"Strange" SETI@Home Signal.

Grumlen · Post by **Grumlen** » Fri Sep 10, 2004 6:06 am

The only thing we really know about the universe as a whole right now is that it is expanding. Faster.

It's a neat point that every single location in the universe is the center of the universe, and everything is expanding away from it. The thing that scientists can't figure out, though, is the fact that the speed at which the universe is expanding is increasing. This fact completely destroys the "Great Collapse/Big Bang" theory as it renders the possibility of the Great Collapse impossible. At least as far as we can tell.

And yes, I know that I just gave fuel to several of the egos around, but even they are also the center of the universe. Just like me. Just like this cup of water. Just like this spec of dust. Just like Mew Guy. Just like . . .

As for the whole multiple/infinite universes thing, theres really no way we could determine the validity of those hypotheses with the technology we have. All we can do for now is theory at best, and while theory does occasionally lead to great discoveries, 99% of the time it's wrong. Like when people said you could never break the sound barrier or that atoms were a large block of matter (instead of a very condensed ball with electrons floating around it).

Post by **Blaze** » Fri Sep 10, 2004 7:02 am

This fact completely destroys the "Great Collapse/Big Bang" theory as it renders the possibility of the Great Collapse impossible. At least as far as we can tell.

I had read/seen that supposedly, all signs point to the difference between the universe continuing to expand, or to slow down, stop, and recontract being way way way too close to call right now.

Grumlen · Post by **Grumlen** » Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:59 pm

Meh, I think I'll trust my old Modern Phys Prof with his Ph.D. in Astronomy.

Post by **Martin Blank** » Fri Sep 10, 2004 6:05 pm

Ask him about the current measured value of Hubble's Constant, which is what defines if the universe is open (continues expanding forever), closed (will expand to a point and then collapse under its own gravity), or bounded (will expand to a point and stop). Right now, it's so finely balanced that (according to an old physics professor) it's like balancing a dime on edge on a dime on edge. There is still enough uncertainty in the measurements that it could tip either way, as the value has to be exactly 1 to be bounded, but then anything off from its actual value (whatever it turns out to be) would have resulted in a very different outcome for the universe.

Deacon · Post by **Deacon** » Fri Sep 10, 2004 6:18 pm

I'm no astrophysicist by any stretch, but it seems like the various galaxies and such are so far separated that I can't imagine the universe "will expaind to a point andthen collapse under its own gravity", which is exactly as its been explained to me many times. And I know it's dangerous to go looking for patterns where none exist, but I think it's pretty friggin cool that the universe is "so finely balanced", perhaps a rather stark sign of a higher power involved in its creation and maintenance

randomperson2 · Post by **randomperson2** » Fri Sep 10, 2004 6:35 pm

And even if it did collapse it would be at a point so far in the future and the rate of collapse would be so infinately slow that I do believe we will have effectively killed each other off long before it happens.

And if I am wrong ill be dead so I won't be complaining

Grumlen · Post by **Grumlen** » Fri Sep 10, 2004 7:29 pm

Umm, Martin, Hubbles Constant isn't a proportion. It's the velocity of the spread of the universe with respect to distance. The units for it are km/s per 1,000,000 light years. Unless this constant drops below 0, then the universe is still expanding. It's also worth noting that because of this constant we've determind that the universe is between 10 and 20 billion years old. The reason for the discrepancy is that light takes time to travel and we don't know what could be affecting the path of light as it travels across the universe.

BTW, the value of hubble's constant is estimated to be 71+/-4. While this number is believed to be slowly decreasing over time, in support of the great collapse theory, they don't know for certain and we will probably never be able to know for sure. To me, the simple fact that galaxies further away are moving away from us more quickly as they get farther away seems to indicate to me that they are accelerating. If it was just a matter of gravity, then they should be slowing down. Obviously it isn't, and to the best of my knowledge scientists don't know what could be causing this acceleration.

Post by **Blaze** » Fri Sep 10, 2004 7:46 pm

Obviously it isn't, and to the best of my knowledge scientists don't know what could be causing this acceleration.

Again, your knowledge seems to be about 10 years behind modern Astronomical Physics. The fact that it IS still spreading appears to be the result of dark matter, in that Einstien's "greatest failure" turned out to apparently be right after all.

Deacon · Post by **Deacon** » Fri Sep 10, 2004 7:46 pm

The universe's struggle to get away from us as fast as possible?

randomperson2 · Post by **randomperson2** » Fri Sep 10, 2004 8:05 pm

[quote="Deacon";p="395035"]The universe's struggle to get away from us as fast as possible?

[/quote]

Wow, it almost pains me to say this but this one made me laugh.

Grumlen · Post by **Grumlen** » Fri Sep 10, 2004 8:58 pm

We're guessing that dark matter is causing it, but we really have no idea what dark matter actually IS or what it's properties are. At this point it's all theory and guess-work.

Post by **Martin Blank** » Fri Sep 10, 2004 9:04 pm

[quote="Deacon";p="394982"]And I know it's dangerous to go looking for patterns where none exist, but I think it's pretty friggin cool that the universe is "so finely balanced", perhaps a rather stark sign of a higher power involved in its creation and maintenance

[/quote]
Galaxies actually tend to cluster. Think of a sponge -- it's mostly hollow, with relatively delicate structures filling in some of the space. If you could shrink the universe down, you would see tendrils and islands of stars and galaxies all connected together. Lots of patterns and structures, and they all work on each other at various strengths.

[quote="Grumlen";p="395027"]Umm, Martin, Hubbles Constant isn't a proportion. It's the velocity of the spread of the universe with respect to distance. The units for it are km/s per 1,000,000 light years.[/quote]
Sorry, you're right. I was thinking of the cosmological constant, and it doesn't center around one, but zero (it's currently ever-so-slightly positive at a maximum of 3 x 10^-52/m^2). That's what I get for putting down my cosmology books for so long.

[quote="Blaze";p="395034"]Again, your knowledge seems to be about 10 years behind modern Astronomical Physics. The fact that it IS still spreading appears to be the result of dark matter, in that Einstien's "greatest failure" turned out to apparently be right after all.[/quote]
Dark energy pushes the universe out. Dark matter is holding it back. It's where unexplained gravity comes from. Einstein's "greatest failure" was, actually, the cosmological constant, which he added into his work to make it fit then-current observations that suggested a static universe. He may have been onto something -- it's still under debate.

Nekra · Post by **Nekra** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 10:27 am

read somewhere that they think they found evidence life once lived on mars, and if thats the case chances are we would find it hard to find a planet capable of sustaining us which didn't already have life on it, of cause whether this life is sentient or not would be a different matter

XenoWolf · Post by **XenoWolf** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 12:12 pm

One article I read mentioned that the signal was found repeated times in the same area, suggesting a 'beacon'-type transmission. Whether this report was authentic or not is uknown, as I can't find the site in my history (I got it in a link someone sent me over AIM).

Wite_Rabit · Post by **Wite_Rabit** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 10:08 pm

Xeno has a point, in the original link in this thread, it suggests that they recieved the SAME signal from different points within a certain area. Beacon, indeed..

I very much would like to follow up on this. Maybe the signals are following a.. flight path of some kind. That perhaps we should be pointed along a projected route to recieve the signal again.

My personal theory is that (as far as the Big Crunch goes) as more stars collapse into black holes rather than white dwarfs, more black holes will be tugging at matter. Once the matter has been sucked up by the various black holes, they'll start to pull each other, n'est pas? I figure that's where everything is going in billions upon billions of years. *shrug*

Err, wasn't Easter the anniversary of that Jesus guy's death?

Also, as far as transmitting on the Hydrogen frequency - the tighter the wavelengths, the farther and faster it would travel, yes? Assuming I remember right, it would be far more.. Well, it would make more sense to send at 1430mghz than at the frequency of a rap station - 102.5mghz. Although cellular tops out under 900mghz as we have it now, maybe ETs broadcast the location of their ships at 1430. Anything is possible. At least, that's what I think.

Real Life Forums

"Strange" SETI@Home Signal.

Who is online