Garja wrote:Considering the fact that the universe keeps expanding it is infinitely small.
Considering the fact that the universe is finite right now, and will always stay finite, it is finitely small garja.
Is it? Anyway it still is incedibly small despite all tge combination of factors. The scale of the universe is just too big to be any probable that there is just one planet with life.
Yes its finite.
It's just a speculation as well, you can't without a doubt for sure as you would say 2+2=4, that universe is finite or infinite for that reason. All we know is that universe is much bigger than the observable universe. Well then there's also this theory that universe is actually very small shaped like a football with mirrors creating an illusion of infinite space.
Garja wrote:I'm frankly rather ignorant to this (never been too interested) but why they say it keeps expanding then?
As far as I understand it, the space is expanding, but not the stuff in it. A good metaphor is imagine a deflated balloon, then you put a bunch of dots on it. As you inflate the balloon, the dots get further and further from each other as the space between them expands, but no more dots are actually added.
The theory is actually that energy in universe remains constant, not the matter, new stars are being born and old one keeps doing. Infact right now there are more stars than there were earlier and they will continue to grow for some time
Garja wrote:I'm frankly rather ignorant to this (never been too interested) but why they say it keeps expanding then?
As far as I understand it, the space is expanding, but not the stuff in it. A good metaphor is imagine a deflated balloon, then you put a bunch of dots on it. As you inflate the balloon, the dots get further and further from each other as the space between them expands, but no more dots are actually added.
The theory is actually that energy in universe remains constant, not the matter, new stars are being born and old one keeps doing. Infact right now there are more stars than there were earlier and they will continue to grow for some time
princeofcarthage wrote:Your link wrong btw. Anyways mass and matter are 2 different things. You are confused
Mass and matter are not 2 different things. Matter is essentially defined as anything that has mass. The amount of matter something has is described by it's mass. As mass is also a descriptor of energy, all of it becomes conserved within the universe as energy cannot be created or destroyed.
“To love the journey is to accept no such end. I have found, through painful experience, that the most important step a person can take is always the next one.”
Sigh, and we all wonder why Chineese are taking up the world now. I am bored to explain that in detail but you should really search or re-read your class 4, class 7 n class 8 books to know how different they really are
princeofcarthage wrote:Sigh, and we all wonder why Chineese are taking up the world now. I am bored to explain that in detail but you should really search or re-read your class 4, class 7 n class 8 books to know how different they really are
I think we understand the relative nuances that they are not the same as one is a substance and one is a quantitative property of said substance but in an online forum in which most people may or may not have completed high school physics and chemistry then I feel that it is easy enough to call them the same thing. Next time I'll be more be articulate in putting forth my opinion
“To love the journey is to accept no such end. I have found, through painful experience, that the most important step a person can take is always the next one.”
Garja wrote:Considering the fact that the universe keeps expanding it is infinitely small.
Considering the fact that the universe is finite right now, and will always stay finite, it is finitely small garja.
Is it? Anyway it still is incedibly small despite all tge combination of factors. The scale of the universe is just too big to be any probable that there is just one planet with life.
Yes its finite.
It's just a speculation as well, you can't without a doubt for sure as you would say 2+2=4, that universe is finite or infinite for that reason. All we know is that universe is much bigger than the observable universe. Well then there's also this theory that universe is actually very small shaped like a football with mirrors creating an illusion of infinite space.
Well actually einstein first added a constant (cosmological constant, nowadays taken to represent dark energy funnily enough) so that his proposed universe could be stable and infinite. Calculations however showed that it would not be stable. Its what Einstein has called his biggest error.
Anyhow, the big bang theory is well established. The cosmic microwave background radiation gives what is extremely close to proof.
princeofcarthage wrote:Sigh, and we all wonder why Chineese are taking up the world now. I am bored to explain that in detail but you should really search or re-read your class 4, class 7 n class 8 books to know how different they really are
But they're related and proportional things.
Matter is "anything which takes up space and has mass" and mass is "the measure of matter."
I'm just saying the conservation of energy is akin to saying the conservation of mass which is akin to saying the conservation of matter.
princeofcarthage wrote:Sigh, and we all wonder why Chineese are taking up the world now. I am bored to explain that in detail but you should really search or re-read your class 4, class 7 n class 8 books to know how different they really are
princeofcarthage wrote:Sigh, and we all wonder why Chineese are taking up the world now. I am bored to explain that in detail but you should really search or re-read your class 4, class 7 n class 8 books to know how different they really are
But they're related and proportional things.
Matter is "anything which takes up space and has mass" and mass is "the measure of matter."
I'm just saying the conservation of energy is akin to saying the conservation of mass which is akin to saying the conservation of matter.
Well, but that's not really true? That's kinda the problem, isn't it? Or well, the part that conservation of energy is akin to conservation of mass, because the latter is a specific case of the former basically. Energy is conserved for example when an electron and positron particle colide while mass is not.
"Mass" has two different definitions between Newtonian and relativistic physics. Everything is straight forward with Newton, but in SR I guess total mass, M, of a system is a function of the total energy of a system and the 3 (or 4?) dimension momentum vectors of the system. (And I guess this is just invariant mass, the same for all observers in all frames, but there is also a mass called relativistic mass which is dependent on the velocity of the observer?) Total invariant mass, by this definition, still must be conserved, but it is more a function. So in annihilation, where matter seemingly disintegrates (I guess), total mass, M, is yet conserved because the matter becomes photon momentum. In that way, mass is not strictly matter. My mistake was to assume the Newtonian definition of mass and substitute it into a SR equation and then talk out of my ass like a circus mule.
I must have forgotten to read my class 4, 7, and 8 textbooks!
