|
Reality
Sept 23, 2004 0:22:23 GMT -5
Post by Antid on Sept 23, 2004 0:22:23 GMT -5
For starters, electricity is not made up of atoms. It consists of charged particles - normally electrons.
Otherwise I also believe that there is a reality within another reality.
Take a point, just a simple point in space. It's so small that it has seemingly no volume, but there's no limit as to how small it is. So there's always something smaller inside, so it's always three dimensional. And within that point, there can be an entire universe like ours. It's like there are infinite other dimensions in all around us, and we're moving through them.
Isn't that weird?
|
|
|
Reality
Sept 23, 2004 0:27:06 GMT -5
Post by Arachis on Sept 23, 2004 0:27:06 GMT -5
yep... but it has to start somewhere... at some point there is some particle that cannot be broken down.. how far down the chain that might be.. well who knows, pass the quarks and Quiggles, and Alis and C-lairs, and youll find some particle that is the smallest it will go...
|
|
|
Reality
Sept 23, 2004 17:37:15 GMT -5
Post by EgoWaffle on Sept 23, 2004 17:37:15 GMT -5
not nesecarily...there is technically no limit to how small something can be, it's just that science isn't advanced enough to measure it.
|
|
|
Reality
Sept 23, 2004 17:52:57 GMT -5
Post by BlueDolphin on Sept 23, 2004 17:52:57 GMT -5
What if the universe is made of particles within particles and so on with no end? Like how a true fractal does not have an end to detail. The closer you go, the more you find.
|
|
|
Reality
Sept 23, 2004 20:30:52 GMT -5
Post by bezzerkker on Sept 23, 2004 20:30:52 GMT -5
Anything that can bring your grade down on a group project definately exists. Actually, I've gotten really good grades with them when we work in groups.
|
|
|
Reality
Sept 23, 2004 22:28:59 GMT -5
Post by Antid on Sept 23, 2004 22:28:59 GMT -5
What if the universe is made of particles within particles and so on with no end? Like how a true fractal does not have an end to detail. The closer you go, the more you find. That's exactly what I mean.
|
|
|
Reality
Sept 23, 2004 22:48:51 GMT -5
Post by Arachis on Sept 23, 2004 22:48:51 GMT -5
I know thats what you guys all meant, but I dont believe thats possible. The more particles there are when you look further into it, the more variation there ought to be at the atomic level. Since we know of very few atoms that are not made of protons/ neutrons/ electrons/ plasma/ or energy, it seems odd that such uniformity is the result of all the random variation that would accompany so many small particles within particles.
|
|
|
Reality
Sept 25, 2004 11:26:25 GMT -5
Post by Antid on Sept 25, 2004 11:26:25 GMT -5
You're thinking atoms, Ali. We're thinking points in space. There's a difference.
But you're right - as you go smaller and smaller, the "universes" or "dimensions" we encounter are infinitely variable. They don't have to be anything like the universe we're living in. They can be different.
|
|
|
Reality
Sept 25, 2004 11:55:26 GMT -5
Post by EgoWaffle on Sept 25, 2004 11:55:26 GMT -5
exactly what i was saying...it's like an infinite amount of planes that make up our universe.
|
|
|
Reality
Sept 25, 2004 12:14:12 GMT -5
Post by Arachis on Sept 25, 2004 12:14:12 GMT -5
ARgh! you cannot understand what I am saying.
I am saying that at the atomic level. There is very little variation. I mean come on, look at what there is. there is neutrons, protons, electrons, and energy + a couple other things we dont know about. Personally I find it strange that all the variation at levels below the atomic level, would straiten itself into such bland uniformity. Imagine. Its as if all the atoms formed together to create only humans, mango trees and monkeys. No other life form existed. But when one looks at it, one sees infinite varieties of creatures. not to mention that all creatures are different (ie there is not any one human who is exactly alike). Yet if you look again at the atomic scale. All the neutrons are exactly the same. Just as are all the protons and electrons. That is what makes me doubt that there are infinite smaller particles.
|
|
|
Reality
Sept 26, 2004 3:27:28 GMT -5
Post by Hans Lemurson on Sept 26, 2004 3:27:28 GMT -5
So you're saying that, for example, even though the things we can see and feel have near infinite variations of form, but thier basic building blocks are identical. So if that pattern follows, you would find that even among the miriad of particles we know of, that they have some fundamental commn organization. Like atoms are different from each other, but they are all merely differing combinations of protons, neutrons, and electrons that got pulled in. But then you look at quarks, and you see that protons and neutrons are just different combinations of quarks; 2 up 1 down gives you a proton; 1 up 2 down is a neutron. And many other of the more strange particles can be described as combinations of quarks.
Thus you might postulate, (like I believe Ali is) that since all of the many and varied structures we can describe may be reduced to just combinations of a few simpler particles, that you will reach a point when the greater structures are described by fewer types of particles, until eventually, you reach a point where there is only one particle, and everything comes from combinations of that. Once you reach that point, everything is uniform, since everything can merely be described by the one particle.
There are a millions of forms of life on the planet, but all of those are made up of cells (and some just are cells).
There are perhaps thousands of cell types, with each species having some of distinct types, but they are all of them built from proteins (ok, and some lipids too, and in an aqueous solution...with different salts and minerals to aid protein function...and nucleic acids...but proteins predominate).
Granted there are almost an infinite number of proteins in existance, but they are all of them made from 20 amino acids.
The 20 amino acids are comprised of 6 different elements (hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, sulfur, and I think one has a bit of phosphorus. If not, then only 5 elements)
The 6 elements are composed of 3 types of particles, protons, neutrons, and electrons.
Electrons are as of yet indivisible.
Protons and neutrons are made of two types of quarks, and maybe a gluon in there to bind them. Beyond that, we do not know of any substructures.
All of the variations we see in our world boil down to a handful of particles, and who's to say that there is not a simpler form for those too...perhaps ithe patterns will simplify into uniformity...
(ok, I'll confess, there are about 15-20 other particle types that never really organize themselves into anything...mostly neutrinos...which got there name for not interacting with much of anything...And most of these particles have their own conjugate anti-particles...making for over 30 known types of subatomic particles, and more may still crop up in further research.)
30 is way simpler than the millions of life forms...and those were only made of, like, four types...so the other particles were there all along and were never more complicated to begin with.
It's strange really that only so very few types of particles interact strongly enough with each other to create all of the complexity we see in the universe...but at risk of making everything I said look like foolishness, I'll say this: What if everything we see in our entire universe is merely an electron in a far grander one yet..and all of our electrons are unverses of their own?
*edit* Holy f*ck that was a long post...don't you feel proud you made it all the way?
|
|
|
Reality
Sept 26, 2004 4:37:32 GMT -5
Post by Arachis on Sept 26, 2004 4:37:32 GMT -5
that is essentially what I was saying, only I find it difficult to believe that one of our electrons could have so many sub particles as to be a whole other universe, as you postulated yourself...
|
|
|
Reality
Sept 26, 2004 12:26:52 GMT -5
Post by Antid on Sept 26, 2004 12:26:52 GMT -5
Ali, I understand what you are saying, but it's YOU who isn't understanding what I'm saying.
As David said, you are apparently claiming that there is a finite ultimate "building block" or "blocks" from some pattern of which everything is created. What I am saying is, I don't believe there is a finite building block. I think that if you keep going deeper and deeper into a point (call it a subatomic particle, if you will, or a quark, or whatever), you will find that it, too is composed of something DIFFERENT. Even two electrons are composed of different things, because as you get smaller and smaller towards infinity, you will find more and more stuff - anything, practically.
|
|
|
Reality
Sept 26, 2004 14:40:18 GMT -5
Post by Arachis on Sept 26, 2004 14:40:18 GMT -5
I know Dmitry... I just dont believe that there can be so many particles that serve as building blocks
|
|
|
Reality
Sept 26, 2004 18:07:36 GMT -5
Post by BlueDolphin on Sept 26, 2004 18:07:36 GMT -5
How can one go about proving the infinite particle hypothesis?
|
|