Scale of the Universe

[AnthonyCordova]

Here is something interesting I found while randomly surfing the web. It gives a sense of the scale of the largest and smallest known things. Apparently, the smallest thing visible to the human eye is halfway in between the size of the Universe and the Planck length, which is supposed to be the absolute smallest length of space. Anything less isn't possible...it has something to do with the fact that things smaller than that would automatically collapse into a black hole. Or something like that. Anyway, here is the link:

http://htwins.net/scale2/

Pretty cool. It takes a few seconds to load.

 

[Blaze]

I can't wait until we push the limit further and expend our knowledge on things even smaller of even bigger (give it a few years, I'm pretty positive that this will happen). This is pretty cool, puts things in perspective. I've had the chance to visit a neutrino lab in the past, and am lucky enough to work with some of those very small particles, I find it truly fascinating.

 

[AnthonyCordova]

[MENTION=8404]Blaze[/MENTION] are you a scientist? What do you research? I'm a complete layman obviously, but I enjoy reading about these things.

---------- Post added at 10:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:58 PM ----------

The true size of the Universe is definitely up for debate. There is no way to say exactly. According to some theories it may even be infinite in size. And then there is the idea of multiverses and whatnot.

 

[Blaze]

[MENTION=8404]Blaze[/MENTION] are you a scientist? What do you research? I'm a complete layman obviously, but I enjoy reading about these things.

---------- Post added at 10:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:58 PM ----------

The true size of the Universe is definitely up for debate. There is no way to say exactly. According to some theories it may even be infinite in size. And then there is the idea of multiverses and whatnot.

I'm a chemist 🙂 I don't have much experience yet, I'm just graduating this year and have been in the research field for about a year, so as far as being a scientist, I'm just a beginner. I'm working mostly on drug design and organic chemistry, so I only have basic knowledge when it comes to quantum/physical chemistry. I'll just stick to working at the atom level lol which is not as fancy as it sounds.

I always like hearing about stuff like this too though! I find it fascinating, I love the idea of the universe being infinite, can't wait until more is learned about it. What is even more exciting (too me at least, since I'm a science nerd) is the organization of things. The way things are built, and how the smallest particles are set in the same way as some of the biggest systems, it's just all really cool!

 

[AnthonyCordova]

Sweet! I have a lot of respect for what you are doing. I did alright in mathematics and physics in high school, but chemistry was always too hard for me. The math was weird. Then I got into college and followed my teaching ambitions and went into the humanities. But I was never a natural at the sciences. I've got a good friend who is working at a University around here as a chemist. He tried explaining to me what it was exactly he worked on, but it went over my head. Too many words I couldn't recognize. Chemistry nomenclature.

What is even more exciting (too me at least, since I'm a science nerd) is the organization of things. The way things are built, and how the smallest particles are set in the same way as some of the biggest systems, it's just all really cool!

Yeah, the idea of a grand unified theory (as I'm sure you know) is the big thing theoretical physicists are after. I suspect they will eventually reconcile gravity with quantum mechanics, but it may still be a while off. The way I see it, both the quantum world and gravity (and everything else) all exist in one larger context. Because they exist in a larger context, there must be a way to reconcile everything. It doesn't make sense that two things existing in the same world are fundamentally irreconcilable. It's all one thing in the end, right? Anyway, that's just my uneducated intuition speaking.

 

[thetopher]

Speaking strictly as a layman I'm still waiting until they discover the micro-verse and also the Land of the Giants. 😀

Although in all seriousness physics goes very strange when things get too big. when gravity/mass begins to warp space/time- makes my head spin.

I'm still waiting for a unifying theory for the fundimental forces of the universe. Something to link how molucules and planets actually work- because at the moment they play by very different rules. 😕

But theoritical physicists are discovering similar mathematical patterns, both in the birth of stars and in molecular structure. Makes you think about how the whole universe is structured.

 

[Ethan Reigns]

The unified theory will be great - until someone finds an anomaly that changes things like relativity did to classical physics and then it will be back to research mode again. Physics is always at its healthiest state when the experimental evidence is ahead of the theory. However, all the nonsense we hear about knowledge increasing exponentially is just that - we are reaching saturation. All the low-hanging fruit in physics have been harvested and the amount of investment needed to make the next big leap exceeds what people are inclined to invest in.

I am still waiting for an explanation of consciousness - we can catalog states of consciousness and diseases or injuries that affect it, but how do we connect it to the physical world? Why do I have an awareness of what I am doing? How does it connect to physics? That would be an interesting connection to make.

 

[Blaze]

Sweet! I have a lot of respect for what you are doing. I did alright in mathematics and physics in high school, but chemistry was always too hard for me. The math was weird. Then I got into college and followed my teaching ambitions and went into the humanities. But I was never a natural at the sciences. I've got a good friend who is working at a University around here as a chemist. He tried explaining to me what it was exactly he worked on, but it went over my head. Too many words I couldn't recognize. Chemistry nomenclature.

Thank you 🙂 Strangely I just seem to have an affinity (pun intended) for chemistry. I consider myself very lucky to be gifted in that field, as it seems you either have it or you don't. Physics is another story though, as much as I love it, I'm not very good at it. A bit off topic but what did you study in college? Most of my classes are science oriented but I took a few anthropology classes, those were a blast!

Yeah, the idea of a grand unified theory (as I'm sure you know) is the big thing theoretical physicists are after. I suspect they will eventually reconcile gravity with quantum mechanics, but it may still be a while off. The way I see it, both the quantum world and gravity (and everything else) all exist in one larger context. Because they exist in a larger context, there must be a way to reconcile everything. It doesn't make sense that two things existing in the same world are fundamentally irreconcilable. It's all one thing in the end, right? Anyway, that's just my uneducated intuition speaking.

I agree, I think scientists are getting closer to to solving these type of problems. But just the thought of quantum mechanics hurts my brain 😛 I'm sure a few of my profs would love this discussion though.

---------- Post added at 08:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:54 PM ----------

The unified theory will be great - until someone finds an anomaly that changes things like relativity did to classical physics and then it will be back to research mode again. Physics is always at its healthiest state when the experimental evidence is ahead of the theory. However, all the nonsense we hear about knowledge increasing exponentially is just that - we are reaching saturation. All the low-hanging fruit in physics have been harvested and the amount of investment needed to make the next big leap exceeds what people are inclined to invest in.

Yes, there will always be changes in research, the science we have today will most likely not be the same in 50 years. At the moment, it's simply impossible for the experimental evidence to be ahead of the theory because technology has enabled us to put thing in "practice" with software which was impossible a few years ago. Some of the stuff we will never be able to test experimentally because of the small scale, but most of the programs are incredibly accurate (from what we know so far).

I disagree about reaching saturation though, just looking at the research going on at my university, there are a lot of studies going on that could revolutionize the world. Not all are in physics of course, but advancements are being made daily. Most of those are just not really exposed to the public because of the increased complexity. It might be a while since we get a new relativity theory, or a Newton's law, but the field still has much to be uncovered.

 

[ILLYRIAN]

Whatever advancements humans can make largely depend on the satellite Apophis, and what its trajectory will change to be in the latter half of April 2029.
At present its speed is stated as 33,000 MPH, it is on course to be in Earth's gravitational field on April the 13th 2029. Depending on what its trajectory becomes will decide if the size of the universe can be deciphered in 50 years time.

 

[thetopher]

Also it depends on scientists realising that the Cthulhu Mythos is actually real! 😛
The stars are almost right!

We are but specks in the winds of chaos my friends. Get used to it. 😀


On an etirely seperate note who too believes that the next big physics breakthrough (of conformation of an existing thoery such of string-theory, fractals, etc.) is maybe about 10 yrs away?
I think it'll come from some hard grafting youngster, theoretical mathematics and a nifty bit of computer coding.

But to be honest, unless we invest in space exploration in a big way, we aren't going to get near any of the bigger universal answers and time soon. 🙁

 

[AnthonyCordova]

A bit off topic but what did you study in college? Most of my classes are science oriented but I took a few anthropology classes, those were a blast!

I studied Philosophy and Comparative Literature in college. I just really like ideas in general. Now I teach while I'm finishing getting my license. I help teach high school English.