Guest guest Posted December 30, 2002 Report Share Posted December 30, 2002 Here then are the Top 10 Space Mysteries that astronomers will be pondering in the New Year and beyond: 1. Dark energy: Nobody knows what the heck it is, but it is officially repulsive. And man, is it powerful! More powerful than gravity, even. While gravity holds things together at the local level (and by local I mean within galaxies and even between them, forming galactic clusters), some unknown force is working behind the scenes and across the universe to pull everything apart. Scientists have only come to realize this dark force in recent years, by discovering that the universe is expanding at an ever-increasing pace. Having no clue what it is, they've labeled it dark energy. The past year was a good one for proving that dark energy is at work. Calculations have been refined: The repulsive force dominates the universe, comprising 65 percent of its makeup. (Similarly unseen and exotic dark matter makes up 30 percent of the universe, leaving us with a universe that contains just 5 percent normal matter and energy.) Two curious ideas related to the accelerating expansion, both of which emerged in 2002: All galaxies are destined to become frozen in time or, perhaps, time never ends.* *Questioning the Big Bang Could universe follow a cycle without end? In the cyclic model, our three-dimensional universe is one of two surfaces, or " branes, " separated by an extra dimension. The two branes bounce off each other to give rise to matter and radiation, and then expand and dissipate due to dark energy. How did the universe begin, and how will it end? Among cosmologists, the mainstream belief is that the universe began with a bang billions of years ago, and will fizzle out billions of years from now. But two theorists have just fired their latest volley at that belief, saying there could be a timeless cycle of expansion and contraction. It's an idea as old as Hinduism, updated for the 21st century. the rest of the articles can be found at http://www.msnbc.com/news/743539.asp http://www.msnbc.com/news/851919.asp ps. some may wonder why post these articles at all since they're about the space mysteries, something that's out there and not here but we often forget that we are in space...or the space is in us...whichever way you prefer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 30, 2002 Report Share Posted December 30, 2002 Hi Hur, Fascinating stuff isn't it? Thanks for posting it. Here are a couple of small corrections. What you refer as dark energy, Old Albert, called the " cosmological constant. " After the discovery of the Big Bang, Einstein thought he was wrong and recanted, but the guy is right even when he thinks he's wrong. What a brain! Anyway, the CC force is very weak. What makes it overwhelm gravity, it's the fact that CC is created by space and gravity by matter. Since there is so small and amount of matter in regard to space, the cumulative effect of CC spans space ever more rapidly which creates more CC, which creates a runaway expansion. Very Buddhist don't you think? The void creating energy and therefore expanding itself. Expanding into WHAT? Another correction ( I'm not positive about this one) I think dark energy is form of unknown energy that doesn't cause expansion. Check it out. Thanks again, Pete --- " Hur Guler <hurg " <hurg wrote: > Here then are the Top 10 Space Mysteries that > astronomers will be > pondering in the New Year and beyond: > > 1. Dark energy: > Nobody knows what the heck it is, but it is > officially > repulsive. And man, is it powerful! More powerful > than gravity, even. > While gravity holds things together at the > local level (and by > local I mean within galaxies and even between them, > forming galactic > clusters), some unknown force is working behind the > scenes and across > the universe to pull everything apart. Scientists > have only come to > realize this dark force in recent years, by > discovering that the > universe is expanding at an ever-increasing pace. > > Having no clue what it is, they've labeled it dark > energy. > The past year was a good one for proving that dark > energy is at work. > Calculations have been refined: The repulsive force > dominates the > universe, comprising 65 percent of its makeup. > (Similarly unseen and exotic dark matter > makes up 30 percent > of the universe, leaving us with a universe that > contains just 5 > percent normal matter and energy.) > Two curious ideas related to the accelerating > expansion, both > of which emerged in 2002: All galaxies are destined > to become frozen > in time or, perhaps, time never ends.* > > *Questioning the Big Bang > > Could universe > follow a cycle > without end? > In the cyclic model, our three-dimensional universe > is one of two > surfaces, or " branes, " separated by an extra > dimension. The two > branes bounce off each other to give rise to matter > and radiation, > and then expand and dissipate due to dark energy. > > How did the universe begin, and how will it end? > Among cosmologists, > the mainstream belief is that the universe began > with a bang billions > of years ago, and will fizzle out billions of years > from now. But two > theorists have just fired their latest volley at > that belief, saying > there could be a timeless cycle of expansion and > contraction. It's an > idea as old as Hinduism, updated for the 21st > century. > > the rest of the articles can be found at > > http://www.msnbc.com/news/743539.asp > > http://www.msnbc.com/news/851919.asp > > ps. some may wonder why post these articles at all > since they're > about the space mysteries, something that's out > there and not here > but we often forget that we are in space...or the > space is in > us...whichever way you prefer. > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 hi pete, i cannot take credit for those ideas since i simply pasted the articles from the msnbc site and i have no clue whether what they claim or your corrections are true or not. the reason i posted it is to show how the modern science, which is in a way our source of modern myths, changes its models, moving from " a time bound beginning " to " a timeless cycle. " although i realize the buddhist term emptiness is used in the same sense as " brahman " or " consciousness, " i admit i never cared for that term since " it " also feels full to me. anyway, i'm impressed how much you know about this stuff. hur Nisargadatta , pete seesaw <seesaw1us> wrote: > Hi Hur, > > Fascinating stuff isn't it? Thanks for posting it. > Here are a couple of small corrections. What you refer > as dark energy, Old Albert, called the " cosmological > constant. " After the discovery of the Big Bang, > Einstein thought he was wrong and recanted, but the > guy is right even when he thinks he's wrong. What a > brain! > > Anyway, the CC force is very weak. What makes it > overwhelm gravity, it's the fact that CC is created > by space and gravity by matter. Since there is so > small and amount of matter in regard to space, the > cumulative effect of CC spans space ever more > rapidly which creates more CC, which creates a runaway > expansion. > > Very Buddhist don't you think? The void creating > energy and therefore expanding itself. Expanding > into WHAT? > > Another correction ( I'm not positive > about this one) I think dark energy is form of unknown > energy that doesn't cause expansion. > Check it out. > > Thanks again, > Pete > > > --- " Hur Guler <hurg> " <hurg> > wrote: > > Here then are the Top 10 Space Mysteries that > > astronomers will be > > pondering in the New Year and beyond: > > > > 1. Dark energy: > > Nobody knows what the heck it is, but it is > > officially > > repulsive. And man, is it powerful! More powerful > > than gravity, even. > > While gravity holds things together at the > > local level (and by > > local I mean within galaxies and even between them, > > forming galactic > > clusters), some unknown force is working behind the > > scenes and across > > the universe to pull everything apart. Scientists > > have only come to > > realize this dark force in recent years, by > > discovering that the > > universe is expanding at an ever-increasing pace. > > > > Having no clue what it is, they've labeled it dark > > energy. > > The past year was a good one for proving that dark > > energy is at work. > > Calculations have been refined: The repulsive force > > dominates the > > universe, comprising 65 percent of its makeup. > > (Similarly unseen and exotic dark matter > > makes up 30 percent > > of the universe, leaving us with a universe that > > contains just 5 > > percent normal matter and energy.) > > Two curious ideas related to the accelerating > > expansion, both > > of which emerged in 2002: All galaxies are destined > > to become frozen > > in time or, perhaps, time never ends.* > > > > *Questioning the Big Bang > > > > Could universe > > follow a cycle > > without end? > > In the cyclic model, our three-dimensional universe > > is one of two > > surfaces, or " branes, " separated by an extra > > dimension. The two > > branes bounce off each other to give rise to matter > > and radiation, > > and then expand and dissipate due to dark energy. > > > > How did the universe begin, and how will it end? > > Among cosmologists, > > the mainstream belief is that the universe began > > with a bang billions > > of years ago, and will fizzle out billions of years > > from now. But two > > theorists have just fired their latest volley at > > that belief, saying > > there could be a timeless cycle of expansion and > > contraction. It's an > > idea as old as Hinduism, updated for the 21st > > century. > > > > the rest of the articles can be found at > > > > http://www.msnbc.com/news/743539.asp > > > > http://www.msnbc.com/news/851919.asp > > > > ps. some may wonder why post these articles at all > > since they're > > about the space mysteries, something that's out > > there and not here > > but we often forget that we are in space...or the > > space is in > > us...whichever way you prefer. > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 2, 2003 Report Share Posted January 2, 2003 > --- " Hur Guler <hurg> " <hurg> > wrote: > > but we often forget that we are in space...or the > > space is in > > us...whichever way you prefer. > > > > both or none ? :-) _________ -- Une adresse @.fr gratuite et en français ! Mail : http://fr.mail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 2, 2003 Report Share Posted January 2, 2003 Nisargadatta , " shantiprod " <shantiprod> wrote: > > --- " Hur Guler <hurg> " <hurg> > > wrote: > > > > but we often forget that we are in space...or the > > > space is in > > > us...whichever way you prefer. > > > > > > > > both or none ? > > :-) > 1. i am in space, i am in awe of the stars, universe=dualistic view 2. the space, the stars, universe appears in me=nondual view 3. both, all of the above 4. silence=no view, neti neti, none of the above 5. all of the above 6. none of the above 7. all of the above .. .. .. the endless loop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 2, 2003 Report Share Posted January 2, 2003 Maybe we can see it a loop, and thru may we see or imagine infinity as a second nature... rather say that infinity is the nature of all, known or unknown. experience is a lamp that we carry on the back, or a light showing past, That I Share with Buddha :-) Namaste! Phil - <hurg <Nisargadatta > Thursday, January 02, 2003 1:59 AM Re: Space Mysteries Nisargadatta , " shantiprod " <shantiprod> wrote: > > --- " Hur Guler <hurg> " <hurg> > > wrote: > > > > but we often forget that we are in space...or the > > > space is in > > > us...whichever way you prefer. > > > > > > > > both or none ? > > :-) > 1. i am in space, i am in awe of the stars, universe=dualistic view 2. the space, the stars, universe appears in me=nondual view 3. both, all of the above 4. silence=no view, neti neti, none of the above 5. all of the above 6. none of the above 7. all of the above .. .. .. the endless loop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 3, 2003 Report Share Posted January 3, 2003 Nisargadatta , " Hur Guler <hurg> " <hurg> wrote: > hi pete, > > i cannot take credit for those ideas since i simply pasted the > articles from the msnbc site and i have no clue whether what they > claim or your corrections are true or not. the reason i posted it is > to show how the modern science, which is in a way our source of > modern myths, changes its models, moving from " a time bound > beginning " to " a timeless cycle. " > > although i realize the buddhist term emptiness is used in the same > sense as " brahman " or " consciousness, " i admit i never cared for that > term since " it " also feels full to me. anyway, i'm impressed how > much you know about this stuff. > > hur Hi Hur -- The term emptiness is employed to dissolve notions of any absolute or permanent quality, condition, essence or being -- such as brahman, god, or consciousness. Emptiness points not to something not being there, as you seem to take it, nor to something being there, which you seem to take as an opposite of emptiness. It's an observation that whever we take something as there or not there, we've made a relative judgment based on criteria, no matter how absolute, permanent, or total we claim our knowing to be. Emptiness may not be the greatest of pointers, since it tends to get opposed to fullness, or equated with some kind of absolute nature of things. Emptiness suggests that because there can't be meaningfully postulated any absolute nature to anything, nor an essential being to anything: things as they are, in their relativity, require no addition of meaning, of an absolute, of an all-knowing knower, of a totality behind the appearance, and so forth. I've seen terms like openness, interdependence and relativity used to clarify the term emptiness when it's mistaken as some kind of absolute or totalistic condition or nature. Not holding to any view of an absolute, not making from the relative any kind of fixed position, is emptiness ... totality right here in the midst of all this unfinished and incomplete nonsense! Moving on with a smile, Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 3, 2003 Report Share Posted January 3, 2003 Nisargadatta , " Hur Guler <hurg> " <hurg> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " shantiprod " <shantiprod> > wrote: > > > --- " Hur Guler <hurg> " <hurg> > > > wrote: > > > > > > but we often forget that we are in space...or the > > > > space is in > > > > us...whichever way you prefer. > > > > > > > > > > > > both or none ? > > > > :-) > > > > 1. i am in space, i am in awe of the stars, universe=dualistic view > 2. the space, the stars, universe appears in me=nondual view > 3. both, all of the above > 4. silence=no view, neti neti, none of the above > 5. all of the above > 6. none of the above > 7. all of the above > . > . > . > the endless loop Beautiful... Namaste, Jeremy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 4, 2003 Report Share Posted January 4, 2003 would this loop have an end, that i can go freely to the marketplace, with Him and Me :-) Fire ! (is in space too) as in water and earth, and of course, by the other way either ! Namaste ! (good to tell, better to teach, best to rest - <Malakhim <Nisargadatta > Friday, January 03, 2003 11:46 PM Re: Space Mysteries Nisargadatta , " Hur Guler <hurg> " <hurg> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " shantiprod " <shantiprod> > wrote: > > > --- " Hur Guler <hurg> " <hurg> > > > wrote: > > > > > > but we often forget that we are in space...or the > > > > space is in > > > > us...whichever way you prefer. > > > > > > > > > > > > both or none ? > > > > :-) > > > > 1. i am in space, i am in awe of the stars, universe=dualistic view > 2. the space, the stars, universe appears in me=nondual view > 3. both, all of the above > 4. silence=no view, neti neti, none of the above > 5. all of the above > 6. none of the above > 7. all of the above > . > . > . > the endless loop Beautiful... Namaste, Jeremy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 4, 2003 Report Share Posted January 4, 2003 Nisargadatta , " shantiprod " <shantiprod> wrote: > would this loop have an end, that i can go freely to the marketplace, with > Him and Me :-) > as the human mind tries to reconstruct reality for the benefit of this individual called " me " , the loop is formed philosophically. in other words, the so called loop is conceptual, it's not real. Him and Me? who's He that is separate from he? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 5, 2003 Report Share Posted January 5, 2003 Maybe another concept ! as religious believe God is separate from 'them' :-) aso... - <hurg <Nisargadatta > Saturday, January 04, 2003 11:31 PM Re: Space Mysteries Nisargadatta , " shantiprod " <shantiprod> wrote: > would this loop have an end, that i can go freely to the marketplace, with > Him and Me :-) > as the human mind tries to reconstruct reality for the benefit of this individual called " me " , the loop is formed philosophically. in other words, the so called loop is conceptual, it's not real. Him and Me? who's He that is separate from he? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.