The universe can be a very strange place. While groundbreaking ideas such as quantum theory, relativity and even the Earth going around the Sun might be commonly accepted now, science still continues to show that the universe contains things you might find it difficult to believe, and even more difficult to get your head around.
Theoretically, the lowest temperature that can be achieved is absolute zero, exactly −273.15°C, where the motion of all particles stops completely. However, you can never actually cool something to this temperature because, in quantum mechanics, every particle has a minimum energy, called “zero-point energy,” which you cannot get below. Remarkably, this minimum energy doesn’t just apply to particles, but to any vacuum, whose energy is called “vacuum energy.” To show that this energy exists involves a rather simple experiment– take two metal plates in a vacuum, put them close together, and they will be attracted to each other. This is caused by the energy between the plates only being able to resonate at certain frequencies, while outside the plates the vacuum energy can resonate at pretty much any frequency. Because the energy outside the plates is greater than the energy between the plates, the plates are pushed towards each other. As the plates get closer together, the force increases, and at around a 10 nm separation this effect (called the Casimir effect) creates one atmosphere of pressure between them. Because the plates reduce the vacuum energy between them to below the normal zero-point energy, the space is said to have negative energy, which has some unusual properties.
One of the properties of a negative-energy vacuum is that light actually travels faster in it than it does in a normal vacuum, something that may one day allow people to travel faster than the speed of light in a kind of negative-energy vacuum bubble. Negative energy could also be used to hold open a transversible wormhole, which although theoretically possible, would collapse as soon as it was created without a means to keep it open. Negative energy also causes black holes to evaporate. Vacuum energy is often modeled as virtual particles popping into existence and annihilating. This doesn’t violate any energy conservation laws as long as the particles are annihilated shortly afterwards. However, if two particles are produced at the event horizon of a black hole, one can be moving away from the black hole, while the other is falling into it. This means they won’t be able to annihilate, so the particles both end up with negative energy. When the negative energy particle falls into the black hole, it lowers the mass of the black hole instead of adding to it, and over time particles like these will cause the black hole to evaporate completely. Because this theory was first suggested by Stephen Hawking, the particles given off by this effect (the ones that don’t fall into the black hole) are called Hawking radiation. It was the first accepted theory to unite quantum theory with general relativity, making it Hawking’s greatest scientific achievement to date.
One prediction of Einstein’s theory of general relativity is that when a large object moves, it drags the space-time around it, causing nearby objects to be pulled along as well. It can occur when a large object is moving in a straight line or is rotating, and, although the effect is very small, it has been experimentally verified. The Gravity Probe B experiment, launched in 2004, was designed to measure the space-time distortion near Earth. Although sources of interference were larger than expected, the frame-dragging effect has been measured to an uncertainty of 15%, with further analysis hoping to reduce this further.
The expected effects were very close to predictions: due to the rotation of the Earth, the probe was pulled from its orbit by around 2 meters per year, an effect purely caused by the mass of the Earth distorting the space-time surrounding it. The probe itself would not feel this extra acceleration because it is not caused by an acceleration on the probe, but rather on the space-time the probe is traveling through–analogous to a rug being pulled under a table, rather than moving the table itself.
The relativity of simultaneity is the idea that whether two events occur simultaneously or not is relative and depends on the observer. It is a strange consequence of the special theory of relativity, and applies to any events that happen that are separated by some distance. For example, if a firework is let off on Mars and another on Venus, one observer traveling through space one way might say they happen at the same time (compensating for the time light takes to reach them), while another observer traveling another way might say the one on Mars went off first, and yet another might say the one on Venus went off first. It is caused by the way different viewpoints become distorted compared to each other in special relativity. And because they are all relative, no observer can be said to have the correct viewpoint.
This can lead to very unusual scenarios, such as an observer witnessing effect before cause (for example, seeing a bomb go off, then later seeing someone light the fuse). However, once the observer sees the effect, they cannot interact with the cause without traveling faster than the speed of light, which was one of the first reasons faster-than-light travel was believed to be forbidden, because it is akin to time travel, and a universe where you can interact with the cause after the effect makes no sense.
One of the longest outstanding mysteries in physics is how gravity is related to the other fundamental forces, such as electromagnetism. One theory, first proposed in 1919, showed that if an extra dimension is added to the universe, gravity still exists in the first four dimensions (three space dimensions and time), but the way this four dimensional space curves over the extra fifth dimension, naturally produces the other fundamental forces. However, we cannot see or detect this fifth dimension, so it was proposed that the extra dimension was curled up, and hence became invisible to us. This theory was what ultimately led to string theory, and is still included at the heart of most string theory analysis.
Since this extra dimension is so small, only tiny objects, such as particles, can move along it. In these cases, they ultimately just end up where they started, since the extra dimension is curled up on itself. However, one object that becomes much more complex in five dimensions is a black hole. When extended to five dimensions, it becomes a “black string,” and unlike a normal 4D black hole, it is unstable (this ignores the fact that 4D black holes eventually evaporate). This black string will destabilize into a whole string of black holes, connected by further black strings, until the black strings are pinched off entirely and leave the set of black holes. These multiple 4D black holes then combine into one larger black hole. The most interesting thing about this is that, using current models, the final black hole is a “naked” singularity. That is, it has no event horizon surrounding it. This violates the Cosmic Censorship Hypothesis, which says that all singularities must be surrounded by an event horizon, in order to avoid the time-travel effects that are believed to happen near a singularity from changing the history of the entire universe, as they can never escape from behind an event horizon.
As is best shown in the equation E=MC2, energy and matter are fundamentally connected. One effect of this is that energy, as well as mass, creates a gravitational field. A geon, first investigated by John Wheeler, in 1955, is an electromagnetic or gravitational wave whose energy creates a gravitational field, which in turn holds the wave itself together in a confined space. Wheeler speculated that there may be a link between microscopic geons and elementary particles, and that they might even be the same thing. A more extreme example is a “kugelblitz” (German for “ball lightning”), which is where such intense light is concentrated at a particular point that the gravity caused by the light energy becomes strong enough to collapse into a black hole, trapping the light inside. Although nothing is thought to prevent the formation of a kugelblitz, geons are now only believed to be able to form temporarily, as they will inevitably leak energy and collapse. This unfortunately indicates that Wheeler’s initial conjecture was incorrect, but this has not been definitively proven.
The type of black hole most people are familiar with, which has an event horizon on the outside acting as the “point of no return” and a point singularity of infinite density on the inside, actually has a more specific name: a Schwarzschild black hole. It is named after Karl Schwarzschild, who found the mathematical solution of Einstein’s field equations for a spherical, non-rotating mass in 1915, only a month after Einstein actually published his general theory of relativity. However, it wasn’t until 1963 that mathematician Roy Kerr found the solution for a rotating spherical mass. Hence, a rotating black hole is called a Kerr black hole, and it has some unusual properties.
At the centre of a Kerr black hole, there is no point singularity, but rather a ring singularity—a spinning one-dimensional ring held open by its own momentum. There are also two event horizons, an inner and outer one, and an ellipsoid called the ergosphere, inside which space-time itself rotates with the black hole (because of frame dragging) faster than the speed of light. When entering the black hole, by passing through the outer event horizon, space-like paths become time-like, meaning that it is impossible to avoid the singularity at the centre, just like in a Schwarzschild black hole. However, when you pass through the inner event horizon, your path becomes space-like again. The difference is this: space-time itself is reversed. This means gravity near the ring singularity becomes repulsive, actually pushing you away from the centre. In fact, unless you enter the black hole exactly on the equator, it is impossible to hit the ring singularity itself. Additionally, ring singularities can be linked through space-time, so they can act as wormholes, although exiting the black hole on the other side would be impossible (unless it was a naked singularity, possibly created when the ring singularity spins fast enough). Traveling through a ring singularity might take you to another point in space-time, such as another universe, where you could see light falling in from outside the black hole, but not leave the black hole itself. It might even take you to a “white hole” in a negative universe, the exact meaning of which is unknown.
Quantum tunneling is an effect where a particle can pass through a barrier it would not normally have the energy to overcome. It can allow a particle to pass through a physical barrier that should be impenetrable, or can allow an electron to escape from the pull of the nucleus without having the kinetic energy to do so. According to quantum mechanics, there is a finite probability that any particle can be found anywhere in the universe, although that probability is astronomically small for any real distance from the particles expected path.
However, when the particle is faced with a small-enough barrier (around 1-3 nm wide), one which conventional calculations would indicate is impenetrable by the particle, the probability that the particle will simply pass through that barrier becomes fairly noticeable. This can be explained by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, which limits how much information can be known about a particle. A particle can “borrow” energy from the system it is acting in, use it to pass through the barrier, and then lose it again.
Quantum tunneling is involved in many physical processes, such as radioactive decay and the nuclear fusion that takes place in the Sun. It is also used in certain electrical components, and it has even been shown to occur in enzymes in biological systems. For example, the enzyme glucose oxidase, which catalyses the reaction of glucose into hydrogen peroxide, involves the quantum tunneling of an entire oxygen atom. Quantum tunneling is also a key feature of the scanning tunneling microscope, the first machine to enable the imaging and manipulation of individual atoms. It works by measuring the voltage in a very fine tip, which changes when it gets close to a surface due to the effect of electrons tunneling through the vacuum (known as the “forbidden zone”) between them. This gives the device the sensitivity necessary to make extremely high resolution images. It also enables the device to move atoms by deliberately putting a current through the conducting tip.
Shorty after the Big Bang, the universe was in a highly disordered and chaotic state. This means that small changes and defects didn’t change the overall structure of the universe. However, as the universe expanded, cooled, and went from a disorderly state to an orderly one, it reached a point where very small fluctuations created very large changes.
This is similar to arranging tiles evenly on a floor. When one tile is placed unevenly, this means that the subsequent tiles placed will follow its pattern. Therefore, you have a whole line of tiles out of place. This is similar to the objects called cosmic strings, which are extremely thin and extremely long defects in the shape of space-time. These cosmic strings are predicted by most models of the universe, such as the string theory wherein two kinds of “strings” are unrelated. If they exist, each string would be as thin as a proton, but incredibly dense. Thus, a cosmic string a mile long can weigh as much as the Earth. However, it would not actually have any gravity and the only effect it will have on matter surrounding it would be the way it changes the form and shape of space-time. Therefore, a cosmic string is, in essence, just a “wrinkle” in the shape of space-time.
Cosmic strings are thought to be incredibly long, up to the order of the sizes of thousands of galaxies. In fact, recent observations and simulations have suggested that a network of cosmic strings stretches across the entire universe. This was once thought to be what caused galaxies to form in supercluster complexes, although this idea has since been abandoned. Supercluster complexes consist of connected “filaments” of galaxies up to a billion light-years in length. Because of the unique effects of cosmic strings on space-time as you bring two strings close together, it has been shown that they could possibly be used for time travel, like with most of the things on this list. Cosmic strings would also create incredible gravitational waves, stronger than any other known source. These waves are what those current and planned gravitational wave detectors are designed to look for.
Antimatter is the opposite of matter. It has the same mass but with an opposing electrical charge. One theory about why antimatter exists was developed by John Wheeler and Nobel laureate Richard Feynman based on the idea that physical systems should be time-reversible. For example, the orbits of our solar system, if played backwards, should still obey all the same rules as when they are played forwards. This led to the idea that antimatter is just ordinary matter going backwards in time, which would explain why antiparticles have an opposite charge, since if an electron is repelled while going forwards in time, then backwards in time this becomes attraction. This also explains why matter and antimatter annihilate. This isn’t a circumstance of two particles crashing into and destroying each other; it is the same particle suddenly stopping and going back in time. In a vacuum, where a pair of virtual particles are produced and then annihilated, this is actually just one particle going in an endless loop, forwards in time, then backwards, then forwards, and so on.
While the accuracy of this theory is still up for debate, treating antimatter as matter going backwards in time mathematically comes up with identical solutions to other, more conventional theories. When it was first theorized, John Wheeler said that perhaps it answered the question of why all electrons in the universe have identical properties, a question so obvious that it is generally ignored. He suggested that it was just one electron, constantly darting all over the universe, from the Big Bang to the end of time and back again, continuing an uncountable number of times. Even though this idea involves backwards time travel, it can’t be used to send any information back in time, since the mathematics of the model simply doesn’t allow it. You cannot move a piece of antimatter to affect the past, since in moving it you only affect the past of the antimatter itself, that is, your future.
It is not strictly science, but rather a very interesting set of mathematical theorems about logic and the philosophy that is definitely relevant to science as a whole. Proven in 1931 by Kurt Gödel, these theories say that with any given set of logical rules, except for the most simple, there will always be statements that are undecidable, meaning that they cannot be proven or disproven due to the inevitable self-referential nature of any logical systems that is even remotely complicated. This is thought to indicate that there is no grand mathematical system capable of proving or disproving all statements. An undecidable statement can be thought of as a mathematical form of a statement like “I always lie.” Because the statement makes reference to the language being used to describe it, it cannot be known whether the statement is true or not. However, an undecidable statement does not need to be explicitly self-referential to be undecidable. The main conclusion of Gödel’s incompleteness theorems is that all logical systems will have statements that cannot be proven or disproven; therefore, all logical systems must be “incomplete.”
The philosophical implications of these theorems are widespread. The set suggests that in physics, a “theory of everything” may be impossible, as no set of rules can explain every possible event or outcome. It also indicates that logically, “proof” is a weaker concept than “true”; such a concept is unsettling for scientists because it means there will always be things that, despite being true, cannot be proven to be true. Since this set of theorems also applies to computers, it also means that our own minds are incomplete and that there are some ideas we can never know, including whether our own minds are consistent (i.e. our reasoning contains no incorrect contradictions). This is because the second of Gödel’s incompleteness theorems states that no consistent system can prove its own consistency, meaning that no sane mind can prove its own sanity. Also, since that same law states that any system able to prove its consistency to itself must be inconsistent, any mind that believes it can prove its own sanity is, therefore, insane.






























Hey guys, Will be the U.S. significantly much better off sticking with Syria’s Assad?
I love this (the list). It vindicates my profound appreciation for my ability to know i.e. my volitional consciousness. Attempting to understand the Universe with all its wonder and occasionally unfathomable construction, enlightens my very soul with an astronomical appreciation of life.
nice, but Hawking radiation was in fact discovered by Zeldovich
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation
alot of weird things about this universe of ours.
some of the stuff listed here is only theoretical because we simply do not have the science (or understanding) to prove it.
but one thing is for sure, this thing is bigger than the two of us !
From list item #1: "The main conclusion of Gödel’s incompleteness theorems is that all logical systems will have statements that cannot be proven or disproven; therefore, all logical systems must be “incomplete.”."
"one thing is for sure, this thing is bigger than the two of us !"
Don't be too sure because I'm pretty big!
well, that went over my head.
Glad I'm not the only one who feels that way.
same here…!!!
phew…i thought i was the only stupid who didnt understood this stuff..!!
The cosmos is epic.
correction: The Cosmos ARE epic.
After I read the first two items my brain went on strike citing difficult working conditions. We did some negotiating and it has agreed to start working again on the condition that I read only one item per hour with the time in-between dedicated to less strenuous topics.
I couldn't have said it better myself! I was following pretty well on the first entry, but after that the brain slowly started shutting down. I think I need to go to bed now and rejuvenate myself. Nighty – night y'all. zzzzzzzz LOL
I've read about most of these, but unfortunately not being able actually understand the math involved really inhibits a full, true understanding of them. This list was a great introduction to these ideas without getting too bogged down with specifics. The only problem I had was the extension of Godel's Theories to the sanity of the human mind. Misappropriation, if I ever saw it.
I understand the idea of relative spontaneity as it relates to great distances (like the firework example), but this – "This can lead to very unusual scenarios, such as an observer witnessing effect before cause (for example, seeing a bomb go off, then later seeing someone light the fuse)." – doesn't make sense to me. How would any cause been seen before effect, regardless of where you are relative to the event? This list is going to have me up all night read more about this. And for that reason, great job, Jeff.
hey tim, how come my comment needs a moderators approval? I am getting this message.
'Your comment must be approved by the site admins before it will appear publicly.'
I'm not sure. I don't see anything in them that would automatically send them to be moderated. I'll just approve them as you post. Sorry for the inconvenience. Also, I'll delete one of the doubles down there. Maybe Jamie would know.
Thanks. I guess this one is going to you for approval too.
Haha yep. I dig getting all these emails. It makes me feel popular
hehe lol
Since we are talking about theoretical science in many of these excerpts, lets consider that we can travel faster than the speed of light. From our viewpoint, if you were to watch a star go supernova that is 1000 light years away, you are actually seeing the light that the Supernova event created 1000 years ago. Now after you witness that, you travel faster than the speed of light in the oppitiste direction of the Supernova. If you kept a constant view of the Supernova, you will start to see that in reverse since you are traveling faster than the speed of light and are watching the events "unfold". Eventually, you will get far enough away where you are seeing the star intact and would then know that it is going to go Supernova. You would have witnessed the effect before the cause. Now, in this instance, the viewpoints are again relative. You would be observing the effect before the cause but only from your viewpoint.
I hope I didn't confuse you more. I think I may have confused myself more….. lol
Oh, I get it. So if you're traveling faster than the speed of light away from an event, you will eventually catch up and reverse "time" (the light coming from that object). Yeah, it makes more sense now after some sleep. Thanks
Thanks kenneth, your explanation made alot more sense to me then the bomb comparison (however I do see how they are similar now). This is the longest its takin me to read a listverse list ever,well done
All you're doing in that example is observing once from 1000 LY, speeding to a further distance faster then the light and observing for a second time. This does not change the time the event happened but rather it changes the time you observed the event.
Is that what you're trying to say or did I miss something?
ok so if u go in the opposite direction then sure u ll see the supernova explode but what happens if u go towards the star faster than the speed of light.
That was an EXCELLENT explanation! It’s true that if you overthink these things that your mind tends to go in circles, but you cut right to the chase. Thanks.
thank you, that clarified that point for me. the bomb metaphor was not as defined but now the theory makes sense. any theories on how we manipulate our planet to produce more clean water and convert modern society to reusable, ecologically safe energies in say the next twenty years? . . . actually, i wager the know-how is easy enough for minds like yours, its all about getting the rest of us motivated, so maybe show us some really scary math to inspire action
This can lead to very unusual scenarios, such as an observer witnessing effect before cause (for example, seeing a bomb go off, then later seeing someone light the fuse). However, once the observer sees the effect, they cannot interact with the cause without traveling faster than the speed of light, which was one of the first reasons faster-than-light travel was believed to be forbidden, because it is akin to time travel, and a universe where you can interact with the cause after the effect makes no sense.
The above excerpt from #8 is either poorly worded or incorrect.
To observe the cause befor the effect you do need to have “something” be able to travel faster than light. Which isn’t suggested in the excerpt as the way this would occur.
One observer might see the cause and the effect complete before a second observer at a distance from the cause/effect event greater than the first observer by some light years would see either the cause or the effect..
But without a faster-than-the-speed of light means of communicating this to the second observer, the first observer could not tell the second observer any sooner than the second observer would see the event for himself.
what if the detonator was on mars, the bomb was on venus and i was on mercury. would i not then see the light from the bomb sooner then the light from the man triggering it?
So you would see the effect before you see the cause but you wouldn’t see the affect before the cause actually occurred.
Well stated. Impressive.
You are correct theoretically but it has been proven that travelling fast than the speed of light turns that object into ant-matter.
In essence you get there, but are ‘not there’.
What Godel's theorems imply is EITHER the human mind can never prove it's own sanity (that is, it can postulate questions it fundamentally cannot answer) OR the human mind is more powerful than a Turing machine (a "hypercomputer", as they call 'em these days.) Godel personally believed the second one was true.
yeah i agree, the human mind is not logical, it includes intuitive elements, and so it doesn’t fall into Godel’s theory
Godel’s theory touches on the essence of belief, faith and religion.
That’s why I’m not easily swayed by the ‘logical postulations’ of so-called intellects like Hawkings et al.
You don't need to resort to faster than light physics for this to work. Perception depends on the light path. Imagine an event that takes place on an object in motion. When the initial event happens (the bomb is set-up) the light path is blocked, but there are mirrors set up. When the bomb actually goes off everything has moved so that the light path to the observer is direct. The observer sees the bomb explode, then, later, sees the bomb being set-up when the reflected light finally reaches him.
We actually see this sort of thing happening in space, light sources being blocked, and us detecting light reflected off of dust clouds or bent around massive objects. In some cases the difference in lightpath length is so great that novas appear to expand faster than light.
Also makes a lot of sense. Again, reading these at 3 in the morning does nothing to help my comprehension of strange things about the universe.
I agree I also don’t see how you could see something before it happens even if there is a delay to how fast light travels, I feel the only option is seeing it late
In regards to not understanding about witnessing the effects before the cause, you have to just understand that the numbers they are using are (currently) impossible. Nothing moves faster than the speed of light. But imagine that you were on Earth and someone on Pluto lit a bomb. Now imagine that the bomb exploded with such force and energy that the effects from it moved faster than the speed of light. You would feel the effects of the bomb, on Earth, before the visual event of the person actually LIGHTING the bomb would be able to travel the distance to Earth. You would feel the effects before you saw them. Essentially time travel.
Interestinggg. Just went through the list for now.. Some of these i'll definitely look into later!
This list was wonderful! A pleasant and concise rundown of some of the most baffling things physicists have to tackle with their grey matter today.
I remember reading in a pop-science quantum physics book about how easily negative energy effects turn up in experimental observations, and even how the negative energy can even be manipulated in various ways – the professor (he was a guest writer for one small section of the book) even talked about a simple theoretical method of creating a 'beam' of negative energy, which worried him because although he could find no fundamental logical contradiction that would stop the effect from being created in the real world, the beam would slowly evaporate matter in its path into nothingness, which is obviously a heinous breach of mass-energy conservation.
I know it's not actually funny, but I laughed when I thought of scientists stumbling upon really disturbing ideas (such as a negative energy ray that would just evaporate things) and scrambling to try and disprove them. Theory is a scary thing.
Actually its not scary at all. Everything is theory, even you and me at this point.
What am I rambling about anyway….
Great list
#1 seems like an excuse to not do a proper job if I ever saw one
i thought this list was supposed to be interesting… what a waste of taxpayers money
To those of us with a brain larger than a grape it IS interesting.
whoosh
Certainly one of my favorite list.
Very informative and makes you think outside the box.
absolutely great list!
'For example, if a firework is let off on Mars and another on Venus, one observer traveling through space one way might say they happen at the same time.' – Well, if it'd have been me, I would have just enjoyed the fireworks and not worry about the silly question of which happened first. I would rather they don't happen samultaneously. That way I could enjoy both.
Also, 'The type of black hole most people are familiar with' sounds something like the black hole around the corner of the street that we pass everyday on our way to work.
'It might even take you to a “white hole” in a negative universe, the exact meaning of which is unknown.' Sounds kind of religious, doesn't it? Hell- heaven and all.
I guess I got a little carried away. Nice list. Didn't get much of what was written but I commend the effort that must have been put behind it. And yes, Gödel’s incompleteness theorems reminds me of Catch-22. I wonder if Joseph Heller knew about it.
I've gone to space a few times. Fairly cheap too. ab0ut $20 an eighth.
I'm not edumacated enough to truly comprehend most of what I just read, but it was interesting nonetheless! Great list. I go to sleep a teensy tiny bit smarter tonight. Of course, by morning, I'll recall none of it and be back to reading the benefits of fiber on my cereal box.
dont feel bad, i just got done with my modern physics hw and am just as lost…
I have a headache after reading #1 lol
Fantastic list, thank you. I bludgeoned my way through it with a "vaguely general" understanding of what you were trying to say. I particularly enjoyed the articles on antimatter and strings… such incomprehensible ideas that (apparently) make sense.
If I had my time over again, which may one day be feasible, I would teleport myself back to my high school physics class and actually pay attention.
I'm sure this is a brilliant list, and I did try to read it but unfortunately I'm just not clever enough and felt like I was reading a text book.
Maybe I'll try again later….
do try to give it a shot again —- it's very interesting, and it written way way better than a textbook on this subject would be…….
very well written list!
So, #1 is basically saying we are all crazy… XD
God list, though.
No, #1 is saying that the first thing we need to understanding is that we can't understand everything. As long as we hold to that, we're good. If we don't, our inflated sense of self will get us in trouble.
Nice Freudian slip there Gabe!!!
You caught that, Tex? May be the most insightful comment I've seen on this list…
Only now I noticed what I did back there…
I make that kind of mistake a lot. But I guess that's because I'm not a native speaker of the english language, so I tend to overlook some typing errors…
I believe the strangest thing about the universe is that it exists at all…
I am always fascinated with the amazing minds that these people must have to develop theories like those in the list.
"the strangest thing about the universe is that it exists at all…"
- that simple statement sums it all up
The ultimate mystery: why is there something rather than nothing?
i've been asked before what is life, matter, the universe – my answer for years has been – "It's a ripple in the nothingness."
useless statment – except i think it's true – don't know why – I just feel it
holy hell my brain hurts now
I can honestly tell that I understand nothing in this list. But thank you anyway for the effort.
eh eh, lousy scientist!
heeeeere brOcky brOcky brOcky…
Very interesting list. I consider myself a relatively intelligent fella, but most of that went about 10 feet over my head. Kudos on a well researched and well written list.
Let me get this right, so internal affairs were in on it all along?
Stand by for a machine-gun-like patter of comments complaining about the science/accuracy of the above list.
really interesting , just hard to process , no.2 really blew my mind . A lot of this list was also on that show stephen hawkings universe . If fact if you read this in a robot voice i wouldn't tell the difference . Well done!! After i play the BONGo later ill re-read .
@bluesman87: "After i play the BONGo later ill re-read."
—–it'll either make more sense, or scare the ***** out of you.
im semi-surprised you tried to make any sense of this list without doing that first, to start out with.
im at work, so i wont be doing any of that , also ill avoid doing much else either .
at least now i’ve got something to say to make my friends’ heads go haywire
There are videos for all this weird anomalies that make it a lot easier to understand.
Wowee, some of this went straight over my head, and even more frighteningly, some made sense.
Great head hurting list!
The definition of mind*****.
Cool List!
and I thought the list was difficult to understand.
my tiny little brain is hurting, but I still injoyed the list……..
Great list, a definite fave. And thanks to PBS, I actually half-ass understood most of it. Sometimes I wish I was just that little bit smarter – so I could understand the specifics instead of just the general idea. Oh well, maybe in an alternate dimension eh?
For those of you having trouble wrapping your head around some of this stuff – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkxieS-6WuA&fe…
Watch this video. It explains multiple dimensions – will get you in the mood for more and help you to understand this list.
Question for the physicists – I thought they were chucking string theory in favor of some oscillating donut affair? and is that related to the Kerr black hole?
i thought it was being tossed for like a membrane theory
That's a new one for me – guess we'll just have to wait on Jeff or some other super-smart guy.
That would be M theory (which includes membranes, or "branes")… the new fandangled champion of string theorists everywhere. If you have a spare hour and you are prepared to have your brain stretched in multiple directions (or should that be dimensions?), check out The Elegant Universe: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-13224933…
I think that'll have to wait until tomorrow – before I indulge eh? Although I'd likely be more fascinated atm, I'd forget it all by morning.
That material had lots of truth in it. Not totally 100% accurate but was explained in a manner conducive to the optimal mental capacity of a sane, although practiced insanity for lengths of time corresponding to the short end of the sticks now that the Earth is changing. So are we…..Yes of course their are faster forms of transportation in this Universe known by it's Infinateness. Do you hear that? That means it is never ending. And yes the electron has freedoms to constitute changes whose affect on the relation of us, the Sun, The Milky Way center. It is fun to ponder the particulars of the entire process. My hats off to you guys and gals. You sure are making some extremely curious effects of Einstein's well accepted theory's….But Infinate, Immortal, a power, a force, or an totally ALIVE being of some sort, expressing LOVE with abundance in the only way He/She can explain to our small finite ears. PEACE
brilliantly researched list.
Woot! I actually knew one of these! I didn't think I would know any of the list items based on the first few entries.
When I started reading I thought this was going to go way over my head but I kept up with it fairly well. Now to let it sink in.
Interesting list.
Great list i even understood a few
Great list. I hardly understood a word of it, but enjoyed it anyway.
This is the best list I have seen in a long time, and I must say, there have been some good ones lately. But this is right up my alley. #3 seems to me the most interesting. I have read about it a number of times and still can't get enough! Excellent list!
its a little disapointing have the knowledge we never know the Cosmos
Even more disappointing is the knowledge that we know more about the cosmos than we do about the depths of our own oceans. Mind****!
One of the best articles I've read in a long time! Very good job Jeff Johnson!
i expected something interesting but those graphs are kind of boring but it is strange i guess
Finally!
Lists like this make me realize what a moron I really am…
"True wisdom comes from knowing that you know nothing"
I understand every one of these (he says while blinking uncontrollably).
7 and 2 had the whoosh effect for me. I still don't quite get it. #1 was the coolest – maybe because it was easiest to understand – although I don't know that I'm satisfied with the answer "just because". Sounds suspiciously like something my mother would say to me.
Wow. Godel's incomplete theorem reminds me of Catch-22. Amazing list.
Where's dark matter on this list???
I have a headache from reading this list but I'm not sure if I do
I understood 9, 2, and 1 pretty well, but the rest of it….. SO far over my head. Glad I never had to take physics in high school. It's like geometry, only science-y.*shudders* I don't think I could've gotten drunk before class every day, and still have passed, the way I did with chemistry. 8D
Wow, Casimir Effect and Electromagnitism! Are you a "Lost"-Fan?
Not sure if this problem has already been addressed, but whenever I attempt to access the November 2010 lists through the archives link, I receive the following message:
"Something is missing…
We don't seem to be able to find what you are looking for. Here are some important site links which might be what you are looking for. Alternatively, you can search with Google below or visit some of our most popular lists"
I'm using Firefox so I don't know if that could be part of the problem. I can still access the November info through the Categories – Latest Lists link and I don't see it for any of the later lists. Just wanted to let you know the problem was out there in case no one else has run into it. Thanks.
Holy crap.
OUTSTANDING LIST – one of the best I’ve ever read on Listverse.
Placing Gödel at #1 was insightful and absolutely the best choice – infinite self referential loops – WOW.
JF – this is one for the book.
I want, so bad, to understand what I just read. I'll have to re-read it after a bit because it really is an interesting list. I'd say it's well written too but I'm pretty ignorant on the subject so this could all be BS and I'd never know.
You stole the words right outta my mouth. I was going to write something like that right after i got done reading the comments.
Great (simple) minds think alike!
it's not BS – some of the stuff may not be fully understood or have enough evidence to say its true with a large degree of confidence, but they haven't been disproved (and are coherent with current theories) so we can't rule them out as being possibilities. mind-blowing stuff on this list here
you missed Paul Dirac for #2, pretty much predicted anti-matter 30 years before they found it.
In the string theory he says the strings don’t have gravity and later he says they have hue gravitational fields….which is it
Not gravitational fields…gravitational waves. Think of it like a ripple in a pond. Gravitational waves are ripples in space-time. Gravitational waves distort space-time like a wave distorts the surface of the water. They have nothing to do with gravity like you're thinking of it.
I (think) I understood most of it, I can tell you know a lot about this subject and it was well researched.
I really enjoyed this list. I found the frame dragging and relativity of simultaneity especially interesting. Kudos!