinite, so the possibility of there NOT being aliens is pretty much zero. I believe there's life beyond simple organisms close to us in the grand scheme of things. Large scale? Everything. Giant walking phalluses with tentacles for arms and assholes for eyes on a planet composed of a Goddess's tit. Literally anything is possible in a universe without end.
>>17857152
It is not infinite.
>>17857160
Nobody has seen the edge, nobody knows the exact rate of universal expansion, and we don't even know if the universe even has edges.
How do you know it is not infinite?
>>17857144
Thats where the mtiverese theory comes in. Read what i wrote first.
>>17856229
prove it
>>17857152
Gawdamn take me to the titty planet of giant tentacle phalluses
>>17857181
you don't want proof
>>17857134
Hey man, not that anon but that was stealthy enough to earn my respect.
>>17857168
Oh, I read everything you wrote.
Even if multiverses was more than an interesting hypothesis, it still wouldnt necessarily mean that literally anything would happen.
>>17855644
life isnt as common as some scientist want to think but its out there. the problem is how long the habitable zone will last because of when life emerges
some times it probably pops up just as a star is getting ready to die or the atmosphere is thinning to much
>>17857160
How is it possible that it isn't infinite? If you have an explanation or theory, I'd love to hear it. It's easier to comprehend infinity than to comprehend a way for everything to just stop being completely.
>>17857225
you know that things can be finite without having an "edge"?
>>17857144
>you can roll a die ad infinitum, but you will never roll a 7
Well, you're not wrong, if it's a die with less than 7 faces. And I think that's where
>>17857168
misinterprets everything.
Though...
>>17857217
There could exist a set of states where, suddenly, the die you were rolling happens to become a die with 7 faces. There doesn't have to exist one, of course, because non-possible things just simply don't exist... but if the model of mutliverse theory we're all making conjecture with is the exact same that I am mentioning, then surely there must exist a set of states within the set such that something remarkable implausible but causally logical occurs (compared to all other possible sets of states involving the rolling of any, or a specific die).
I mean, imagine what might have occurred if the chiral molecules that supposedly are all over the place in our solar system happened to be in the wrong places at the wrong time. Something fantastically absurd, like an entire genesis of "left-handed molecular life" and thus completely alien chemistry would have occurred on Earth, if at all.
Nothing.
Everything.
>>17857188
>>17857251
Blue board, buddy.
>>17855663
Well if they are looking at stars like us ( humans) then yes , but if they are highly intelligent , and have 1000 to 10000 years of advanced technology compared to our own, then I'm pretty sure that they can see the earth / solar system as it is currently is.
>>17855644
I'm gonna say one thing that keeps me up at night. Either we are alone in this universe, or we aren't. And both of those possibilities terrify me.
>>17855648
Why would you think that? Because you want to?
>>17855877
>Almost infinite combinations
A finite number is nowhere near infinite. Learn your definitions.
>>17856046
Yes it is true that we humans are not special. To give into the notion that we ( humans) are the only intelligence in the universe is moronic and show how much we lack in true intelligence. Anything and everything is possible. Possibility spiders or apes or lizards have gained the same intelligence we have here on earth but on there planet and are the sole conquerors , maybe the same as us, maybe better and with 1000 or 10000 years ahead of us.
>>17855644
Now I have a special message for any intelligent lifeforms that may be receiving this message trillions of light years away in the farthest reaches of the universe: Heeey, How ya doing kids?
>>17857189
lol what a fucking roleplaying faggot copout
>>17857232
Oh yeah, I totally agree with that. Of course it can mean that there will be some funny universes.
It just doesnt mean that every possibility has to happen
>>17857316
Hey Arthur C. Clarke, stop wasting your time on 4chan and write a new book already
>>17855644
Shit like this never made sense to me.
How the fuck would they know how big the universe is? They clame everything is billions of light years away and yet they can calculate it?
>>17857378
science, bitch
>>17857378
It's approximated to be sure, but it's done by measuring the intensity of stars. Basically, we know how bright objects should be, and we know how intense they look from Earth. Intensity goes as the inverse square of distance, so solve and there you go.
>>17857378
Bigass meter stick
>>17855644
A big tub of cottage cheese.
>>17857359
replace the cig with a dick in that picture and thats Literally You
>>17856229
it's curious this post is getting so much attention.
annyyywayy post what you believe in
>>17857181
survival of the fittest.
>>17857483
fuck u bitch that's y u don't get pussy
>>17857540
get your throat problem fixed. your voice is weird.
>>17857558
wtf r u talkin bout
>>17857558
u better not be lookin through my fockin compute
>>17855648
Nigga do you know how specific the human evolution is? You know how specific Earth life is? They wouldn't be like shit on Earth.
>>17857604
i really dont care
>>17857650
what?
>>17857136
Do you feel pretentious?
>>17857378
>They clame everything is billions of light years away and yet they can calculate it?
this question doesnt even make sense
>>17857677
his post is still better than yours
>>17857633
You don't know that.
Evolution is also not a planned thing. We could have had seven fingers and the inability to spot shiny things as the norm.
>>17857225
>How is it possible that it isn't infinite?
For all intents and purposes, it might as well be, however, we'll never truly know.
Regardless, I subscribe to a finite universe, as that would make the cosmos a closed system, and in a closed system, energy is never created or destroyed, it is merely transformed, and it is the transformation of energy that we observe all around us in the cosmos.
Pic related.
>>17857378
Math, nigger. Math.
Does anyone know that one theory/paradox about alien life in the space?
I read about it in some thread a long time ago and it was explaining why we are alone.
>>17857825
It had something to do with "if other life existed then they would have colonized the entire milky way by now" or something like that
>>17857825
The Fermi Paradox?
>>17857843
Yea that one
>>17857856
Maybe you'd like to hear about our lord and savior, the Great Filter, as well.
>>17857856
yeah, it is a neat thought, but doesnt explain anything really
>>17857232
>>17857363
>>17857144
i didn't missinterpert anything your minds are just too small to bear the concept of infinity. if you have infinite universes each with its own laws of physics EVERYTHING is possible. you are trying to define a second universe by the paramiters set by this universe. try thinking big for a change.
for example take a number like pi or square root of 2. those numbers have infinite amounte of numbers behind the decimal point and the nubers dont repeat. if we take that into account and transform those numbers into ascii code turn them into 8 bit ascii code you get letters. if you get an INFINITE amount of letters at some point they will start to make words. why ? coincidence. after that they will create sentences and later books. its is guaranteed that if you dig far enough into infinity you will find romeo and juliet by shakespear you will also find great works of art that are yet to be wrtitte.
also what is a movie today ? all of it is in a digital format= a binary code. so if you translate the numbers beyond the decimal point propertly you will get pictures and collors, first randomly but because of infinity you will start to get whole movies and after that whole lives. everything you every did will do or thought of doing is already written in the number pi. you just have to "translate" the nubers in the right way since there is more than one way to do it.
you are limiting your selves by saying that the die has 6 sides it doesnt have to have 6 sides in this universe it is a die but you simply can not know how it will behave in another universe you cant know if a geometrical shape of a die is even a possible state of matter in another universe you cant even speculate. you have nothing to base your speculations on. for all you know it is a die in this universe but a goldfish in another. you can't know. thats the beauty of infinity.
>>17855644
Faggots named op
>>17858863
Geometrically, a line is an infinite series of points. Yet not a single one of these infinite points will ever be off the axis of the line. It is impossible.
The decimal number .101001000100001000001... is an infinite string of numbers that does not repeat. Yet there will never be another integer in it besides 1 and 0. It is impossible.
Just because something is infinite doesn't mean it has no boundaries. That the ACTUAL knowledge of infinity, and yes - it is beautiful.
>>17855644
i feel like there is just some guy standing out side the whole universe like the jesus in that picture,. i feel like there is a whole different plain of humans too where everything is more fun and sophisticated that here.
>>17858909
god man you have 0 knowledge of information science do you now ?? the 0 and 1 can be translated into anything yoyu want. thats why you are capable of listening to mp3 and watching shit on your monitor and typing on this anime image board. as i sayd its the way you translate te binary that counts.
also an analogy between a line and an infinite amounte of universes is just blatantly stupid beyond meassure.
Why do so many people in this thread think that the universe is infinite?
>>17855926
I was kinda expecting a yo mamma joke
>>17858863
no, you are indeed misinterpreting things.
I already understood where you are coming from based on your first post. I heard your train of thought a thousand times. Thats why it is a common misconception.
My example with the die was about your line
> everything. Litterally. If something goes to infinity then every single thing that you can imagine can happen
And yes even with an infinite amount of your magic universes, it still wouldnt that everything that can happen, will happen.
I dont know why you cant wrap your head around this.
Also, what happens in another universe isnt even part of ours and doesnt answer OPs question at all.
>>17858985
because space is expanding faster than light
>>17858985
agreed
one article says theres 37trillion stars
a health article says the avg human has 37trillion cells
also accounts for the extra gravity that was recently measured if u think about it
>>17859133
That doesn't mean that the universe is infinitely large, there isn't an infinite amount of matter.
>>17859129
The question was what is out there. It is undefined. Other universes are out there. I dont understand why are you uncapable to understand that you cant know how a univerase that no one ever saw works. It is arogant to even presume that you know. I cant understand how are you uncapable to wrap your head around a simple law of mathematical chance and coincidence. Its quite sad tbqh
>>17859129
Arguing about what could or couldn't happen in a multiverse is kinda silly. If there is a multiverse it's likely that they all have a similar origin and there is a limit to what can happen in them, but at the same time there could just be different multiverses or something outside of the multiverse that we don't know about.
>>17859133
yeah that's wrong.
>>17859144
>Other universes are out there.
there is literally no proof of this.
>>17859163
Hahahah so you legit think that there is nothing beyond our limited universe ? You sound like a guy from the middle ages claiming the earth is flat. No offence but you are a definition of a small minded person.
>>17859144
>Other universes are out there
lol. thats a fancy hypothesis at best.
and you are still the one here who doesnt understand how that works.
>hurr durr with infinite universes, that MUST mean that there is one where you are a knight that rides dragons
Nope! But keep watching your popsci videos. At least the thought is entertaining.
And again, another universe wouldnt be "out there". It wouldnt be part of our universe.
>>17859149
yeah. But I was just arguing the point that "literally everything would exist" is not a logical conclusion to make. There would be lots of weird shit but not everything
>>17859178
>beyond our limited universe
seems like you're the one with a small mind
>>17859158
well, it is not
>>17859178
again, proof. name calling doesn't change that.
>>17859183
Grasping for straws. Trying to redefine what fucking "out there" means. Pathetic. Youre an idiot if you still think that a universe diffrent from ours would function by even remotly similar laws. An idiot and whats worse an arrogant idiot.
>>17859188
>implying our universe is infinite
Sad
>>17859191
you are retarded
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/about-us/104-the-universe/cosmology-and-the-big-bang/expansion-of-the-universe/616-is-the-universe-expanding-faster-than-the-speed-of-light-intermediate
>>17855738
I doubt our evolutionary history is a model for other lifeforms, but our evolutionary system might be.
Remeber, our phenotypes have been shaped by circumstance more than anything. Natural selection does not aim to create a "perfect" organism, and we are not the apex of evolution. Hell, evolution does not mean "biological upgrade."
Ever since humans developed radios and what not, we've been emitting radio waves and those waves keep traveling in space. I kind of believe and aliens but eventually those waves will reach something that knows what to do with them (or not)
>>17859197
>Grasping for straws. Trying to redefine what fucking "out there" means
What do you mean? How do I redefine it? Another hypothetical parallel universe isnt part of our universe. We couldnt reach it. For all intenses and purposes it isnt out there.
>Youre an idiot if you still think that a universe diffrent from ours would function by even remotly similar laws
Wow, stawmanning that hard now? I never said something even remotely similar to that. In fact I even said that there would be lots of weird possibilities
see
>>17857363
and
>>17859183
>An idiot and whats worse an arrogant idiot
Now you are just namecalling. Not a very good point
But your usage of "arrogant" is quite ironic, since you wont even consider that you are the one that is wrong here. Your shitty arguments show that your position isnt really the strongest.
So I invite you to show me the paper that proves that in a multiverse every possible thing must happen
>>17859198
>implying there is something "beyond" the universe, as if there is some kind of edge
sad
>>17859201
>http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/about-us/104-the-universe/cosmology-and-the-big-bang/expansion-of-the-universe/616-is-the-universe-expanding-faster-than-the-speed-of-light-intermediate
>the answer is that the universe does expand faster than the speed of light, and, perhaps more surprisingly, some of the galaxies we can see right now are currently moving away from us faster than the speed of light!
you are very cute.
>>17858863
Well... you're being condescending still... which shows that you don't care to understand much of anything except that which you're putting forth.
>your minds are just too small
No, I don't think that's especially true. No one's mind is too small to grok the concepts of infinity- all several of them. You probably use some form of set theory without even knowing in your daily life (mathematical).
And don't pretend you know what's going on regarding movies and base-2. That's not how it works, 1:1; there are countless codecs and formats for digital media to be stored as, and a handful of people in the film industry still use traditional film to store/forward things. Furthermore, the only way you will get random images and bad quality from directly translating data into points on your screen using the collective pieces of equipment you're powering, would be if some of the data was damaged- otherwise the codecs would ensure that all is represented properly, as the codecs are the literal "series of instructions" that the computer has to follow in order to build it's "digital IKEA furniture" with. It's not a coincidence... it's intended.
The human mind is good at finding patterns and such where there often are none- for supposed reasons I won't get into. But I think that this is a habit you need to break, because you will only find what you want to find if you "dig far enough". You will not find Romeo and Juliet in the genome of the contemporary man.
You won't also get an infinite amount of letters from finite binary sequences, unless you are using a fundamentally awkward system for the letters- which would then truly result in a loss of translation and random gibberish.
We are not limiting ourselves. We are operating to the given standard- the standard that defines everything that we can actually do. It isn't even necessarily baseless speculation- it's phenomenon. It isn't noumenal. You can even observe it for yourself and agree or disagree.
>>17859138
and you base that on....?
>>17859138
it does, tho.
If space itself is expanding faster than you can move in it, the universe is technically infinite
>>17858965
>blatantly stupid
You mean, the notion that space bends, that dimensions are valid, and that if you draw a straight line long enough, you will end up at the beginning of the line, is blatantly stupid? The same underpinnings that contribute to the notion that there could be infinite sets of states, is stupid?
Oh, okay. You must determine what you want the "0 and the 1" to be translated into, as well, or else you're not so much translating as you are simply converting random noise. There must be parameters, not chaos. You're being too myopic, and I mean that in the least condescending way.
>>17859144
But you can know how a universe that no one ever saw, works. It isn't even arrogant. It's more arrogant to decide that one simple facet, that one simple aspect of a system defines all things. That's... bad logic. Math is not responsible for how you interpret redness, but you can apply math to the signals in your brain that fire when you see red. Perhaps you can even communicate redness using mathematical concepts. That would be the beauty of living in a multiverse-type system; most things would borrow from one another were they exactly similar with respect to being... a universe. Regarding the topology of it all.
Gravity is a great example. Can you imagine what a universe with no gravitational attraction would look like- a universe compromised of only 2 fundamental forces? Congratulations... you now have a exactly-similar understanding of what it is like to exist in a universe that could be wholly possible. In fact... why do you suppose gravity is even extant? What's up with gravity? What's up with mass? Why aren't there more clusters of anti-matter near our solar system, let alone our local cluster of galaxies/nebulae? What's the deal with dark matter and dark energy? Is it even extant? These are qualities that, according to such a theory or notion hypothesis, would be inalienable inside of a multiverse, constituted out of various universes. Allegedly.
>>17859197
I'll say that it's not idiotic to suggest that a universe that is not ours, would function by even remotely similar laws. Watch me, though:
>infinite universes
>infinite possible universes that can exist inside of a multiverse, given the supposed nature of the mutliverse and all other meaningful qualities
>infinite possible universes
>our universe exists
>a universe that is exactly like ours save for one lone atom exists
>this lone atom is negligible to most if not all of the universe in question
>there are now two universes with human beings, 4chan, and gravity
>>17859274
>If space itself is expanding faster than you can move in it, the universe is technically infinite
That just means you don't fully understand what "space" is....
>>17859490
thats wrong. but nice assumption there mate. claiming the other person just doesnt understand what hes talking about is always a convincing argument
Hello. Extradimensional traveler here. Happy to answer any questions you may have.
Mostly WIMPs
We're the high-energy minority.
Fuck all. Followed by some more fuck all. Then some ayylmaos, because it's statistically impossible that we're the only ones out there, followed by even more fuck all. And then you hit the cosmic radiation background that acts as our current perceivable edge of the universe. Beyond that? My best guess is more fuck all, though quantum mechanics would suggest otherwise.
>>17859603
>statistically impossible
>sample size: 1 planet with life
yeah, thats not how that works
>>17859619
>1/10 planets in our solar system has life
>Uncountable amount of systems out there
Lol nigger
>>17859391
Sure Stephan Hawking could be right, but we can't live with "what if's" forever.
>>17859619
It is, though. The chances of there being life forms that follow the same basic setup as humans (carbon based, needing oxygen/water, etc.) is more than zero. Given the extrapolated numbers of planets that are hospitable to such life, the chances go up even more. Then if we consider that other life forms might form from a different basis than regular Earth life and thus be capable of surviving with completely different circumstances, and have some of that shit even here on Earth, the chances go up even further. And then there's the thing about the universe being infinite as far as we know, which basically puts any possibility that isn't equal to zero at a hundred percent.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that it's actually against the odds that we're the only ones in the entire goddamn universe, even if we currently only have a sample size of 1.
>>17859651
It's actually 11.
Fuck me.
>>17859652
True, but I'd rather prefer we shut the fuck up for now and waited until we've got our own lightspeed projectiles.
>>17859574
I meant "you" as in "all of us" not understanding what space is, not just that anon.
We don't fully understand what space is, which is why we needed to invent dark matter and dark energy.
>>17859651
>10 planets in our solar system
>1/uncountable planets means it is statiscally necessary
yeah, you clearly know what you are talking about
>>17859662
this is all reasonable conjecture and all, but it doesnt make it ""statiscally impossible""
>>17859619
>yeah, thats not how that works
Sure, if you're obtuse.
The probability for other planets with life is borne out by the fact that the cosmos never creates anything in ones, it creates things by the billions.
Galaxies, stars, planets, singularities, asteroids, gas clouds, pulsars, the cosmos mass produces all of this shit by the billions, and that's all the data needed to realize that the creation of life is no different. It's just what the cosmos does...
We're not special.
>>17859715
If the probability for other planets with life is borne out by the fact that the cosmos never creates anythings in ones... then it's equally reasonable to suggest that we're the only set of living things that are still around, because the cosmos also creates sets of pulsars that shoot out beams of death, amongst other things.
We could very well be special. What we seem to be focused on, though, is why or why not we'd figure we'd be special.
>>17859715
I know that and yet it is still not how that works.
Of course it would seem "wrong" if we were the only planet with life on it, but there is nothing we can really work with here. We arent even exactly sure how life started out here.
>>17859800
>it's pointless to suggest that something is certain when it consistently provides nodes of uncertainty
>so everyone is busy arguing over whether or not it's more sensible to entertain some sort of conclusion that better encompasses the uncertainty
>arguing over whether or not something is more sensible is more sensible than arguing over something with incomplete data
>>17859651
>>17859669
it is 8
>>17855644
Vast emptiness dottet with various matter.
Who can really tell?
aliens are dead and we'll die out aswell
>>17859669
There are 13.
>>17859903
How do you count 13?
I took the 9 and then counted Ceres and the X planet that we can't actually see so it's not named yet.
>>17859926
If you decide to count dwarf planets and hypothetical objects as planets you should get a much higher number
>>17857189
Jesus christ what a fucking useless roleplaying edgy teenage naive cuntdick of a cuckprick jacking his pedophile-nigger ass loving faggot dad of a bitch mother in the heavens.
Pic related its you faggot trophy for being a fag.
>>17860025
boy ;_;
>>17860025
oh and btw you are a criminal who will have to carry the burden of the people you fucked over to get to where you are for the rest of your pathetic little life.
but i heard suicide is a good way out.
>>17857290
That's not how light works you fucking mong.
>>17860094
You seem upset.
I think about the universe a lot and I came up with a conclusion. The universe is made up of both extremely tiny particles of energy that contains both a positive and negative charge. The "empty space" theory is wrong. These particles started to mass in strength creating a significantly large ball of particles (much smaller than quarks). The energy itself following the causality flow of attraction and quarks were spontaneously were blown into existence when the even tinier particles started forming together as the random and correct sequences of energy combined to create quarks, and the right sequence formed protons,neutrons, electrons so on and so forth. The universe of subquark particles is imploding, or more like reacting to itself and losing it's independence as quarks are formed pushing away the smaller material. Thus shrinking the existence of these particles as they are now forming quarks to form atoms. And as the energy combines these even smaller particles into bigger particles atoms start to explode outward.
This expansion of particles will eventually stop as the energy is dissipating to allow the collapse, thus stopping new atoms from forming. These atoms will expand out to form a new causality flow. New math, new events, new cycles. What is the dark energy or dark matter that is accelerating the expansion? Simply put it is the escaped particles that accelerated out and were not forming quarks once the actual quarks were spreading out.
>>17860663
The big bang lead to a new causality stream, everything always adds to it. The death of all stars will eventually be pushed out and creating anomalies of energy in other parts of the infinite universe where the subquark particles are at a stagnant energy balance that is precisely balanced so that if one single particle changes the entire process of a big bang will occur. A single atom to literally be the spark to these explosions. It is no doubt that our existence relied on the death of another universes existence. However not all is lost!
>>17860666
The atoms that created you, defined you, are all going to the same universe that you may explode into existence. As atoms already, that means the same causality flow will happen and thus, an endless repeating cycle of life and death. The scary part behind this, is the inevitable loss of all subquark particles as one universe uses a large combination of subquark particles during the big bang process. What we do know is that the atoms are spread back into the subquark regions during black holes. Those recycle the subquark particles back into existence. Enabling a balance to some degree. However, eventually there will be nothing but pure atoms bouncing around each other as the overall blanket of subquark particles are exploded into atoms. There will be giant pockets of subquark particles expanding out due to incredibly large black holes. However these pockets will lead to unique properties as the subquark particles nearest to the boundaries will interact in energy. A different kind of universe could exist here where everything is going to collide as the atoms.
So everything becomes atoms eventually, atoms into molecules and perhaps even giant networks of giant blocks of atoms creating a causality relationship we may have never known to exist.
And we are a part of it. Down to the smallest particles and all the way up to the top. Black holes are our saviors, it allows us the opportunity to be born again by recycling the subquark particles.
Causality builds, Objects form, Time begins.
>>17860636
not as much as your projection riddled anger fit. now go manipulate my dick into your mouth.
>>17860692
Subquarks could be developing into complex living things or cellular like to some degree or already have been by creating quarks. Of course once they bypass the circuitry phase. This is why the quark could survive because it is in essense a somewhat living thing because of the interactions of the quarks within itself. If we recall, quarks come in two and separating one quark far enough from the other will create two more quarks but it will disappear rapidly. The reason for this is that the energy is still radiating as it stretching, this radiation actually influences the subquark particles to essentially magnetically pull the other particles into a quark rather rapidly, however the problem is that it will likely not be the same quark mechanism and self destruct. Spirits could be to some degree the energy from the quarks of the atoms influencing the surrounding quarks to formulate a similar shape. However, since these quarks are not forming atoms they dissipate back to subquarks. Our consciousness may simply be quark bond energy radiating into itself. If we truely believe our atoms create our brains, then the quarks must have something else to do with it as well. Not only this, but the environment and it's quarks may be influencing our brain and the reverse may be possible
>>17860942
>>17860692
>>17860666
>>17860663
This is the very basis of universal energy influences from the mind. If the mind projects into patterns, such patterns may "carry wind" in the subquark world we live in. Every movement we do carries wind as the quarks formulate energy bonds that spreads. The true, real power comes from understanding this generalization of energy that the real energy is in the subquark particles. Influencing those by real, majestic patterns may open the doors to possibilities we have yet to imagine. The first to discover the influential pattern that creates a chain of reactions from subquarks is the first to discover the real true language of the universe. We discovered the language of our level of causality, that of course is chemistry. We are but barely understanding quarks, if we can truely discover a certain patter that quarks can be influenced into greater potential, then the next obvious task is the real true ultimate energy source. The patterns that influence the subquarks. This universal energy can only be tapped into, once we truly understand the nature of the universe. The causality flow builds, objects form, time begins.
This energy source is not likely to have been discovered by humans alone. We probably had visitors and may still have them that have discovered the means and may have tried to communicate this information to prehistoric humans. However by default it would have been lost in translation and tons of false patterns promoting itself as a sigil have created either ineffective products or completely defective results. I propose we were visited, but the information has been lost. However, we can reconstruct this universal language. It begins with a better understanding of science.
I believe that other life obviously exists out there. Maybe its even stopped by to say "hello", but I have to have a healthy amount of skepticism. I think that as amino acids form in many places out in the cosmos the idea odpanspermia is a very likely reality. I also think that there are likely entities beyond human comprehension, extraterrestrial and extradimensional alike. There may be other forms of life that are not of a carbon-base. Humans are not special and are just incredibly tiny and insignificant hairless apes living on a pale blue dot suspended on a sunbeam. We may be part of an infinitely larger, more complex system. There may or may not be some form of an afterlife, although I believe there is not. We are just a blip on the cosmic radar.
>>17860974
Still not convinced?
Review the characteristics of a haunting.
-Cold. The stereotypical cold feeling could be the rush of energy bonds from quarks pushing the atoms to some degree away from each other and creating a sensation of cold.
-Electrical interference
This is a given, electrons are essentially part of a group called leptons which can also be influenced by large segments of subquarks creating a great energy influence or a "wind" of energy.
-Objects moving
Once the energy is great enough it may form into giant subquark networks and push against the atoms of objects and creating this effect
-Apparitions are white and go through walls
Since the subquark energy flows are stronger and smaller then atom bonds, they will simply go through objects. The reason they appear white is because subqark energy influences the radiation around itself into a visible spectrum of all colors.
-Disappears back into nothing
The literal consequence of consistent interactions with other energy and 2nd law of thermodynamics. Energy cannot flow infinitely, it becomes transferred. Thus this energy is transferred back into the veil of subquarks.
-Death
In the literal sense the close nit pack of atoms inside our skull have a much higher influence then smaller amounts of atoms in a brain. Smaller animals may not possess enough quark energy to greatly influence the subquark energy flow. Humans see the "light" as bright as anything. This light is the result of our quark bonds separating from the usual spaces brought on by a powerful hallucinating drug that influences the entirety of the consciousness. This light is not light, it's quark energy separating thus allowing consciousness to be winded across the quarks nearby, in which does enable a very brief form of consciousness.
That is enough information for you guys. Hopefully someone here can make enough connections to advance the human race.
Farewell space brothers,
P.S. no we won't crash on the moon ;P
>>17860663
>>17860666
>>17860692
>>17860942
>>17860974
>>17861058
I dont want to be a snarky smart ass since you obviously put some thought and effort in your post
>>17861260
Give me the criticism. I don't want to believe in something that is wrong by nature. I expect someone to tell me that I am wrong if I am wrong. I want to know the truth just as badly as anyone else. Holding back, is only holding back what I could MAYBE discover. In other words, not speaking is being more of a douche then speaking. I don't care if it may sound stupid. I don't have any degrees in math and science. I'm all speculation based on what I read. Hit me, I need to know where I am weak friend :) . Only then can we try to leap into logical statements that the real scientists can actually prove with their backed research. Perhaps this is the case for the people Einstein, Pauli, Schroder and all the other great mathematicians. They needed some spark of creativity to find the logic. Fuck the ego. Hit me with your best shot!!
Also, I won't be checking this tomorrow morning. I'll be far too busy. If you can kindly reply on this thread and send your response to me via email to biagonist at gmail , I will greatly appreciate it. Arrogance to any degree cannot be tolerated when there is other opinions. And yes I did roleplay at the end, I'm not a ayylmao.
>>17861424
>>17861260
I will bump this thread tomorrow or create a new one to find you. I need criticism, it's the only way I know where I could be wrong.
>>17857776
What? Evolution is not random.
>>17855700
What is Hawking's theory?
>>17861554
True, but it's not planned either.
>>17855644
dunno
>>17861058
>quarks push the atoms away from each other, creating the sensation of cold
Because materials expand when they get cold, right? And metal shrinks when it gets hot?
What kind of quarks are these? Where do they come from? Where do they get their energy?
>ghosts are white because they're emitting radiation
So they're literally white hot, huh? Then they'd set the place on fire, not cause a sensation of cold.
>giant quark networks push objects
How? With what force?
>it's all quarks and quark energy
Then it would be measurable.
You know, when science uses words like quarks and energy and the laws of thermodynamics, these words actually mean things. Discrete, specific things. They're not just throwing shit around randomly and meaninglessly the way you're doing. If you're going to do that just replace that shit with voodoo and magic and chi or whatever.
>>17861672
>but it's not planned either.
source?
>>17855644
maybe they'll tell you what happened on the dark side eventually
>>17861650
not him, but I think hawking said something along the lines of how they would most likely want to kill us, to make sure we don't become a threat to them.
>>17861709
False, they need us for genetic material to advance themselves.
>>17861706
what?
why and how should it be planned?
also:
>proving a negativ
>>17861713
>False, they need us for genetic material to advance themselves.
That's a bold claim. Might I ask for a source to that information?
>>17861554
see
>>17861672
I never said it was random. I just said that it wasn't planned. It can't be more specific than the nucleation of ice crystals in a given storm system here on (rather in the atmosphere of) Earth, because of the nature of (what we understand to be) molecular quirks in our local environment (the solar system). Having seven fingers and poor eyesight (for the average human being) wouldn't have made us any less human, than simply having different hair pigmentation- and this was the point I was trying to put across.
Human life isn't fantastical. It simply fits the bill, especially now, because of each individual's inherited traits and genome mutations, and is tantamount to a body of water taking the shape of a small basin. Except, sometimes, it rains over that body of water, and the basin is sometimes shaped by this as well.
For all we know, these exact quirks could be common throughout many areas of the Milky Way (perhaps even all of them at once), and the likelihood that something would have been encouraged to turn out somewhat similarly to us could be high. That's not to say this is the case, but rather, that this is something to consider.
>>17861706
https://www.encodeproject.org/
At your leisure.
Evolution:
>is the simple result of variation, differential reproduction, and heredity
>it is mindless and mechanistic
>it has no goals; it's not striving to produce "progress" or a balanced ecosystem
>it does not produce perfection
>if genes are "good enough," they produce offspring (the next generation)
>the genetic variation that occurs in a population because of mutation is random
>but selection acts on that variation in a very non-random way
>genetic variants that aid survival and reproduction are much more likely to become common than variants that don't
>this is why having six fingers can be trivial in the long run but still matter
>because you'd be wasting more energy and resources on extra fingers
>but it can still happen regardless
>>17861733
Source is personal experience.
I'm sure some deathbed NASA/CIA guy will confirm the deals of technology for life on record, eventually.
>>17861761
>>17861761
>Source is personal experience.
disregarded. don't bother trying to say something so definitively if all you have to back it up is "because I say so"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRhZyQZRl8s
>>17859672
I'm what you people refer to as an aylmao
This is ypur species in a nut shell
>muhhh projectiles
What a fucking planet this is
>>17861883
What a planet you seem to be.
>>17861792
Go look underground, it's not hidden very well here.
There's a reason 40% of the U.S. Defense budget goes missing year to year.
>>17861895
>Go look underground, it's not hidden very well here.
Right, I'll just start digging in my back yard. Can't be more specific? Or better yet, how about you get some pics of whatever it is you think is down there?
>There's a reason 40% of the U.S. Defense budget goes missing year to year.
Yes, that reason is called "greed".
An infinite multiverse would be fucking AWESOME, but I don't know.
String theory points strongly in the direction of the existence of a multiverse, so there's that.
How far can you zoom out, though? What is beyond the sea of multiverses? Is it like how you can zoom in with an infinite degree of magnification on the micro level (molecules to atoms to atomic particles to quarks, etc)? Would you just keep zooming out forever?
I think that's the biggest question: what is "it" when you zoom out to the highest degree?
>>17855644
A free house that's what
And it's all ours
>>17855644
The truth.
>>17856002
Kurzgesagt is an autistic redditor
>>17861051
>>17857217
>Even if multiverses was more than an interesting hypothesis
I like to think that universe is SO BIG , SOOOO BIG that theres a point where variants start to repeat , so it is possible that theres someone exactly like you , somewhere around the universe
>>17857839
>It had something to do with "if other life existed then they would have colonized the entire milky way by now" or something like that
Thats retarded
>>17861748
Poor eyesight compared to what? To an extent, evolution IS planned, it's called natural selection. Random mutations give way to different characteristics (some beneficial, some harmful). An organism which suffered a mutation that resulted in poorer eyesight would have a harder time reproducing.
That's why is useless to say we "could have seven fingers and the inability to detect shiny objects".
>>17862823
>it's called natural selection
>Random mutations give way to different characteristics (some beneficial, some harmful)
>An organism which suffered a mutation that resulted in poorer eyesight would have a harder time reproducing
So... we're arguing the same thing now when it comes to the mechanics involved in evolution. Except for the fact that we disagree on the notion that evolution is exactly planned at all.
You started by saying evolution is planned. Then, you mentioned natural selection, which is by definition, variation, differential reproduction, and heredity. You mentioned random mutations- that is variation. You mentioned organisms that "suffered" a mutation- that's differential reproduction in action alongside heredity of said variation/s. None of that is possess any agency, or produces perfect genes- and in your example, we already have an organism that is -not- perfect, and does exist in the real world.
Natural selection is not planned, if it possesses random elements/does not actively cull or culture things. Yet, it is not complete chaos. At it's core, it's the phenomenon that encompasses the mis-pairing during DNA replication and the need to preserve a protein's function (mutations that will actually provide an organism with the means to live, while potentially having non-specific quirks of their own, and not something fantastical like a random noise pattern helix resulting in a cancerous blob). Evolution in living things is not like a random number generator. It is also not an assembly line.
I'm thinking you didn't actually read my post, and you're just going off on a tangent, and I don't know why.
>That's why is useless to say we "could have seven fingers and the inability to detect shiny objects"
No, that's not entirely why. Please read >>17861748 more carefully.
>>17862823
>To an extent, evolution IS planned
The fossil record shows that evolution is a random process, not a planned process.
>>17858965
Seems to me that you have just been watching pop science videos by the magic science negro. You don't actually have real knowledge of science. Read a serious science book for once,'you mongoloid.
>>17859652
No, but we could wait until we've got more than one planet before giving away our home address and door keys.
>>17860634
I think he was referring to manipulation of tachyon particles or some type of quantum viewing technology.
>>17861895
That reason is known as the American Intelligence Community, you literal autist.
>>17855657
if they are outside of the local group, it is impossible for us to reach them period. Even at the speed of light or with generational ships, the universe is expanding too fast for us to ever "catch up" to a galaxy outside our local group.
>>17855644
Can we talk about how creepy the fermi paradox is? Why are we not seeing other life? is the great obstacle to life behind us or before us? thoughts?
>>17856229
you came here from the inner earth thread too eh?
>>17859391
LET 'EM FUCKIN TRY
>>17864788
I dont know man. The fermi paradox is entirely based on the assumption that aliens want to contact us and are able to. It isnt even entirely certain if Fermi himself wanted to make a point about the existence of aliens. Some think he wanted to express his scepticism about space travel in general (it was pre 50s).
But maybe they are already zooming through space, well aware of us and just signed a Star Trekian policiy with other aliums. So they leave us alone until we discovered warp drive or something. Not very likely, but I like that thought
just tell me one thing why isnt everythign beautifull and good and wwhy i dont have a girlfriends out of that set
>>17855672
>can or cannot
You just activated my autism. Is there a third option youre not listing here? You sound like a first year college student 19 year old that just smoked weed while watching a science nigger documentary.
Even at the closest star to the sun, others would only be able to see our solar system without any planets. Once the light we emit now gets there, the sun's already burnt out
Distance/light speed limit makes it imppssible for any living species to even see another in the cosmos.
Except they're hyperdimensional
>>17861980
The picture on top of the puzzle
