anyone here interested in astronomy or astrophysics. i was just reading yesterday that it is possible for there to be areas of space with negative mass and that these areas can be used to support a wormhole. and also that a casimir effect can create a localized mass-negative area of space-time. physics blows my mind! and that’s why i love it.
“Dark matter” yeah! Supposedly more of that stuff than anything we can actually see! Without it, the universe would probably expand forever and at at some point in the distant future, you would look into the night sky and see…nothing! Everything we see in the night sky currently, would keep (and is) expanding in all directions until they were so far apart form there neighboring celestial bodies, nothing could be seen!
But if there is this mysterious dark matter, then the universe-at some point-billions of years hence, will slow down from the aggregate gravity of all the matter out there, finally collapsing in on itself in one cataclysmic “Big Crunch” , becoming infinitely small once again before the next “Big Bang”! 
scientists have calculated the amount of dark matter in the universe and it still isn’t sufficient enough to slow the expansion of the universe. this expansion is actually speeding up. the dark force has now overpowered gravity. so the universe is doomed to expand forever until even the atoms are ripped apart.
Maybe, maybe not. Luckily, we won’t be around to find out!
A Brief History of Time - Stephen Hawking
The Universe and the Teacup: The Mathematics of Truth and Beauty - K. C. Cole
Awesome books, that even I can read and understand with ease! 
The first one is quite awesome! I haven’t read the other…yet.
I was studying particle physics in college, with an focus on cosmic radiation… unfortunately, this is not a hobby one can keep up with home-made equipment… otherwise I’d have a particle telescope in my backyard 
As for astronomy, I’ve only a passing interest. I’ve been visiting http://www.heavens-above.com/ to learn about man-made objects travelling through space, and how one can watch them (even with a naked eye) with little knowledge of astronomy. I’m hoping it’ll help me become more familiar with constellations.
If anything, I’d like to learn how to navigate using the stars. Won’t do me much good, though, since I don’t have a ship nor any desire to sail. Just a pipe dream.
What is this dark force of which you speak? Dark matter isn’t rumored to exhibit anti-gravity…
How do you make this connection? The force that holds atoms together and the force of gravity are two different things. On the energy scale in which they currently exist, one cannot affect another.
I fear you’ve been reading too much Star Trek. Your “astrophysics” concepts don’t sound quite right.
no i don’t watch too much star trek. lol. einstein’s theory of relativity allows for a force that repels two objects more strongly as the two objects move farther apart. so in a since it’s the opposite of gravity. as far as the atoms being torn apart, the universe is expanding at an ever increasing rate. as this rate continues to increase, even the strogn force is not sufficiently strong enough to hold matter together. this is known as the “big rip.” this site:Endless Void or Big Crunch: How Will the Universe End? | Space
explains it pretty well. wikipedia (i know you all hate that site) also explains teh big rip pretty well.
the show “the universe” which was on the history channel, is an astronoy show that is completely accurate. it means to explain astronomy to the average person. they even have the leading astronomers and astrophysicists on the show explaining things. this show also supports my claims.
I assume you’re talking about Einstein’s theory of general relativity… but I don’t see how that theory would lead to the apparent inversion of Newton’s law of gravitation. Care to elaborate? …and I’m not asking for more links. Why don’t you start by stating Einstein’s theory and showing me the term from which a repulsive force evolves.
This is just a theory. You’re talking as if this is reality… even though you can’t explain why you support the theory.
No, that show supports its own claims. You haven’t made any claims yourself.
the cosmological constant is where we get dark energy.
and how have i not made claims? i talked about dark energy and the big rip. so tell me how i haven’t made any claims.
and i support this thoery because it is the only theory that is mathematically accurate to observations. if we didn’t have dark energy, how would the expansion of the universe be expanding at an ever increasing speed?
[QUOTE=catinabag1]
no i don’t watch too much star trek. lol. einstein’s theory of relativity allows for a force that repels two objects more strongly as the two objects move farther apart. so in a since it’s the opposite of gravity. as far as the atoms being torn apart, the universe is expanding at an ever increasing rate. as this rate continues to increase, even the strogn force is not sufficiently strong enough to hold matter together. this is known as the “big rip.” this site:http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/big_rip_030306.html
explains it pretty well. wikipedia (i know you all hate that site) also explains teh big rip pretty well.
QUOTE]
From one of “The Big Rip” articles on the web:
“The speculative but serious cosmology is described as a “pretty fantastic possibility” even by its lead author, Robert Caldwell of Dartmouth University.”
Note that the word “fantastic” is closely related to the noun “fantasy”.
As Maestro suggests: you need to rein in your enthusiasm for some of the more speculative ideas in science, and you certainly need to understand rather more of your subjects before making some of your wilder statements in print. There are too many very knowledgeable readers in here, as you found with your recent and unfortunate venture into simple maths.
Keep your enthusiasm for the subjects, but stay rather better grounded.
Nao
actually that article was posted several years ago. this theory is now the accepted theory of the universe’s death. check the dates on things before you use them.
and as for the math, the peole that were against me don’t understand the math i was using. so before people criticize, you need to understand.
THE accepted theory?? There you go again. It remains ONE THEORY. I don’t know how popular that theory has become in the 5 or so years since the article. Is it now “the most widely accepted theory”? If so perhaps you could provide a reliable reference supporting that?
As for the Maths: I read through the thread. The complex number arithmetic that you involved (for no good reason) is very simple. The “people against you” Nico, JayS etc seem very much to know their subject. I cannot fault their analysis. It looks as if you may have made a simple mathematical error down near the 2+2=4 level.
Nao
actually there is a good reason why i involved complex numbers, to show that there are more numbers than 0 and 2 that have the discussed properties. and actually the math behind solving the correct equation that gives you an infinite number of answers is very complex. if it’s so easy i would like to see you solve it. and yes it is possible. my calculus teacher, ironically enough, showed us this proof in class after finals.
So far catinabag seems to have maths, physics and homosexuality solved.
Would you care to tackle world peace or climate change next?
Just before your nap you understand.
The Shift key?
Would you be so kind as to publish your teacher’s proof in full here.
I cannot prove something that is fundamentally incorrect, neither can you, and it will be interesting to see your calculus teacher try to prove the impossible.
Meanwhile: you suggested that 2 +2i is a solution . So, making this as easy as possible for you:
if x=2+2i 2*x =4 +4i
and x squared = 22 + 2i2i + 22i +22i
= 4 +4(i*i) +4i +4i ( i squared being equal to minus 1)
= 4 -4 + 8i
= 8i
As 4+4i does not equal 8i , your solution is in error. (as JayS has already said)
If 2+2i was not one of your infinite number of complex solutions: please tell us one that is and we will happily demonstrate that to be incorrect as well.
Nao
Perhaps “the math you are using” isn’t math after all… do you really understand what you are doing?
After studying physics for four years, I realized there is so much I don’t know, and I may never know, that I should never assume that I fully understand something.
If you claim to understand something, then you haven’t studied it long enough to appreciate the subtleties therein.
I agree and thoroughly enjoy that program, and I try never to miss an installment; if I can’t be home then I record it.
Reminded me of this quote: