[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/sci/ - Science & Math

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: universe1.jpg (908 KB, 3000x2940)
908 KB
908 KB JPG
>universe still completely unexplained
>its shape, origin and cause completely unknown, we don't even know if it's infinite or not
>consciousness a total mystery
>physical laws are "fundamental" and can't be explained
Meanwhile we are left with string theory, multiverse theories, quantum physics, simulation theory, holographic principle, big bang etc.

When did science go wrong? Universe is as much of a mystery as it was 1000 years ago.
>>
>>12939693
When they stopped believing in the spiritual, and started to believe their theories were truths instead of a bunch of stories.
As soon as they abandoned reality.
>>
>>12939693
Theories are theories. The ones we've been able to use in experiments and mathematics are the ones we can veritably say are true, but never wholly true. We know through veritability that there was something huge that happened in the universe 13 billion years ago and we call that the big bang, based on our theories. It is veritably true that this happened, but what happened and why and how is all unwhole, or just theory.

Going by this logic, you want whole and completely solid truths about the universe, which simply doesn't happen. We can't perform any practical experiments with the stars past Sol, we can't perform anything practical on the baselines of reality except for supercolliders, which is an experiment to determine if particle physics and /one/ portion of quantum physics is veritably true - not wholly true even. Just like the Big Bang, we don't know the why or how, only the what in that particles do exist and we can measure consistencies like mass and spin.

You're asking something of science that it has not ever provided since its inception. If you want hard truths and progression that matters, get into engineering, not cosmology.
>>
>>12939737
retard
>>
>>12939750
seethe
>>
>its shape, origin and cause completely unknown, we don't even know if it's infinite or not
100 years ago a lot of people believed the Galaxy was the entity of the universe. The original term for other galaxies was "island universes". In that time the universe has been shown to be much larger, with observations reaching out to the limits imposed by nature. The question about whether or not it is infinite is a modern one. The fact that the universe is now understood to have evolved and expanded from a dense state is another scientific revolution. You ask about it's origin, but that question is purely the outcome of scientific progress. 100 years ago many would have dismissed it as eternal. And you're wrong about the shape, there is a good deal of evidence that the universe is spatially flat, at least in standard cosmology anyway.

You try to marginalised any scientific discovery, but actually your own questions are built upon scientific progress.
>>
File: file.png (51 KB, 200x144)
51 KB
51 KB PNG
>>12939693
God made everything and you can't change my mind.
>>
>>12939693
Life is a formula.
>>
>>12939790
entirety*
>>
>>12939790
I thought the consensus was the curvature of the universe was open, so we'd eventually accelerate expansion and hit degeneracy? Or was there a recent discovery that made Einstein correct or someshit
>>
>>12939693
Science is totally useless beyond measurements and models. Scientific knowledge has to be mixed with philosophy and mysticism to answer the problems you raise but half of academia are godless nihilist bugmen who will go to their graves without ever pondering the bigger picture.
>>
>>12939693
You don't know what the word "completely" means. As such, I have no desire to educate your retarded misunderstandings given your bad faith rhetoric. Consider killing yourself.
>>
>>12939903
>something might have came from nothing
>we find ourselves within that something with no complete explanation of what the something is
Explain what the something is and what it’s purpose is pseud
>>
>>12939874
The universe is consistent with being flat. There are is a small minority who argue for open, but it's not significantly supported by the data.

>accelerate expansion and hit degeneracy
The universe is accelerating, but that doesn't mean it's open. I have no idea what you mean by degeneracy.
>>
>>12940032
Weird, I always thought it was the other way around, with nobody supporting a closed curvature, few with static and most with open, but I'll look into it a bit more. By degeneracy I meant the decay of matter into the end of entropy, i.e. end of the universe through stars having no more fuel to form, everything accelerating apart and everything degrading into black holes and rare EMW
>>
They've played for absolute fools
>>
Atheists can explain science, logic, uniformity of nature and the trustworthyness of their senses. Only GOD can do this.
>>
>>12940282
>with nobody supporting a closed curvature
Flat is not closed or open. It's the line between them, with zero net curvature. The standard model of cosmology is flat LCDM.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shape_of_the_universe

>few with static and most with open
Flat is not a static universe. You would struggle to find any serious cosmologists working on static models.
>>
>>12940529
Actually I can't.
t. GOD
>>
>>12939918
>Something might have came from nothing
Source?
>>
life is nothing but a simulation
>>
>>12939880
lmao
>>
>>12939693
>>universe still completely unexplained
Stopped reading there
>>
>>12939804
This isn't at odds with anything itt, tho. Science explains the how, but the why is outside its scope.
>>
>>12939693
Consciousness emerges from electrical activity in the brain...
>>
If something is outside of the observable universe e, does it exist at all?
>>
>>12939693
When we let jews run the academia
>>
>>12942350
And gravity is apple falling from the tree. How have you explained anything with that statement?
>>
>>12942368
well by definition there is no "outside" of the universe. If there was, then it would be included in our definition of the universe.
>>12940807
prove it mate
>>
>>12942790
So is that a yes? Stuff we will never be able to observe exists.
>>
>>12942812
If we're never able to observe it or know about it or any indication of the likelihood of its existence, then it probably doesn't make sense to make claims about whether it exists or not.
>>
>>12939804
Can you guys please stop pitting science and religion against each other? It is very annoying, thank you.
>>
>>12940032
If the universe isn't closed then is it infinite? If it's not infinite then it has a boundary? What is that boundary?
>>
>>12939693
We have barely any idea how the brain functions.

We larp intelligence. Ayylmaos don't come hang out because we're insignificant, stupid, pointless and it's a waste if time. We have nothing they want or need.
>>
>>12939693
Listen up because I'm only gonna say this shit once.

WE. DO. NOT. EVEN. FUCKING. EXIST.

Ontological nihilism.
Acatalepsy.
Complete fucking illusion.

There is nothing to figure out because there is nothing. Not even our own selves.
>>
>>12939790
If the universe is the way they say it is, what are we floating (for lack of a better word) in?
>>
>>12940621
>There are certain logical connections among these properties. For example, a universe with positive curvature is necessarily finite.
>If Ω = 1, the universe is flat.
>If Ω > 1, there is positive curvature.
>If Ω < 1 there is negative curvature.

Okay, got a bit confused apparently. A static universe would be positive curvature, what was thought before we noticed the acceleration. Flat would mean that there's general acceleration of the expansion, while negative curvature would lead to the red shift of death, Big Rip and what not.

Why the hell aren't we learning more about dark energy/matter? This void shit is the reason why everything is still accelerating, we need to figure that out. Earlier the better, imo, that way we can justify trying to go for intergalactic travel in the far future
>>
>>12939880
>White trash hands typed this
>>
>>12939804
You're free to believe that, science is merely a mechanism to explain natural phenomena.
>>
>>12939693
>When did science go wrong?
our measurement tools suck.
>>
>>12939737

>What are the metaphysical assumptions of current science?
These are the assumptions:
The problem of induction isn't a problem for some reason.
Empiricism is accurate.
Mathematical realism is true.
Group opinion (peer review) is a legitimate means of discerning reality.
Positivism is accurate.
Repeat apparent occurrences of events means those events are legitimate and real.
Objects maintain identity over time.
Having a doctorate means something of value.
Scientists also reject that value statements are legitimate even though they use them all the time.

The problem with science is that scientific realism is completely retarded. Bible level of retardation. According to ‘’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’science’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ reality is composed by mathematical objects.

Nobody has ever witnessed those immaterial mathematical constructs.

It’s peak atheist midwitism . The main problem with determinism and science is that they use ‘’rules’’ and those ‘’rules’’ 1/ are not subject to determinism 2/ don’t live in the universe 3/ nobody knows where they come from 4/ no atheist is able to explain how a material system, say a particle, is supposed to know how to behave, ie following the immaterial rules during an interaction, before it interacts.
5/all the rules are followed not deterministically, but statistically at best
>>
>>12939750
The fuck? everything he said was true.
>>
>>12945508
>recognizing that science has limits and pondering the bigger picture of existence via different avenues is white trash
Bugman troglodyte confirmed, fag
>>
>>12939693
>>12939709
>>12939737
>>12939750
>9750▶>>12939757 >>12946450
>>>12939737
>>12939757
>>12939790
>>
File: 1617131005103.jpg (133 KB, 699x901)
133 KB
133 KB JPG
>>
File: 1616196338341.jpg (90 KB, 833x913)
90 KB
90 KB JPG
>>
>>12939693
The symptoms of a model that explains part of something but not the entirety of it. Yet they have the gall to suggest they know what the universe is really like. It's silly.
>>
>>12939737
You don't know anything happened 13 billion years ago. That relies on the assumption that the laws of physics are constant and universal which is not necessarily true. The fact that your model does not tell you a complete picture implies that even that assumption could be wrong. You might pretend like the only other explanation is randomness but that's not true at all. The laws of physics could change around consciousness couldn't they? Perhaps WE are exactly what everything exists around?
>>
yes
>>
>>12939709
>spiritual is reality
found another person who needs to be shot in the fucking head
Everything is fucked because people are falling into belief traps.
>>
>>12940621
Why is a closed universe impossible? It seems like it makes more sense to me because if it's not closed then it has to be infinite in size, does it not? Or does it have a boundary somewhere outside of our observable universe?
>>
>>12939693
>>12940032
>The universe is consistent with being flat.
I heartily disagree, kind sir. The universe can be ultimately reduced down to a one dimensional triangle, incompassing time and gravity. Pro-tip, you can't.
>>
>>12949724
based
>>
WHAT IF THE UNIVERSE IS SO BIG IT DOESNT REGISTER ANY CURVATURE YOU IDIOTS HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT THAT
>>
File: 2021-04-10_01.05.27.jpg (389 KB, 717x925)
389 KB
389 KB JPG
>>12949724
>Everything is fucked because people are falling into belief traps.
We live in the most scientifically minded time in human history.
>>
>>12949724
>people need to have their brains blown out for having spiritual worldviews
you're a pathetic loser
>>
>>12939693
So?

How boring with it be if we knew ALL of that shit already

I'm dying to fucking know but there is so much excitement in discovering this shit and finding out the most immaculate method of approximating the truth/reality, even though they probably don't exist and we never come close to either of them.

It's such a self-rewarding thing to continually falsify, falsify, falsify, chip away at reality and uncovering what's beneath. Why the fuck would you lament that amazing experience?
>>
>>12939693
So if the milky way is a disc, does that mean someone standing on the equator looking up sees more stars than someone on the north pole?
>>
>>12949724
The OP asks where did it go wrong. Materialism, the inability to see things as a whole and only focus on tiny bits (because we want to measure, test, classify) is a very reasonable answer.
>>
God of the gaps was real all along
>>
>>12946832
what's the bottom right one?
>>
>>12946820
more?
>>
>>12952408
yeah, it's this big white streak called "the milky way"
>>
>>12952770
>big white streak
Is that what she calls it?
>>
>>12939693
What do you mean? We know a lot more, but there is potienally infinite to understand.
>>
>>12939693

is each cillinder logarithmic? how accurate is this?
>>
>>12939880

your pic is both depressing and humorous.
>>
>>12945508

sub human r edditor detected. you're a weakling and your future wife will fuck other men before you.
>>
File: 1617174151031.webm (960 KB, 1280x720)
960 KB
960 KB WEBM
>>12946832

im about to blow your mind away
>>
File: 1617174373176.webm (745 KB, 1280x720)
745 KB
745 KB WEBM
>>12954437
>>
File: 1617174570070.webm (715 KB, 1280x720)
715 KB
715 KB WEBM
>>12954437
>>12954441
>>
File: 1618048335760.gif (372 KB, 220x165)
372 KB
372 KB GIF
>>12939880
>>
>>12954437
>>12954441
Very interesting
>>
File: 1617176066099.webm (690 KB, 1280x720)
690 KB
690 KB WEBM
>>12954446
>>
File: 1617176098956.webm (373 KB, 1280x720)
373 KB
373 KB WEBM
>>12954453

*full metal alchemist kei music*
>>
File: 5ddde1f2d55fd.jpg (214 KB, 1217x858)
214 KB
214 KB JPG
>>12954469
>>
File: AHHHHH.jpg (28 KB, 219x230)
28 KB
28 KB JPG
>>12954437
>>12954441
>>12954446
>>12954457
>>12954469
>>
File: 278984.bin.jpg (28 KB, 400x527)
28 KB
28 KB JPG
why do all the quality threads get ignored
>>
>>12954862
I think hardly anything gets ignored. As grimes said...



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.