Isn't our sun set to burn out in about 12,000 years? It won't supernova because it's not big enough, but it will expand first, taking out the nearest couple of planets (and possibly earth) before collapsing and becoming a...red dwarf or white elf or green ogre or whatever it's called

So that'll mean in 1M years the earth will strongly resemble today's Neptune in terms of climate.

What a cheerful holiday thought

Quote from tristancliffe :

We don't know every galaxy has a black hole in the middle. We don't know for sure than any have. All we know is that something doesn't quite add up in the middle with our existing knowledge. But then you get onto Dark Matter, p-branes, string and superstring theory; and you realise that an answer like 'there is a black hole in the middle' cannot in all probability be correct.

Will the blackhole, if it exists, consume the Milky Way? Who knows? Is the orbit of the galaxy declining or increasing (i.e. will it fly apart or be consumed).

The Discovery Channel takes very complicated facts, breaks them down to simple sections, lies a bit, uses fancy made-up graphics, and then people believe it. Don't - it's a channel for stupid people. By all means watch it, and learn about new things, but never take what they say as 'The Truth'.

i watched on bbc learning channel.They were making visual observations and did see it.(of course you can't see it but can understand that it is there by looking at the things around it.)

And isn't it obvious that there should be something there with incredible mass and gravity to keep the galaxy spining around? look at the shape of a galaxy.Anyone would easily realise that there's something in the middle pulling everything towards itself.

and, http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2000/ast29feb_1m.htm take a look at this pls.

and this : http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6937

I like watching discovery channel, but not stupid. And i don't like ppl calling everyone stupid.

Quote from Dajmin :

Isn't our sun set to burn out in about 12,000 years?

it's supposed to be a lot more than that: http://ask.yahoo.com/20040121.html

Quote from Dajmin :

Isn't our sun set to burn out in about 12,000 years? It won't supernova because it's not big enough, but it will expand first, taking out the nearest couple of planets (and possibly earth) before collapsing and becoming a...red dwarf or white elf or green ogre or whatever it's called

So that'll mean in 1M years the earth will strongly resemble today's Neptune in terms of climate.

What a cheerful holiday thought

Check this up : http://ds9.ssl.berkeley.edu/solarweek/DISCUSSION/howold.html
And maybe this:
http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/StarLife/oldsun.html

One of your links says Sag A is a quasar. Another says Sag A is the Black Hole. It justs shows that although a few people have a few theories about it, no one knows with anything approaching certainty what is there.

No, it's not obvious that there is something of huge mass. Obviously there is huge mass towards the middle, but nothing to say it's a single entity. Why can't it be lots of stars orbiting each other very very fast.

Why don't you like people calling everyone stupid? A lot of people ARE stupid, and the number of stupid people increases every year. To deny that 'the masses' are stupid would be to assume that everyone is clever and intelligent, something that any newspaper would dispel in seconds.

If it was obvious, why hadn't Black Holes been 'invented' 100 years ago? And why do a lot of respected scientists even deny their possible existence. Sure, a lot of it is caused by people not liking change, but even then there is less weight behind the concept of Black Holes than there should be in this day and age. Nothing is certain, and a BBC Learning Show has almost no authority on the subject. I don't claim to either, but I recognise that Black Holes are still mostly theoretical in nature. Who's to say the theory is wrong and there isn't a giant Christmas Cake in the center of the universe?

Quote from tristancliffe :

One of your links says Sag A is a quasar. Another says Sag A is the Black Hole. It justs shows that although a few people have a few theories about it, no one knows with anything approaching certainty what is there.

No, it's not obvious that there is something of huge mass. Obviously there is huge mass towards the middle, but nothing to say it's a single entity. Why can't it be lots of stars orbiting each other very very fast.

Why don't you like people calling everyone stupid? A lot of people ARE stupid, and the number of stupid people increases every year. To deny that 'the masses' are stupid would be to assume that everyone is clever and intelligent, something that any newspaper would dispel in seconds.

If it was obvious, why hadn't Black Holes been 'invented' 100 years ago? And why do a lot of respected scientists even deny their possible existence. Sure, a lot of it is caused by people not liking change, but even then there is less weight behind the concept of Black Holes than there should be in this day and age. Nothing is certain, and a BBC Learning Show has almost no authority on the subject. I don't claim to either, but I recognise that Black Holes are still mostly theoretical in nature. Who's to say the theory is wrong and there isn't a giant Christmas Cake in the center of the universe?

I bet you don't know what a black hole is?

ok there's no black hole. and i won't beleive until someone brings it here and show me. now i'm a respectful man aren't i?

I was going to show you my black hole but I put it in my pocket this morning and it ate my trousers. Now I'm just wearing anti-matter

Oh yeah, 4 or 5 billion years is a bit longer than 12k. But it's all the same to me

Quote from ZORER :

Do you mean black hole?

every galaxy has a black hole at the very center of them. And those blackholes eat their galaxies.A time will come that our blackhole will eat all the milkyway. but that's far far far than a million year.

And yes, noone would survive that unless moving to another universe.



i luv discovery chnl.

I didn't mean black holes no. However, at the centre of a black hole there is also a singularity. Maybe the centre of black holes contain unborn universes - who knows

Ok then here's one for the 'masses':The Universe is a giant atom.
Because Homer Simpson was there, he tod me

The best question of all: If the universe is a descriptive word for 'everything' and it is expanding, what is it expanding into?

Quote from Gentlefoot :

The best question of all: If the universe is a descriptive word for 'everything' and it is expanding, what is it expanding into?

Erm! matter, maybe

Quote from CSU1 :

Erm! matter, maybe

But all matter is part of the universe.

It reminds me of that 'The Universe is just a giant Turtle' thing. Let's say the universe is a giant turtle. If so, what is the giant turtle standing on? Another turtle maybe? OK so what is that turtle standing on? This touches on the concept of inifinity and the question I was asking. i.e. What is the universe expanding into?

Quote from Gentlefoot :

But all matter is part of the universe.

Yep, and so are doughnuts, but thats another story.
I bet that this Universe is like Orions Belt in M.I.B, and we all are playthings for a higher entity:jawdrop:

Quote from Gentlefoot :

I was asking. i.e. What is the universe expanding into?

Hmm, it'd keep expanding until it is so big that even light will not be able to reach from one point to another point.So can we call it an absolute "nothing"

Or maybe expand and swallow other universes around. A universe containing other universes. Call it "master of the universes" ?

Or will it slow down instead of speeding up it's expansion and stop and start shrinking to another big bang?



Add : http://www.co-intelligence.org/newsletter/comparisons.html

:sadbanana: ok this is going waaaay too far, its big very bloody big, how big,where it ends, where it stops NOONE knows not even todays most funky scientests! so today,here on http:\\www.lfsforums.net we aint gonna come to a conclusion because of tristancliffs masses'

The universe is merely the physical plane of existence of a pan-dimensional super being that some would call god. We, collectively, are individualisms of the consciousness of this being - a result of its need to experience everything it possibly can in the physical world before the bodies expire and the individualisms return to the natural state of existence of all living things, which is as a single consciousness comprising all that is and also isn't. Our bodies are vessels that we inhabit as we remember, through our physical lifetimes, how to make a connection with the single consciousness that we, in fact, are. Beings of light we are! Not this...crude matter


As for a million years from now, well...if this species hasn't exterminated itself we may well have already achieved the crucial paradigm shift from animal motivations & instincts: "destroy enemies, make offspring, consume" to purer, simpler thoughts worthy of a higher life-form: "be, learn, grow, search, do no harm" and could be doing very well for ourselves. Or maybe we'll all be ninja space robots with jetpacks and badass lasers and shit and cruise around vaping space aliens

Quote from ZORER :

Hmm, it'd keep expanding until it is so big that even light will not be able to reach from one point to another point.So can we call it an absolute "nothing"

Or maybe expand and swallow other universes around. A universe containing other universes. Call it "master of the universes" ?

Or will it slow down instead of speeding up it's expansion and stop and start shrinking to another big bang?



Add : http://www.co-intelligence.org/newsletter/comparisons.html

...but as we understand it the universe contains all matter yes? So if there is no matter outside the universe what is it expanding into? And even if the expansion slowed down, it's still expanding right now right? So I ask again, into what? Nothing right? So nothing must be something!

You see the problem.

I nearly went mad thinking about this stuff about 4 years ago. If you're like me and you have to understand WHY things are the way they are then you'd be wise to avoid this topic areas altogether.

i understand what you say Gentlefoot.

and you'r right Csu.


Maybe after 1.000.000 years, we'll be clever enough to understand what's in and beyond the universe.

Quote from CSU1 :

I bet you don't know what a black hole is?

I'm willing to bet I have as good an idea as most, if not all, people here. Unless we have a very talented, famous theoretical physisist in our ranks it's doubtful we'll get any more accurate.

The next question is do YOU know what a black hole is?

You are welcome to believe there is a black hole at the centre of every galaxy, but I can't do that until there is conclusive proof that black holes exist in the first place. Whilst it's likely they exist, the proof (or rather lack of dis-proof) isn't conclusive. Our understanding of such things is rather poor. WE can just about theorise about event horizon's, but as black holes do not 'obey' classical physics, and we have no idea what gravity is or how it effects other things, then describing behaviour it becomes a bit of a guessing game.

Quote from ZORER :

i understand what you say Gentlefoot.

and you'r right Csu.


Maybe after 1.000.000 years, we'll be clever enough to understand what's in and beyond the universe.

I know I am.

btw: you do know that your post reads after one year we will be clever enough too understand the Universe

@ Tristan; yeah! it's all bullshit really if you think about it as much as Gentlefoot has
Dont worry next year Zorer will be able to tell us Tristan

No it doesn't. A lot of countries use . where we use ,, so 1.000.000 is a million. If you are going to be part of the internet culture you'll have to learn things like this

2 hours later i'll be getting drunk :drink::rock_band:woohoo:

CSU1's definitive guide to the universe:

Quote from CSU1 :

its very bloody big

Case closed

Quote from tristancliffe :

I'm willing to bet I have as good an idea as most, if not all, people here. Unless we have a very talented, famous theoretical physisist in our ranks it's doubtful we'll get any more accurate.

The next question is do YOU know what a black hole is?

You are welcome to believe there is a black hole at the centre of every galaxy, but I can't do that until there is conclusive proof that black holes exist in the first place. Whilst it's likely they exist, the proof (or rather lack of dis-proof) isn't conclusive. Our understanding of such things is rather poor. WE can just about theorise about event horizon's, but as black holes do not 'obey' classical physics, and we have no idea what gravity is or how it effects other things, then describing behaviour it becomes a bit of a guessing game.

Unfortunately if our theories about black holes are correct. i.e. they are so dense that not even light can escape their gravitational pull, we can never prove their existence because of the uncertainty principle. This principle states that objects in the universe behave differently when in contact with photons. As we need photons to be able to examine things (cos we cannot see them without) we can never observe a black hole and therefore never prove their existence.

A bit like not knowing if the fridge light goes off when we shut the door lol