The strong atomic forces that hold a nucleus together are roughly one duodecillion times more powerful than gravity

The strong atomic forces that hold a nucleus together are roughly one duodecillion times more powerful than gravity.

Other urls found in this thread:

music.youtube.com/watch?v=ixLT1sKmNVE&feature=share
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

So?

The odds of you being born into the universe were around 1/4^300, yet you're on this website.

You are correct, user. Gravity is the weakest of the four fundamental forces. Now go kill yourself.

If you bombard Earth with photons for a while it will eventually emit a Tesla Roadster.

I dunno. I'm drunk. That's pretty neat. Gravity is the weakest of all forces of nature. Forces are weird altogether I think. In a way they're just like other dimensions pulling on the matter of the dimensions we perceive. The same way energy spreads out infinitely. So does matter but from our perspective it appears to push things together. That's amazing.

But gravity works on cosmic scales while the strong force only works on very tiny scales inside the nucleus.

those tiny scales are what makes up the universe tho

I know. Thing's look very bizarre from our point of view.

I misspoke a bit. Energy spreads out till equilibrium. Not infinitely. Theoretically.

i'd like to think that it will turn out to be our final legacy to some distant alien race. a bitchin' convertible manned by a dummy, basically saying "fuck yeah" to the universe

I'm not familiar with that concept. Could you explain it to me like I'm five years old? Because I'm not a smart man.

Do any of you guys remember symphony of science? That's what I'm listening to now. Link below was always my favorite one. I remember showing it to my physics teacher when I was in high school. He died a few years back though so now it makes me a little sad. My girlfriend who I dated all through high school broke up with me a week before prom but I still decided to go. I tried to have fun but when I saw her dancing with the random dude she ended up going with I just sat in the back by myself. My physics teacher was the only one who came over and sat at the table with me when he saw me looking all pathetic and depressed, tearing up like a bitch. He told me not to worry about it, and that my life was barely starting. He was right. But now I miss him even more than I ever missed her. He was a cool guy. I'm drinking for you tonight, Mr. L.

music.youtube.com/watch?v=ixLT1sKmNVE&feature=share

pls show us on the doll where your physics teacher touched you

Gravity isn't a true force. It is the reactionary "force" of the expansion of our universe.

In every position in space, gluons come into and out of existence and the energy of this interaction is greater than zero. That is the dark energy that is responsible for the expansion.

This phenomenon is strongest in a vacuum. When mass is present, this force is weaker. Gravity is just the lack of this outward force. Because dark energy is the expansions of space, this curves the fabric of spacetime which causes mass to fall towards other masses.

This is why people say gravity is an illusion, but many people don't know the underlying mechanics of it. It took me all of 2017 to even grasp this concept after mulling over it for dozens of hours throughout the year.

The world science festivals of 2015 and 2016 helped me understand this concept.

wut

isn't it more like all those atomic level forces adding up? atoms alone don't amount to much, but bunch enough of them together to form a planet or star and shit starts to happen.

also "dark energy" is just a fancy term for saying "something we don't know yet." soon we will discover the underlying network of the cosmos and realize we've only scratched the surface.

But we do know what it is (theoretically), we just can't measure it on a macro scale. That gluon phenomenon was just recently discovered and still needs to be investigated further.

Regardless, dark energy is "the thing that we don't know, but is causing the expansion of the universe".

In two years when this is common knowledge among moderately educated individuals, I want you to remember this user that talked about it.

Dark energy may be the reason for the expansion but dark energy is ill defined.

...

dark energy dark matter and black holes are fantasies, lern about the electric universe. Thunderbolts of the gods. (search youtube)

Explain it in simple terms if it's so easy.

Thunderbolts of the gods in an electric universe are just fantasy.

Lern about black holes, dark matter(redundant), and dark energy. (search youtube)

Nobody alive today can explain dark matter, dark energy, or black holes in simplistic terms because we don't even know what those things really are.

theories are just plausible sci-fi. maybe it IS like that, but maybe its something completely different we aren't seeing clearly yet.

remember history and all its theories...gravity was once thought of as objects "in love" with the earth. that was once considered insightful.

i think we are on the same track tho as far as dark energy. if there is more to the universe than we can currently account for, obviously there is some other layer or layers to it we are not able to see yet. are these layers equivalent to wormholes? some kind of trans-spacial area where all the junk sucked up by black holes goes? a kind of mouldy basement of the universe? who knows.

Who. Knows.

>In every position in space, gluons come into and out of existence and the energy of this interaction is greater than zero. That is the dark energy that is responsible for the expansion.

Simple terms: Black holes are the result of extremely massive stars folding in on themselves after they die. When mass reaches a critical point of density, it becomes dark matter and it stretches the fabric of spacetime so much that it inverts space and time past the event horizon.

There are literally dozens of seminars from the world science festival explaining these topics with experts from different fields. It's not psuedoscience if it was predicted with mathematics and we are finding new ways to observe these phenomena every year.

Those aren't simple terms. Someone will make a joke about me being a brainlet for saying that, but that is not what it means to explain something in simple terms.

seminars. meaning from people with interesting theories, but not accepted factual evidence.

meaning MAYBE their idea is right. but also maybe there are ten other theories which could also explain the same phenomenon.

also, mathematics is not reliable in and of itself. it needs factual evidence to back it up. without proof, you're just blowing smoke.

Predicted by mathematics and being observed in new ways. We've observed gravity waves from black holes merging after it was predicted by mathematics. We've observed gravitational lensing of black holes after it was predicted by mathematics.

All of this is relatively new stuff, but out tech is catching up to observe and confirm these theories.

In science, a theory is attempting to explain a natural phenomenon with a mountain of evidence. You can't prove theories, but they are being heavily supported with evidence.

Einstein's theory of relativity can never be proven, but we use it for GPS, Spaceflight, and many other aspects because it works and it is supported by evidence of it working.

Ask me to extrapolate anything you don't understand. I can do so at any point of my statement.

I have been into conceptual physics since childhood, so I am familiar with these terms. I understand that these things are not common knowledge.

Expand* wrong word. I am extremely tired.

i get you bro. i'm just saying that the "smart" theories of the moment are not the end all be all of science to base your ideas on. yeah maybe they could point in the right direction, but also maybe not.

some people have been humping super string theory for 40 years. yeah on some level it might make sense, but with lack of evidence to back it up... it doesn't mean shit.

point is there is a lot we don't know. the wise man admits his ignorance. the arrogant child pretends to know everything. which one are you?

isn't that a form of proof?

My view of the world is tentative. I only hold firm what I can conceptually understand and have seen evidence to back it up. If someone comes out with genuinely consistent ideas of how the universe works and can back it up without contradicting or taking leaps of faith, it will convince me to change.

No. It is evidence. Proof would be physically viewing the fabric of spacetime and being able to manipulate it in an experiment while controlling all extraneous variables.