#51
|
|||
|
|||
Maybe our entire universe or (sub-universe) is actually revolving around
something much bigger in a super-universe. Therefore making the stars look as if they aren't moving, when in actuallity everything we see is moving. But then again, does it really matter? We have to understand our own universe. Maybe we're expanding into the super-universe. "Bill Sheppard" wrote in message ... ....the answer remains the same - there is no center, there is no edge. Example - define the center and/or edge of the surface of a sphere. The analogy applies to the sphere of our visible cosmos. But who's to say our visible cosmos isn't simply embedded in a larger, flowing Process? As in the refrigeration cycle analogy, a cluster of freon molecules embedded in the flow felt the 'bang' of its sudden expansion as it flashed to a gas. Eventually it'll feel the 'crunch' of being re-ingested back into the compressor. Not subject to empirical proof? Well, the notion that our visible cosmos is an accurate, universal model of "all that is" is likewise pure philosophy, as is the void-space paradigm. oc Anti-spam address: oldcoot88atwebtv.net Change 'at' to@ |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
the term is mutiverse i beleive it has been hypothesized
Darrell wrote: Maybe our entire universe or (sub-universe) is actually revolving around something much bigger in a super-universe. Therefore making the stars look as if they aren't moving, when in actuallity everything we see is moving. But then again, does it really matter? We have to understand our own universe. Maybe we're expanding into the super-universe. "Bill Sheppard" wrote in message ... ....the answer remains the same - there is no center, there is no edge. Example - define the center and/or edge of the surface of a sphere. The analogy applies to the sphere of our visible cosmos. But who's to say our visible cosmos isn't simply embedded in a larger, flowing Process? As in the refrigeration cycle analogy, a cluster of freon molecules embedded in the flow felt the 'bang' of its sudden expansion as it flashed to a gas. Eventually it'll feel the 'crunch' of being re-ingested back into the compressor. Not subject to empirical proof? Well, the notion that our visible cosmos is an accurate, universal model of "all that is" is likewise pure philosophy, as is the void-space paradigm. oc Anti-spam address: oldcoot88atwebtv.net Change 'at' to@ |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
the term is mutiverse i beleive it has been hypothesized
Darrell wrote: Maybe our entire universe or (sub-universe) is actually revolving around something much bigger in a super-universe. Therefore making the stars look as if they aren't moving, when in actuallity everything we see is moving. But then again, does it really matter? We have to understand our own universe. Maybe we're expanding into the super-universe. "Bill Sheppard" wrote in message ... ....the answer remains the same - there is no center, there is no edge. Example - define the center and/or edge of the surface of a sphere. The analogy applies to the sphere of our visible cosmos. But who's to say our visible cosmos isn't simply embedded in a larger, flowing Process? As in the refrigeration cycle analogy, a cluster of freon molecules embedded in the flow felt the 'bang' of its sudden expansion as it flashed to a gas. Eventually it'll feel the 'crunch' of being re-ingested back into the compressor. Not subject to empirical proof? Well, the notion that our visible cosmos is an accurate, universal model of "all that is" is likewise pure philosophy, as is the void-space paradigm. oc Anti-spam address: oldcoot88atwebtv.net Change 'at' to@ |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
thanks for info. mutiverse
"matthewwinston" wrote in message ... the term is mutiverse i beleive it has been hypothesized Darrell wrote: Maybe our entire universe or (sub-universe) is actually revolving around something much bigger in a super-universe. Therefore making the stars look as if they aren't moving, when in actuallity everything we see is moving. But then again, does it really matter? We have to understand our own universe. Maybe we're expanding into the super-universe. "Bill Sheppard" wrote in message ... ....the answer remains the same - there is no center, there is no edge. Example - define the center and/or edge of the surface of a sphere. The analogy applies to the sphere of our visible cosmos. But who's to say our visible cosmos isn't simply embedded in a larger, flowing Process? As in the refrigeration cycle analogy, a cluster of freon molecules embedded in the flow felt the 'bang' of its sudden expansion as it flashed to a gas. Eventually it'll feel the 'crunch' of being re-ingested back into the compressor. Not subject to empirical proof? Well, the notion that our visible cosmos is an accurate, universal model of "all that is" is likewise pure philosophy, as is the void-space paradigm. oc Anti-spam address: oldcoot88atwebtv.net Change 'at' to@ |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
thanks for info. mutiverse
"matthewwinston" wrote in message ... the term is mutiverse i beleive it has been hypothesized Darrell wrote: Maybe our entire universe or (sub-universe) is actually revolving around something much bigger in a super-universe. Therefore making the stars look as if they aren't moving, when in actuallity everything we see is moving. But then again, does it really matter? We have to understand our own universe. Maybe we're expanding into the super-universe. "Bill Sheppard" wrote in message ... ....the answer remains the same - there is no center, there is no edge. Example - define the center and/or edge of the surface of a sphere. The analogy applies to the sphere of our visible cosmos. But who's to say our visible cosmos isn't simply embedded in a larger, flowing Process? As in the refrigeration cycle analogy, a cluster of freon molecules embedded in the flow felt the 'bang' of its sudden expansion as it flashed to a gas. Eventually it'll feel the 'crunch' of being re-ingested back into the compressor. Not subject to empirical proof? Well, the notion that our visible cosmos is an accurate, universal model of "all that is" is likewise pure philosophy, as is the void-space paradigm. oc Anti-spam address: oldcoot88atwebtv.net Change 'at' to@ |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Err, multiverse.
typo exterminator now activated Darrell wrote: thanks for info. mutiverse "matthewwinston" wrote in message ... the term is mutiverse i beleive it has been hypothesized Darrell wrote: |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Err, multiverse.
typo exterminator now activated Darrell wrote: thanks for info. mutiverse "matthewwinston" wrote in message ... the term is mutiverse i beleive it has been hypothesized Darrell wrote: |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Breakthrough in Cosmology | Kazmer Ujvarosy | SETI | 8 | May 26th 04 04:45 PM |
Breakthrough in Cosmology | Kazmer Ujvarosy | Space Shuttle | 3 | May 22nd 04 09:07 AM |
Breakthrough in Cosmology | Kazmer Ujvarosy | Astronomy Misc | 3 | May 22nd 04 08:07 AM |
Breakthrough in Cosmology | Kazmer Ujvarosy | Space Station | 0 | May 21st 04 08:02 AM |
Breakthrough in Cosmology | Kazmer Ujvarosy | Policy | 0 | May 21st 04 08:00 AM |