every respondent is showing thier complete inability to understand that WE are not the be all and end all as far as what's acceptable as flat. As I've said, we ourselves without a second thought call things 'flat' which in reality are NOT flat in the least. So who is to say that there's no larger scale, or larger being, who sees us as yet another one of their acceptably 'flat' items, as we see so may 'flat things' that we now on molecular levels are NOT flat, but it's all in the perspective of the observer and/or the scale. Do people argue as to the flatness of a piece of paper?? NO!! Of course not. paper is accepted as flat. So why is it so hard to believe that larger scale universe and beyond don't see us as 'paper'. I figured you'd be so self absorbed as humans who think they and their observations are the most correct, while not realizing we live in a galaxy, universe and beyond that we have NO comprehension of what lies further.
Here's the problem with your 'flat' theory. Massenergy in the Universe creates a curvature in space due to gravitational effect. So no matter what scale, large or small, nothing in the Universe is actually flat, although some things might appear that way.
Even if there were a larger Universal structure (multiverse), it would still have to conform to the laws of Physics, thus also would not be flat. There is, in reality, no such thing as a 'straight' line.
Yes, I read what you said, and what you said violates the Laws of Physics.
I understand what you are trying to get at, but it is important to understand what we already know about our Universe. We do know some of the large-scale Universe (Level 1 = our local Universe) structure through astronomical observation (Hubble Space Telescope and various Large Radio Telescopes), as far as the Event Horizon in spacetime will allow. So we do know quite a bit more than just "our small space". It is true that the Earth is a very, very small amount of massenergy in just the context of the Level 1 Universe. The Earth is not a particle or molecule, but is composed of particles and molecules.
In order to contemplate what you are proposing (a very large-scale structure), you would need to advance to a Level 3 Universe). I would strongly advise that you should seek to understand the Level 1 and Level 2 Universes first.
Unfortunately, your "THEORY" has already been disproven by a gentleman named Albert Einstein. What I had stated above, is true and in accordance with the General Theory of Relativity. You might wish to familiarize yourself with these concepts, which have since been proven. We say that massenergy within spacetime creates a proportional 'curvature' in space.
The World Is Flat!!
← View full post
every respondent is showing thier complete inability to understand that WE are not the be all and end all as far as what's acceptable as flat. As I've said, we ourselves without a second thought call things 'flat' which in reality are NOT flat in the least. So who is to say that there's no larger scale, or larger being, who sees us as yet another one of their acceptably 'flat' items, as we see so may 'flat things' that we now on molecular levels are NOT flat, but it's all in the perspective of the observer and/or the scale. Do people argue as to the flatness of a piece of paper?? NO!! Of course not. paper is accepted as flat. So why is it so hard to believe that larger scale universe and beyond don't see us as 'paper'. I figured you'd be so self absorbed as humans who think they and their observations are the most correct, while not realizing we live in a galaxy, universe and beyond that we have NO comprehension of what lies further.
--
suckonthis9
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
2
2
Here's the problem with your 'flat' theory. Massenergy in the Universe creates a curvature in space due to gravitational effect. So no matter what scale, large or small, nothing in the Universe is actually flat, although some things might appear that way.
Even if there were a larger Universal structure (multiverse), it would still have to conform to the laws of Physics, thus also would not be flat. There is, in reality, no such thing as a 'straight' line.
--
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
Anonymous Post Author
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
Well said...
Did you read a WORD I said?
--
suckonthis9
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Yes, I read what you said, and what you said violates the Laws of Physics.
I understand what you are trying to get at, but it is important to understand what we already know about our Universe. We do know some of the large-scale Universe (Level 1 = our local Universe) structure through astronomical observation (Hubble Space Telescope and various Large Radio Telescopes), as far as the Event Horizon in spacetime will allow. So we do know quite a bit more than just "our small space". It is true that the Earth is a very, very small amount of massenergy in just the context of the Level 1 Universe. The Earth is not a particle or molecule, but is composed of particles and molecules.
In order to contemplate what you are proposing (a very large-scale structure), you would need to advance to a Level 3 Universe). I would strongly advise that you should seek to understand the Level 1 and Level 2 Universes first.
Unfortunately, your "THEORY" has already been disproven by a gentleman named Albert Einstein. What I had stated above, is true and in accordance with the General Theory of Relativity. You might wish to familiarize yourself with these concepts, which have since been proven. We say that massenergy within spacetime creates a proportional 'curvature' in space.