What is the greatest/mysterious phenomenon?

[GoldShadow]

Cereal. It makes eating easy and quick for us cooking-impaired people.

Seriously though, I'd agree with a bunch of the things others have already said, no point in repeating th em.

 

[plasmawisp6633]

Cereal. It makes eating easy and quick for us cooking-impaired people.

Cereal is probably one of the most amazing things on this earth. My question is, why does it only work with milk? They need cold cereal (that rules out oatmeal) that you can make with water, so I don't have to keep buying gallons of 2% milk.

 

[mario-man]

Whole Milk FTW

 

[Jabroni]

Death. Like what goes on there it's full of questions.

 

[Vulpine51]

The Chans. 4chan, 7chan, ect. They're like the "black holes" of the internet. Except the only thing they suck up is crap.

 

[omfgomfg]

vulpine be glad that crap isn't being distributed around everywhere since those sites are sucking it u~oh wait..

 

[_Phloat_]

Cereal is probably one of the most amazing things on this earth. My question is, why does it only work with milk? They need cold cereal (that rules out oatmeal) that you can make with water, so I don't have to keep buying gallons of 2% milk.

Cereal works with Dr Pepper, no questions asked

 

[Sephiroth M]

The meaning of life.

 

[Blackadder]

Actually, another amazing thing.

Women.

'Nuff said.

 

[psicicle]

But string theory is all technically just mathematical conjecture with no scientific support, because all the things theorized in it cannot be tested by experiment. Basically string theory is just Mathematicians' way of perpetuating their status quo, their way of keeping students busy, and their way of seeming like they're still useful to society. And the fact that it catches on like a religion in which the people who most believe [ i.e. the students and teachers] are the people most deceived-- THAT, my friends, is phenomenal.


Well, my physics teacher, although she was a total flake, said that scientists broke the speed of light by accelerating photons in some environment which was conveniently unable to be reproduced, and for a moment I believed her. I wanted to believe her. But now I think she might have been lying.
And there's no logical reason for sound to set the universal speed limit, since sound is just vibration.

However, the speed of gravity is a perplexing idea. Since matter has never been created, the speed of gravity is unknown, and it may very well be infinite, instantly taking effect when matter is introduced into space [like the speed of darkness]. But if we could convert energy into matter as E=mc^2 declares possible...we might be able to discover the speed of gravity.

sombody might have said this but the spped of gravity is the same as the speed of light. People are confusing the causation here, because the universal speed limit is whatever it is, light can only go that fast because by it's nature it moves as fast as it is possible to move.

Also, string theory does not have scientific support yet. THe problem so far that I am aware of is that nobody can do the math to get the exact equations and right now only approximations can be used. Other problems such as finding the correct calabi yau space also are unsolved. The thing is, I doubt that most string theorists believe that string theory is definitly true, I think that they believe that is is the most likely theory we have so far.

Also, you dont have to create matter to test the speed of gravity. You can just move an object and see how much delay another object some distance away has on "feeling" the gravity. For example, you could decide to move the sun away, but since the speed of light (and gravity) is what it is, the earth won't notive that the sun has moved for 8 minutes.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

I don't see what's so difficult about this question, it's the egg... duh

2 reasons why:

Creatures that used eggs to reproduced were around before chickens

If you are talking about a chicken egg, according to evolution the egg came first because it came from 2 non-chicken parents whose DNA would kind of mix to create the first chicken egg, which hatched into a chicken.

Also, black holes don't have infinite density, zero volume or infinite mass. THe universe does not deal in any of these. All a black hole is is a mass of enough density so that things like light can get so close to the center that they cannot escape. This comes from the inverse square law of gravity. Everything has a certain radius at which it becomes a black hole. For example, if the Earth were compressed into the size of a pea, it would become a black hole. Finite, non-zero mass, density and volume.

 

[Varuna]

I think this thread has turned into nothing but "amirite" post.

 

[Tundravalco]

G-Regulate. thread over.

 

[GoldShadow]

sombody might have said this but the spped of gravity is the same as the speed of light.

Gravity doesn't really have a speed, it's a force whose strength increases proportionally with the mass of an object. On earth, it happens to be 9.8 m/s/s.

 

[psicicle]

Gravity doesn't really have a speed, it's a force whose strength increases proportionally with the mass of an object. On earth, it happens to be 9.8 m/s/s.

No, that is the speed at which gravity affects the velocity of an object, the force itself goes at the speed of light. The earth is affected by the sun's gravity. If you took away the sun, the earth would keep orbiting around where the sun used to be for another 8 minutes.

 

[teeman92]

black holes-they scare me,i heard they wander around lot,anything that get too close get instanly sucked in,it look like a "hole" going out of the universe

space-how big is it? it wonders me


atoms..

 

[GoldShadow]

No, that is the speed at which gravity affects the velocity of an object, the force itself goes at the speed of light. The earth is affected by the sun's gravity. If you took away the sun, the earth would keep orbiting around where the sun used to be for another 8 minutes.

Ah, my bad about the "gravity has no speed" thing, you were right about that.

However, the speed of gravity being equal to the speed of light idea came under some controversy, apparently:

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/gravity_speed_030116.html
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/Phys-speed-of-gravity.html

 

[psicicle]

Ah, my bad about the "gravity has no speed" thing, you were right about that.

However, the speed of gravity being equal to the speed of light idea came under some controversy, apparently:

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/gravity_speed_030116.html
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/Phys-speed-of-gravity.html

Oh right, that is sorta true how it has never actually been proven experimentally. I've heard about this except I forgot. The problem seems to lie in how the experiment is interpreted. However, the article is from 2003 so new developments may have come up.

Here's a quote from wikipedia on it:

Experimental measurement?

The speed of gravity can be calculated from observations of the orbital decay rate of binary pulsars PSR 1913+16 and PSR B1534+12. The orbits of these pulsars around each other is decaying due to loss of energy in the form of gravitational radiation. The rate of this energy loss ("gravitational damping") can be measured, and since it depends on the speed of gravity, comparing the measured values to theory shows that the speed of gravity is equal to the speed of light to within 1%. [10] (However, it should be noted that measuring the speed of gravity by comparing theoretical results with experimental results will depend on the theory; use of a theory other than that of general relativity could in principle show a different speed, although the existence of gravitational damping at all implies that the speed cannot be infinite.)

In September 2002, Sergei Kopeikin and Edward Fomalont announced that they had made an indirect measurement of the speed of gravity, using their data from VLBI measurement of the ******** position of Jupiter on its orbit during Jupiter's transit across the line-of-sight of the bright radio source quasar QSO J0842+1835. Kopeikin and Fomalont concluded that the speed of gravity is between 0.8 and 1.2 times the speed of light, which would be fully consistent with the theoretical prediction of general relativity that the speed of gravity is exactly the same as the speed of light.

Several physicists, including Clifford M. Will and Steve Carlip, have criticized these claims on the grounds that they have allegedly misinterpreted the results of their measurements. However, Kopeikin and Fomalont continue to vigorously argue their case. (See the citations below for the details of the arguments pro and con.)

It is important to understand that none of the participants in this controversy are claiming that general relativity is "wrong". Rather, the debate concerns whether or not Kopeikin and Fomalont have really provided yet another verification of one of its fundamental predictions.

 

[-Knux-]

I find it weird in how I drink so much milk every day...

 

[andalau]

Oh right, that is sorta true how it has never actually been proven experimentally. I've heard about this except I forgot. The problem seems to lie in how the experiment is interpreted. However, the article is from 2003 so new developments may have come up.

Here's a quote from wikipedia on it:

Experimental measurement?

The speed of gravity can be calculated from observations of the orbital decay rate of binary pulsars PSR 1913+16 and PSR B1534+12. The orbits of these pulsars around each other is decaying due to loss of energy in the form of gravitational radiation. The rate of this energy loss ("gravitational damping") can be measured, and since it depends on the speed of gravity, comparing the measured values to theory shows that the speed of gravity is equal to the speed of light to within 1%. [10] (However, it should be noted that measuring the speed of gravity by comparing theoretical results with experimental results will depend on the theory; use of a theory other than that of general relativity could in principle show a different speed, although the existence of gravitational damping at all implies that the speed cannot be infinite.)

In September 2002, Sergei Kopeikin and Edward Fomalont announced that they had made an indirect measurement of the speed of gravity, using their data from VLBI measurement of the ******** position of Jupiter on its orbit during Jupiter's transit across the line-of-sight of the bright radio source quasar QSO J0842+1835. Kopeikin and Fomalont concluded that the speed of gravity is between 0.8 and 1.2 times the speed of light, which would be fully consistent with the theoretical prediction of general relativity that the speed of gravity is exactly the same as the speed of light.

Several physicists, including Clifford M. Will and Steve Carlip, have criticized these claims on the grounds that they have allegedly misinterpreted the results of their measurements. However, Kopeikin and Fomalont continue to vigorously argue their case. (See the citations below for the details of the arguments pro and con.)

It is important to understand that none of the participants in this controversy are claiming that general relativity is "wrong". Rather, the debate concerns whether or not Kopeikin and Fomalont have really provided yet another verification of one of its fundamental predictions.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/program.html

One of those videos explained that Einstein found that the Speed of Gravity - the Speed of Light.

 

[psicicle]

Well he predicted that, however I think that the speed of gravity would be difficult to determine.

 

[Engo]

What amazes me is how mankind was able to figure out everything we have now.

Another phenomenon is the universe IMO.

 

[andalau]

I think everyone established the universe as the greatest phenomenon for like the billionth time. Anyways, did he really predict that? I forget cause I thought I remember watching it said he did some equation.

 

[Seed of Sorrow]

when you look up at the stars, your looking at where the stars where millions of years ago...............edit: well, maybe not milliions, but I don't remember.

 

[adjl]

I'm not entirely sure how one would prove it (High school physics can only go so far >.>), but it definitely makes sense that the speed of gravity is equal to that of light. Light's speed (and, in turn, the speed of every other form of electromagnetic radiation, as they all share this same property) is a result of the photon being massless. Gravity doesn't have a mass either (although it differs from photons and such in that it also lacks any sort of momentum, I believe, whereas photons have it), meaning that its maximum speed would be identical to that of light and other massless... whatever pronoun you'd use for that sort of stuff. We'll call them things.

So many confusing things out there...

 

[teeman92]

im wondering,how does lighting come from clouds?

 

[psicicle]

im wondering,how does lighting come from clouds?

I don't think that's fully understood even today, but I think it's something to do with the clouds rubbing together and creating static or something like that.

 

[DainBramaged]

Has anyone posted Cryptozoology yet? that's another big one.....

Great thread!

 

[pikachun00b7]

How you put a pokemon is a pokeball. Can someone explain to me how that works?

 

[dinoneil]

To me, the greatest mystery is the world of the supernatural, like ghosts and spirits and such. There is too much I wanna know about it...atleast a clarification of its nonexistence!

 

[Ripple]

look up ball lighning, it's light in a ball (duh!) that fall to the ground and leaves no traces that it was ever there. (not the same as sparks)

 

[CrystalMidnight]

I'd have to say the arguements between religeon and Darwins theory. or w/e evolution same diff. Though I am on evolutions side some of the religeon things make sense, but not many

 

[GoldShadow]

I was on a plane last night (to Arizona), and when I looked out the window I saw storm clouds with the most amazing lightning. I know how it works, and I know that cloud-cloud lightning is very frequent, but I've never seen it like that before. There was so much lightning, illuminating the entire sky at times, the most amazing thing I've ever seen. There were about 200-250 flashes/minute (I have an urge to quantify everything, so I counted for 15 seconds and multiplied by four, three times and got an average). The way different layers of clouds were silhouetted against the night was awesome. It was the greatest light show I've ever seen.

 

[Master_Pig]

Growth is the greatest phenomena IMO. How bodies grow and mature amazes me.

 

[Rx-]

Lightning is IMO the greatest phenomenon. It's like hiccups but on a huge scale.

I guess hiccups are IMO the next greatest phenomenom.

Please no flaming.

 

[RJC]

Hiccups are weird. I think dreams are mysterious too.

 

[Uchiha.Sanosuke]

Dreams, the idea of hypnosis, and most of all...

the Easter Island statues. I really find the Moai fascinating...got one of em in my room.

 

[Kitten]

Has anyone posted Cryptozoology yet? that's another big one.....

Great thread!

What like that Cryptozoology hasn't packed it in and gone home yet? It's a big pile of ****. The only thing phenomenal you could possibly associate with it is what an astoundingly large loaf of bull**** it is.

Another interesting thing is that new idea that time is slowing down as the universe expands. I mean, we'll never notice this, as our thoughts would be slowed too.

 

[Crimson King]

Cryptozoology - the study of animals that don't exist. How would I love a job in something that is pretty much disproven and you just have to sit and say "it might exist."

 

[GoldShadow]

Cryptozoology is legit guys, one time I saw a chupacabra, bigfoot, and a werewolf all in one day.

 

[Adi]

Conciousness.