• Faraway Quasar Group Is The Largest Structure In The Universe
    68 replies, posted
[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;39199248]Does our size make us insignificant, or does the fact that we, beings made out of stardust, can think and reason make us the most important and significant things in the universe? What are we but the universe trying to figure itself out? [editline]12th January 2013[/editline] I should probably stop PUI.[/QUOTE] The universe would be boring if we weren't small compared to it. I find reassurance in the fact that we are all insignificant. If we were "important" or "large" then there wouldn't be a whole lot to understand about it.
We have a place in this universe, and that's enough for me. Even if it is a small one, even if for a short time. Outside your window, there's no shortage of life to be found, and many wonders that grow no less beautiful for having seen them a million times before. The best part is that you're alive and conscious to enjoy them. Another thing, too, is beautiful, and sad. The Universe may be vast beyond the capacity of our minds to fully understand, and the depth of the secrets it holds may be ultimately unknowable to any species, let alone any individual. But in this moment, in the time each of us has been granted, the lives that we love and the moments of our own personal stories that define who we are dwarf the whole of the universe in their importance to us.
I always think of what Philhellenes said about the crushing vastness of the Universe. [I]"It's like the Universe screams in your face, 'do you realize how grand I am? How old I am? Can you even COMPREHEND what I am? What are YOU, compared to ME?' And when you know enough science, you can just calmly smile back at the Universe and reply, 'Dude, I AM you!' "[/I] It's what you need to understand: that we're not just disparate elements occupying a Universe like unwelcome or second-class outsiders. We're beings made of atoms, which are in turn made of energy that once existed as a blinding flash of light. Nothing separates us from the stars we were borne from. We are the ultimate culmination of matter changing, interacting and evolving, up until the point that our sophistication has become so much that we can THINK. We are, literally, the Universe becoming aware of itself, being able to consider and comprehend itself. Suddenly, with this realization, everything that made you feel so small and insignificant makes you feel almost godlike. After all, if we are the Universe, then by rights we inherit all comprised within it. The native American tribes once protested to the white-man's insistence that you could own land, or in fact truly possess anything that wasn't given to you. And this was because they deferred to the land around them as being greater than themselves, and that if they were to own the land, the land must be given to them from on high. But as I see it, there is nothing higher, more complex or more precious than sentient life. Vanishingly rare, immensely complex and intelligent enough to bend the Universe to its whim, and comprehend itself and the matter/energy that is but an extension of itself. The religious often reject scientific ideas on the basis that they feel somehow worthless in a natural Universe, that their religion tells them they're special, crafted by some creator that deems them special by its own arbitrary subjectivity. But they fail to see the whole picture. On reality's own merits, we are INCREDIBLY special. WE are the highest things the Universe has produced, to our knowledge at least. We've nothing to bow to, no authority to answer to other than our fellow sapient life-forms. How much more special can you get? How does being told you're special by something greater than you, trump BEING the greater thing, and figuring out that you're special regardless of WHO says so or not? It's why I feel angry when our own kind stifles our inevitable journeys beyond Earth. It behooves us to go forth and take our birthright. An entire Universe is out there for us to explore, plumb and know, and we sit here on a mote of dust as it beckons to us.
[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;39203497]It's really all about perspective, if you just look at the large scale then in the grand scheme of things we won't even leave a trace of our existence in a few billion years, our world will be scorched to ash and swallowed by the sun and then Earth, the cradle of our existence is gone and even that will be a flash in the intergalactic pan. Everything we do means nothing because it will all be wiped out in the blink of an eye someday without any emotion attached to that destruction. On the other hand we are human, we love, laugh, smile, cry, we hate and we hurt, while we may not become some sci-fiesque species that spreads across the stars and masters the universe to the point where we can rip energy from its very fabric, right now we can be someones whole universe, we can make sad people happy and spread happiness across the world. Like I said, life's all about perspective.[/QUOTE] And then after that, eventually the stelliferous era will end. There'll be no more stars, no more life. And yet, the universe will keep on existing, with no one to observe it. I guess what I'm trying to say is that, I'm happy that right now, someone does exist to observe it. I feel privileged that I can be one of those. Because eventually, the universe will be nothing but radiation and iron, but at least someone will have seen it, when it was at it's most beautiful.
[QUOTE=J-Dude;39208113]I always think of what Philhellenes said about the crushing vastness of the Universe. [I]"It's like the Universe screams in your face, 'do you realize how grand I am? How old I am? Can you even COMPREHEND what I am? What are YOU, compared to ME?' And when you know enough science, you can just calmly smile back at the Universe and reply, 'Dude, I AM you!' "[/I] It's what you need to understand: that we're not just disparate elements occupying a Universe like unwelcome or second-class outsiders. We're beings made of atoms, which are in turn made of energy that once existed as a blinding flash of light. Nothing separates us from the stars we were borne from. We are the ultimate culmination of matter changing, interacting and evolving, up until the point that our sophistication has become so much that we can THINK. We are, literally, the Universe becoming aware of itself, being able to consider and comprehend itself. Suddenly, with this realization, everything that made you feel so small and insignificant makes you feel almost godlike. After all, if we are the Universe, then by rights we inherit all comprised within it. The native American tribes once protested to the white-man's insistence that you could own land, or in fact truly possess anything that wasn't given to you. And this was because they deferred to the land around them as being greater than themselves, and that if they were to own the land, the land must be given to them from on high. But as I see it, there is nothing higher, more complex or more precious than sentient life. Vanishingly rare, immensely complex and intelligent enough to bend the Universe to its whim, and comprehend itself and the matter/energy that is but an extension of itself. The religious often reject scientific ideas on the basis that they feel somehow worthless in a natural Universe, that their religion tells them they're special, crafted by some creator that deems them special by its own arbitrary subjectivity. But they fail to see the whole picture. On reality's own merits, we are INCREDIBLY special. WE are the highest things the Universe has produced, to our knowledge at least. We've nothing to bow to, no authority to answer to other than our fellow sapient life-forms. How much more special can you get? How does being told you're special by something greater than you, trump BEING the greater thing, and figuring out that you're special regardless of WHO says so or not? It's why I feel angry when our own kind stifles our inevitable journeys beyond Earth. It behooves us to go forth and take our birthright. An entire Universe is out there for us to explore, plumb and know, and we sit here on a mote of dust as it beckons to us.[/QUOTE] I think we're breaking away from the bounds of ego as humans. We're realizing the fantasy fairy-tales that we believe, take seriously, allow to dictate our lives and that we even consider 'reality' are ridiculous and flawed. As more and more people become enlightened to this 'non-belief' or even just aware of it, we'll see religions, jealousy, hatred, anger and destruction falling away in favor of humanity as a singular unit.
[QUOTE=alien_guy;39206035]It doesn't say how far away it is. if its ~ 13.75 billion light years away, then sure.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Article;39199110]This LQG is so far away that it looks as it did when the universe was just 770 million years old.[/QUOTE] hence making it 12.98 billion light years away but only visible because of this momentary burst of light extremely bright light
universe is infinite, this isn't the biggest
I'm waiting for them to make a telescope powerful enough to see all the way back to the big bang (Within the first second) Oh wait, that's impossible. Sorry :<
Imagine if suddenly the sky turned bright white and we realised that light from the edge of the universe had finally reached us and it turned out to be solid light in every direction.
[QUOTE=SCopE5000;39209518]I think we're breaking away from the bounds of ego as humans. We're realizing the fantasy fairy-tales that we believe, take seriously, allow to dictate our lives and that we even consider 'reality' are ridiculous and flawed. As more and more people become enlightened to this 'non-belief' or even just aware of it, we'll see religions, jealousy, hatred, anger and destruction falling away in favor of humanity as a singular unit.[/QUOTE] Moving away from egoism would be saying something different than, "we're the most precious and special things to exist, we're higher than everything". We aren't precious, we aren't special, we aren't more important than anything else that exists whether it is sentient or not. To say so is a disgusting amount of entitlement, it's no different from religions that dictate that man is a divine being. We exist, that's it, our morals and values and everything in-between only matter within the context of our consciousnesses and society. Individual humans act in self-interest and preservation, and that and all of the other subconscious factors that influence us will always, always, rule over our thoughts and minds whether you realise it or not. There will never be some great breaking down of our differences and conflicts in favour of unity, regardless of how far we advance in other respects. As long as things like adultery, material value, mental doctrines, and "power" exists, among the other countless unfixable emotional and economic and political factors that mark us exist, there will always be separation and anger and jealousy and destruction. Surely space is where our future lies, but saying that we deserve to conquer and understand it just because we happen to have the cognitive abilities to do so, or that we ever fully will conquer and understand it, isn't realistic. To say that we'll change our own, grotesque nature so that we are better as a race isn't realistic.
man I can't wait for summer so I can stargaze without having to wear multiple layers space is fascinating, absolutely awesomely largomundo.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;39211081]Moving away from egoism would be saying something different than, "we're the most precious and special things to exist, we're higher than everything". We aren't precious, we aren't special, we aren't more important than anything else that exists whether it is sentient or not. To say so is a disgusting amount of entitlement, it's no different from religions that dictate that man is a divine being. We exist, that's it, our morals and values and everything in-between only matter within the context of our consciousnesses and society.[/quote] Of course there's no INTRINSIC value, because value is, by it's very nature, a subjective matter borne within a mind. But if we ARE the Universe, can it not be argued that sentient beings are the MIND of the Universe, and the rest of it merely the body? Is it "a disgusting entitlement" for our minds to decide things for the body, when the body is made up of billions of mindless, directionless cells? If so, what can we do about it anyway? It's splitting hairs. You can neither surrender your power over your body than sapient species can cease to manipulate the Universe to fill their needs, wants and dreams. The way I see it, the Universe is ours to do as we collectively see fit. Should we not understand ourselves by way of understanding the Universe we are part of? [quote]Individual humans act in self-interest and preservation, and that and all of the other subconscious factors that influence us will always, always, rule over our thoughts and minds whether you realise it or not. There will never be some great breaking down of our differences and conflicts in favour of unity, regardless of how far we advance in other respects. As long as things like adultery, material value, mental doctrines, and "power" exists, among the other countless unfixable emotional and economic and political factors that mark us exist, there will always be separation and anger and jealousy and destruction.[/quote] As sapient beings, of course we will all have our own sordid interests. Have I argued otherwise? We resulted from evolution, the design of our brains isn't perfect. We will always have conflict, which is for the better really. The challenge of differing ideas, values, allowing us to refine them rather than existing in an echo-chamber. I don't know why you believe I think we'll become one mind or something. Maybe the end of your post will explain it. [quote]Surely space is where our future lies, but saying that we deserve to conquer and understand it just because we happen to have the cognitive abilities to do so, or that we ever fully will conquer and understand it, isn't realistic.[/QUOTE] Isn't realistic? We have 30 billion years with which to plumb the Universe's secrets and better know ourselves! To explore, to evolve, to refine our methods and our knowledge! And I only say that in case we never succeed at maintaining the Universe's capacity for life, or leap across a multiverse into other Universes with the capacity to sustain us. And as to "deserving" to conquer and understand just because we can... well, why not? What's stopping us, and why shouldn't we? Maybe "deserve" is a strong word, but I think we owe it to ourselves as an extension of the Universe to know it and use it as well as possible. [QUOTE]To say that we'll change our own, grotesque nature so that we are better as a race isn't realistic.[/QUOTE] "Our own [I]grotesque [/I]nature"? I find that statement in itself grotesque, and that it appeals to a religious sentiment that looks upon the human race and condemns it for being exactly what it is. When we encounter other sentient races, I know we'll swap campfire tales of our species' misdeeds past and present. Selfishness, greed, arrogance, ignorance; is it REALISTIC to expect us to find our way in the world without them being a factor, at ANY stage of our evolution, organic or cultural? Human beings are far too critical of themselves. It's too popular anymore to behave as though we're a pack of savages, and that ANY developing species anywhere else would have a better time of it than we have. We inflict shame on ourselves to atone for our imperfections, while trying to be more perfect than we CAN be. In a way, that's almost noble. And yet it's so insufferably DUMB. It's good that we want to expect the best of ourselves, that we strive for something more. To BECOME more than our inner ape. But while we should constantly struggle to improve for the sake of everyone, I believe it is self destructive to ignore how our culture has progressed in favor of wallowing in the shame of our inevitable sins. I believe we are CONSTANTLY working towards a better and brighter world than I think even the most optimistic among us would posit, and history stands as testament to our plodding, but constant trail towards enlightenment. This world will never be perfect, and neither will we, but I see the human species as a fascinating, positive and worthy part of the Universe, and I think we will continue moving forward for millenia to come, and quite probably longer.
[QUOTE=J-Dude;39212188]Of course there's no INTRINSIC value, because value is, by it's very nature, a subjective matter borne within a mind. But if we ARE the Universe, can it not be argued that sentient beings are the MIND of the Universe, and the rest of it merely the body? Is it "a disgusting entitlement" for our minds to decide things for the body, when the body is made up of billions of mindless, directionless cells? If so, what can we do about it anyway? It's splitting hairs. You can neither surrender your power over your body than sapient species can cease to manipulate the Universe to fill their needs, wants and dreams. The way I see it, the Universe is ours to do as we collectively see fit. Should we not understand ourselves by way of understanding the Universe we are part of? As sapient beings, of course we will all have our own sordid interests. Have I argued otherwise? We resulted from evolution, the design of our brains isn't perfect. We will always have conflict, which is for the better really. The challenge of differing ideas, values, allowing us to refine them rather than existing in an echo-chamber. I don't know why you believe I think we'll become one mind or something. Maybe the end of your post will explain it. Isn't realistic? We have 30 billion years with which to plumb the Universe's secrets and better know ourselves! To explore, to evolve, to refine our methods and our knowledge! And I only say that in case we never succeed at maintaining the Universe's capacity for life, or leap across a multiverse into other Universes with the capacity to sustain us. And as to "deserving" to conquer and understand just because we can... well, why not? What's stopping us, and why shouldn't we? Maybe "deserve" is a strong word, but I think we owe it to ourselves as an extension of the Universe to know it and use it as well as possible. "Our own [I]grotesque [/I]nature"? I find that statement in itself grotesque, and that it appeals to a religious sentiment that looks upon the human race and condemns it for being exactly what it is. When we encounter other sentient races, I know we'll swap campfire tales of our species' misdeeds past and present. Selfishness, greed, arrogance, ignorance; is it REALISTIC to expect us to find our way in the world without them being a factor, at ANY stage of our evolution, organic or cultural? Human beings are far too critical of themselves. It's too popular anymore to behave as though we're a pack of savages, and that ANY developing species anywhere else would have a better time of it than we have. We inflict shame on ourselves to atone for our imperfections, while trying to be more perfect than we CAN be. In a way, that's almost noble. And yet it's so insufferably DUMB. It's good that we want to expect the best of ourselves, that we strive for something more. To BECOME more than our inner ape. But while we should constantly struggle to improve for the sake of everyone, I believe it is self destructive to ignore how our culture has progressed in favor of wallowing in the shame of our inevitable sins. I believe we are CONSTANTLY working towards a better and brighter world than I think even the most optimistic among us would posit, and history stands as testament to our plodding, but constant trail towards enlightenment. This world will never be perfect, and neither will we, but I see the human species as a fascinating, positive and worthy part of the Universe, and I think we will continue moving forward for millenia to come, and quite probably longer.[/QUOTE] Sapient species are usually not good custodians of their homeworlds, I'm sure. We certainly aren't good custodians of ours. Natural resources are not ours to use and discard as we see fit - We need to better learn how to preserve them while still making use of them - For once, we need to learn how to live in a place without destroying it. The universe owes us nothing, and we are as dust in the wind - But I'd rather be part of a gentle breeze than a sandstorm. I agree with some of what you said - We owe it to ourselves as a species to ever grow in knowledge and technology, and to explore the stars when we may. But we must never forget the costs - And everything has a cost. [editline]14th January 2013[/editline] Furthermore, J-dude, I must add that the concept of the world being there for our taking is one typical of Abrahamic faith - It is championed by Christianity, Islam, and Judaism.
[QUOTE=J-Dude;39212188]Of course there's no INTRINSIC value, because value is, by it's very nature, a subjective matter borne within a mind. But if we ARE the Universe, can it not be argued that sentient beings are the MIND of the Universe, and the rest of it merely the body? Is it "a disgusting entitlement" for our minds to decide things for the body, when the body is made up of billions of mindless, directionless cells? If so, what can we do about it anyway? It's splitting hairs. You can neither surrender your power over your body than sapient species can cease to manipulate the Universe to fill their needs, wants and dreams. The way I see it, the Universe is ours to do as we collectively see fit. Should we not understand ourselves by way of understanding the Universe we are part of? As sapient beings, of course we will all have our own sordid interests. Have I argued otherwise? We resulted from evolution, the design of our brains isn't perfect. We will always have conflict, which is for the better really. The challenge of differing ideas, values, allowing us to refine them rather than existing in an echo-chamber. I don't know why you believe I think we'll become one mind or something. Maybe the end of your post will explain it. Isn't realistic? We have 30 billion years with which to plumb the Universe's secrets and better know ourselves! To explore, to evolve, to refine our methods and our knowledge! And I only say that in case we never succeed at maintaining the Universe's capacity for life, or leap across a multiverse into other Universes with the capacity to sustain us. And as to "deserving" to conquer and understand just because we can... well, why not? What's stopping us, and why shouldn't we? Maybe "deserve" is a strong word, but I think we owe it to ourselves as an extension of the Universe to know it and use it as well as possible. "Our own [I]grotesque [/I]nature"? I find that statement in itself grotesque, and that it appeals to a religious sentiment that looks upon the human race and condemns it for being exactly what it is. When we encounter other sentient races, I know we'll swap campfire tales of our species' misdeeds past and present. Selfishness, greed, arrogance, ignorance; is it REALISTIC to expect us to find our way in the world without them being a factor, at ANY stage of our evolution, organic or cultural? Human beings are far too critical of themselves. It's too popular anymore to behave as though we're a pack of savages, and that ANY developing species anywhere else would have a better time of it than we have. We inflict shame on ourselves to atone for our imperfections, while trying to be more perfect than we CAN be. In a way, that's almost noble. And yet it's so insufferably DUMB. It's good that we want to expect the best of ourselves, that we strive for something more. To BECOME more than our inner ape. But while we should constantly struggle to improve for the sake of everyone, I believe it is self destructive to ignore how our culture has progressed in favor of wallowing in the shame of our inevitable sins. I believe we are CONSTANTLY working towards a better and brighter world than I think even the most optimistic among us would posit, and history stands as testament to our plodding, but constant trail towards enlightenment. This world will never be perfect, and neither will we, but I see the human species as a fascinating, positive and worthy part of the Universe, and I think we will continue moving forward for millenia to come, and quite probably longer.[/QUOTE] I was responding to both you and the guy who quoted you talking about humanity uniting. There is no logical reason why we would ever be the "mind" of the universe. Why would mortal, stupid, and small things act as the consciousness of something infinitely large and grand. If the universe was some giant, conscious being, certainly it would manifest its own "thoughts" in something that is more than what can easily be considered just barely conscious and objectively aware of its own actions. Humanity certainly isn't too critical of itself, considering how many gaping flaws we have, ones that are absolutely crippling and destructive. We'd just be ignorant and even more broken to forget that they exist, or downplay them as part of being human and being ~individuals~ and something we should just tolerate, since, at least with our current society and technology. they aren't fixable. Of course, to be objective and all, when I say disgusting and grotesque I mean counterintuitive, self-destructive, disruptive of harmony, against the cause of altruism and advancement. In which case, even objectively, we are disgusting and unworthy for what we are; self-indulgent, disloyal, and conflicting things. We are not, at all, striving to be our best. Being mindful of, or trying avoiding the giant, gaping holes that come along with the human ego and consciousness is not going for broke to be more perfect than we can be. The world gets brighter and nicer everyday in some ways, but it only becomes worse or remains static in others. There are plenty of examples and statistics I could use the prove this; adultery rates, divorce rates, and death and morality rates related to certain causes. Though the first two may seem irrelevant, they are really representative of major human characteristics such as loyalty, altruism, and self-control. Some of those statistics are the reason why I'm quite happy to argue the point of our irrelevance and smallness. Now, to say the universe is still ours', in some way, and that we as conscious beings are entitled to everything it holds, is of course wrong in an objective context. It can be argued morally that something so low and fractured and twisted as us shouldn't ever have any claim over it, but morals don't hold much value in a logical argument. Maybe it would just be pointless for us to advance so much without fixing or somehow sealing off our more "domestic" issues as a race. When I say conflict I mean mass bloodshed and hatred and all, not conflicting values or arguments. I was arguing for my pessimism and not against what Scope had to say about unity. Advancement can still happen without any sort of conflict of interests or ideals, regardless, since new ideas can still be universally agree'd with. Humans are too geared towards their own self-interest to achieve such a level of unity, though. It is disgusting to title ourselves as something so grand and precious when we are so small and flawed and have not done so much to at least try to mend those flaws. It is disgusting because we can so very easily realise that we aren't so worthy and irreproachable and at least try to change that, but alas, it isn't happening, anyway. People just giving into their own counterintuitive nature and doing harm to everything and everyone and labeling that as some sort of "right" or "freedom" is why I'm even arguing to say that we are pointless or disgusting or undeserving in the first place. I can't really comprehend why any one of us could ever claim that we are something grand and big and important in this universe after they've read about and seen the infinite and objective and, relative to us, timeless complex that is the reality. I can't comprehend why we should ever, ever, achieve a grand state in this place while still being unbelievably, internally, broken and twisted. I could go on and ponder for days about why we shouldn't advance so far without first realizing and fixing the logically unfixable, and why we probably won't advance as far as you described, anyway, but until I get some rest I'll probably just go in circles about how we're broken and not precious. I honestly hope we don't advance too far unless the flaws that make us what we are are magically fixed, it's probably why my arguments make sense to me at all. [editline]14th January 2013[/editline] We're like the exact polar opposites in this respect. [editline]14th January 2013[/editline] Come to think of it, my mindset is a win-win. If we fail as a species and fall out of existence, everything that is bad and wrong with us will go, too. If we ever advance as far as getting into metaphysical sciences like you hope we do, we'll have probably changed our own subconscious and more instinctual thought processes, somehow. Then again, that's pseudo-science.
How can this be bigger than the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sloan_Great_Wall"]Sloan Great Wall[/URL], for example?
[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;39199331]The only reason "history" or "philosophy" has any value or significance is because sentient beings deem it so. The universe at large as we know it has no concept of value. Thus making us the most significant beings in the universe, only because we deem it so.[/QUOTE] Significance is exclusively a human sentiment / value, so classifying humans as the most "significant" thing in the universe is largely useless. The universe won't give a damn if we're wiped out tomorrow, so I'm not sure how being able to judge significance somehow makes us significant. Our existence is absurd and probably pointless, I don't think that's a conclusion we should try to avoid.
[QUOTE=archangel125;39212669]Sapient species are usually not good custodians of their homeworlds, I'm sure. We certainly aren't good custodians of ours. Natural resources are not ours to use and discard as we see fit - We need to better learn how to preserve them while still making use of them - For once, we need to learn how to live in a place without destroying it.[/QUOTE] Oh pish posh, we're only in a minor learning phase. Was inevitable. Back in the day, we never had to worry about things like pollution or limited, non-renewable resources and exploding populations. It's a bump in the road. We'll figure it out by the end of the century. You can't tell me other sapient species wouldn't have dealt with this problem too. It's just a natural result of the early and inefficient forms of industry. We shall overcome, either by the development of truly revolutionary technology, or a spiraling cataclysm that will demand we better change or methods and policies to prevent a repeat of such things. The species will survive. [quote]The universe owes us nothing, and we are as dust in the wind - But I'd rather be part of a gentle breeze than a sandstorm. I agree with some of what you said - We owe it to ourselves as a species to ever grow in knowledge and technology, and to explore the stars when we may. But we must never forget the costs - And everything has a cost.[/quote] Well of COURSE it owes us nothing, it's not alive. Mostly. It can be argued that, as packets of matter that are PART of the Universe, WE are the part of the Universe which is alive, and can owe and be owed to. In which case, our only obligation is to each other, and possibly to some of the more intelligent earth species. As to "Dust in the wind," it sounds rather defeatist. I envision a time in the far far future, where we are capable of such immense feats that we could rearrange whole solar systems if we wanted to. All you need is the energy to do so, and it's a big Universe out there. [quote]Furthermore, J-dude, I must add that the concept of the world being there for our taking is one typical of Abrahamic faith - It is championed by Christianity, Islam, and Judaism.[/quote] Well, it wasn't MADE for us, but if nothing ELSE owns something, why not lay claim to it? Nobody's stopping us. Naturally we ought to respect territory owned by other sentient races in the Universe and work together with them. I don't think you really understand my sentiment. I'm not saying we should slam planetoids together for fun, or use designated planets as gigantic garbage dumps (though stars would be better suited for that task) or be otherwise childish and irresponsible. Of course there will be laws and regulations as to how we handle things, it's only natural that we would. I mean, would you object to a Moon base? I doubt you would, because what's the harm? I'm really not sure what your contention is at this point. [QUOTE]I was responding to both you and the guy who quoted you talking about humanity uniting. There is no logical reason why we would ever be the "mind" of the universe. Why would mortal, stupid, and small things act as the consciousness of something infinitely large and grand. If the universe was some giant, conscious being, certainly it would manifest its own "thoughts" in something that is more than what can easily be considered just barely conscious and objectively aware of its own actions.[/QUOTE] No no, you misunderstand me. I'm not saying the Universe is alive in the traditional sense you might say so. But it IS alive in the sense that WE are alive, and WE are the Universe. We are matter and energy, non-living elements same as everything else, and we are ALIVE. We are parts of the Universe that LIVE, that THINK, that COMPREHEND! In a way, we are the Universe incarnate. The Universe is great and grand, but we are not APART from it, we ARE it! We are one of the things, maybe even the GREATEST thing, that MAKES the Universe amazing. That by disparate, dead elements growing, multiplying, recombining and mutating, light and particles came together to form something so complex, it can REASON. We take for granted just how incredible that really is. Also, "stupid"? In what sense? This is exactly the kind of self-loathing I'm talking about. We hold ourselves to a higher standard, but then we forget that we've raised the bar pretty damn high already. We take our own cleverness for granted, and tend to ask too much of ourselves. [quote]Humanity certainly isn't too critical of itself, considering how many gaping flaws we have, ones that are absolutely crippling and destructive. We'd just be ignorant and even more broken to forget that they exist, or downplay them as part of being human and being ~individuals~ and something we should just tolerate, since, at least with our current society and technology. they aren't fixable.[/quote] It is not that we are without flaws, but that we so often condemn ourselves for them when they CANNOT be our fault. Our flaws result from us being animals, honed for survival at all cost by evolutionary processes, driven to intense paranoia all those thousands of years ago when we left the trees in Africa for the ground, and found our only immediate defense was to be more cautious than all the other prey animals. To defeat the inner ape, and be more, is daunting and counters many of our in-built instincts. But that isn't to say we cant do it. But it should not be a surprise when our instincts win-out over our reason. I'd say given the enemy we face at the genetic level, what we have accomplished is nothing less than breathtaking. We don't give ourselves enough credit, and too readily focus on the ill. We're better than we realize. [quote]Of course, to be objective and all, when I say disgusting and grotesque I mean counterintuitive, self-destructive, disruptive of harmony, against the cause of altruism and advancement. In which case, even objectively, we are disgusting and unworthy for what we are; self-indulgent, disloyal, and conflicting things. We are not, at all, striving to be our best. Being mindful of, or trying avoiding the giant, gaping holes that come along with the human ego and consciousness is not going for broke to be more perfect than we can be.[/quote] If we're not worthy, then I doubt if anybody is. Again, I'd like to see the alien species who didn't have to fight the same battles we did on their way to progress and the greater reaches of the cosmos. Things like apathy should be expected from the greater public. That we're at all surprised that we've yet to fight down our instincts collectively is to have expected something unrealistic. On the flipside though, look at the state of the world now. There are rogue nations that live under theocratic law, isolate their people from the world and deny the cultural advancements of Western society, but the vast majority is living in a time of shared ideals and peace that has never before been experienced. Large national powers aren't going to war, people connect and speak to others on the other side of the planet like next-door neighbors (sometimes, lol). The world is inarguably better than it's ever been, and can only get BETTER. Sure, we're facing economical and social challenges, fettered by outdated legal structures and systems for the world as it is, but these are challenges we will overcome, however daunting they seem at the moment.[/quote] [quote]The world gets brighter and nicer everyday in some ways, but it only becomes worse or remains static in others. There are plenty of examples and statistics I could use the prove this; adultery rates, divorce rates, and death and morality rates related to certain causes. Though the first two may seem irrelevant, they are really representative of major human characteristics such as loyalty, altruism, and self-control. Some of those statistics are the reason why I'm quite happy to argue the point of our irrelevance and smallness.[/quote] Actually, they seem utterly irrelevant to humanity as a whole, and not unexpected. Humans did not evolve as monogamous creatures. Monogamy is something society FORCED upon us. It's nothing to do with loyalty, but with genetics. Again, you blame the human species for things they have no real control over. And divorce rates? I'd list divorce rates as a net POSITIVE in that they have increased. It's better that a couple divorce than that they force a marriage to work that clearly ISN'T working anymore. It's the fact that society isn't shaming people who get divorces, or that religion isn't forcing people to remain unhappy and maintain a facade because somewhere along the line we decided marriage had to be FORVER. I repeat, it's a GOOD thing that people are abandoning these traditions. No marriage "fails" if it doesn't last "till death do us part". It worked for the time that it did. If the couple was happy, it's not a failed marriage because it ended. [quote]Now, to say the universe is still ours', in some way, and that we as conscious beings are entitled to everything it holds, is of course wrong in an objective context. It can be argued morally that something so low and fractured and twisted as us shouldn't ever have any claim over it, but morals don't hold much value in a logical argument. Maybe it would just be pointless for us to advance so much without fixing or somehow sealing off our more "domestic" issues as a race.[/quote] Your lack of esteem for your own kind depresses me. We are only as "fractured" and "twisted" as any other species on our planet or others. You behave as if any other species is somehow "better" than us. Why? Certainly not because they don't kill each other, because they do. Certainly not because they don't rape, or steal, or devastate their environment? Because we are FAR from unique in those respects. Any other species with or capacities and our cleverness would have likely done no different than we have. As to "domestic issues," I believe that's well in hand. We advance culturally with every new day, with the death of every old codger stuck in his ways and incapable of embracing the new landscape of tolerance, fellowship and reason. Looking at the timeline of the human species, our advances in how we treat our fellow human being would look like a lightning bolt struck us in our collective hearts, as we continue to embrace reality and reason over ignorance and dogma, and see each other as borne equals. You fail to see how remarkable our ascension has become. [quote]When I say conflict I mean mass bloodshed and hatred and all, not conflicting values or arguments. I was arguing for my pessimism and not against what Scope had to say about unity. Advancement can still happen without any sort of conflict of interests or ideals, regardless, since new ideas can still be universally agree'd with. Humans are too geared towards their own self-interest to achieve such a level of unity, though.[/quote] Again, what bloodshed are we talking about? The past decade has seen the least deaths as a result of war or combat in human history. Of course terrible things have still happened, but they are inarguably happening LESS. We are hating LESS, we are warring LESS. The trend is clear that we are well on our way to a better future, in EVERY respect. You behave as though the fact that tragedies OCCUR or that people die is enough reason to condemn all of us. Tragedies are the infinitely regrettable, but inevitable byproduct of life simply being possible in the first place. And you're right, as individuals we all have self interest that drives us, but I'd rather us be individuals with varying ideals than the fucking Borg collective. If I could, there are some things I would change about the human species, but other things I would never touch. [quote]It is disgusting to title ourselves as something so grand and precious when we are so small and flawed and have not done so much to at least try to mend those flaws. It is disgusting because we can so very easily realise that we aren't so worthy and irreproachable and at least try to change that, but alas, it isn't happening, anyway. People just giving into their own counterintuitive nature and doing harm to everything and everyone and labeling that as some sort of "right" or "freedom" is why I'm even arguing to say that we are pointless or disgusting or undeserving in the first place.[/quote] As I have pointed out several times in this post, your sentiment is WRONG. Demonstrably WRONG, because the evidence leans heavily in the opposite direction, toward a better and better world. You fail to see the breadth of the progress exploding all around you, or recognize that some things even ARE progression. And I never said we were beyond reproach. I agree we have flaws, and should always strive to be better. But I think it is a grave mistake to shame ourselves for our flaws. All we can do is try to be a little bit better, and the results are speaking for themselves. [quote]I can't really comprehend why any one of us could ever claim that we are something grand and big and important in this universe after they've read about and seen the infinite and objective and, relative to us, timeless complex that is the reality. I can't comprehend why we should ever, ever, achieve a grand state in this place while still being unbelievably, internally, broken and twisted.[/quote] Your self-hate really is enough to make me shake my head. I'm glad I don't share your attitude, or your contempt for your own kind. The Universe is grand, and great and beautiful, and we are a part of it as much as the cat's eye nebula. But when you look at what it took for us to get here, alive with a mind, it's hard to deny that we are some of the most interesting things about the Universe. Matter and energy with a will of its own, directed by natural processes to think and feel and create. We're too close to our own world to realize just how special and precious we are. There are thousands of nebulae and supernovas and blue supergiant stars, but there is only ONE human species, sat upon the little spec at the far-end of the galaxy we call Earth. And it is not so much a claim of ownership, as the knowledge that we are as much a part of it as it is a part of us. We are the progeny of the stars, a branch of the family tree of light itself. From fleeing in fear from predators on the African plains, we journeyed until we stood upon our own moon, and invented until we'd gone from rubbing two sticks together to colliding protons head-on at close to the speed of light, and communicating across the planet on currents of sunbeams. And our journey, our legacy, is far from over. [quote]I could go on and ponder for days about why we shouldn't advance so far without first realizing and fixing the logically unfixable, and why we probably won't advance as far as you described, anyway, but until I get some rest I'll probably just go in circles about how we're broken and not precious. I honestly hope we don't advance too far unless the flaws that make us what we are are magically fixed, it's probably why my arguments make sense to me at all.[/quote] Some of our broken bits are to our own detriment, but others, I think, give us character. I anticipate the day genetic engineering will allow us to perfect our own design, with hope, but caution. There are just some things about us I would never change. [quote]Come to think of it, my mindset is a win-win. If we fail as a species and fall out of existence, everything that is bad and wrong with us will go, too. If we ever advance as far as getting into metaphysical sciences like you hope we do, we'll have probably changed our own subconscious and more instinctual thought processes, somehow. Then again, that's pseudo-science.[/quote] If we fall, I only see it as a light in the Universe going out. A tragic loss. But I don't see it happening. We've proved responsible with the one class of weapon that could spell doom. Used only twice in anger, and then never again. Say what you will, we've proven we're not dumb enough to go through with our own destruction. And once the less enlightened sectors of the world join us in our future, I doubt if we'll need to worry about such things again, especially once we begin colonizing other planets.
[QUOTE=zugu;39213514]How can this be bigger than the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sloan_Great_Wall"]Sloan Great Wall[/URL], for example?[/QUOTE] It's in the second sentence of the article christ.
[QUOTE=bull3tmagn3t;39210140]universe is infinite, this isn't the biggest[/QUOTE] "Largest structure [B]in the universe[/B]"
[QUOTE=J-Dude;39219827]Lots of words.[/QUOTE] I could do another giant reply and ponder for hours with new argumentative points that are purposely separated from the entire, "we're awful" thing, and go into detail why those irrelevant factors such as divorce and adultery rates are perfectly representative of the disruption of harmony, flaunting of self-interest, and all that, and how it is perfectly preventable. I'm fatigued right now, though, maybe I caught that flu that has been going about.
[QUOTE=bull3tmagn3t;39210140]universe is infinite, this isn't the biggest[/QUOTE] The universe is very finite.
[QUOTE=bull3tmagn3t;39210140]universe is infinite, this isn't the biggest[/QUOTE] well we don't know for sure how big it is but if anying the universe is a bobble what ever the fuck is past the edge might be infinite though.
[QUOTE=archangel125;39224172]The universe is very finite.[/QUOTE] We don't know that.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39225482]We don't know that.[/QUOTE] Don't we? Of course, we're pretty sure that the universe is expanding. To be expanding, it'd have to have had a starting point. We can see evidence through observing distant cosmic structures and through spectroscopy (galaxies, stars, etc) of how things looked and were composed when the universe was young. We can see this because the light from those distant things took a long time to reach us, and so we're seeing them as they were billions of years ago. Furthermore, the fact that things in the universe have temperature, like stars, means the energy has to have come from somewhere. We know that stars form and die, but even new stars need to coalesce out of hot gases. The next logical step seems to be to come to the conclusion that since the universe is expanding and has energy, it has to have had a starting point. And since it had a starting point, and still has energy, there must be an outer boundary somewhere. It is theorized we can observe roughly a third of the universe because anything beyond that is too far away for its light to have reached us yet. But it is extremely unlikely that the universe is infinite. Practically impossible.
[QUOTE=BrainDeath;39220523]It's in the second sentence of the article christ.[/QUOTE] It wasn't when I posted the link to the Wikipedia article.
[QUOTE=archangel125;39225727]Don't we? Of course, we're pretty sure that the universe is expanding. To be expanding, it'd have to have had a starting point. We can see evidence through observing distant cosmic structures and through spectroscopy (galaxies, stars, etc) of how things looked and were composed when the universe was young. We can see this because the light from those distant things took a long time to reach us, and so we're seeing them as they were billions of years ago. Furthermore, the fact that things in the universe have temperature, like stars, means the energy has to have come from somewhere. We know that stars form and die, but even new stars need to coalesce out of hot gases. The next logical step seems to be to come to the conclusion that since the universe is expanding and has energy, it has to have had a starting point. And since it had a starting point, and still has energy, there must be an outer boundary somewhere. It is theorized we can observe roughly a third of the universe because anything beyond that is too far away for its light to have reached us yet. But it is extremely unlikely that the universe is infinite. Practically impossible.[/QUOTE] then what defines the edge of the universe? i don't think we can say we know this for sure yet.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;39225758]then what defines the edge of the universe? i don't think we can say we know this for sure yet.[/QUOTE] If general relativity has SOME things right, there's nothing beyond the edge. Space and time itself only exist within the confines of the Universe. Beyond... We don't know. Nothing exists on any plane of reality that we can understand. It makes it entirely possible that this isn't the only universe, and more than possible that this isn't the first. [editline]15th January 2013[/editline] When we have a grand unified theory we may be able to answer that question more definitively. And that only after the GUT has been tried and tested and nothing seems to defy it. We really, really don't have one yet. [editline]15th January 2013[/editline] In theory, the ends of the universe can be experienced in many places, at the event horizons of singularities. Let's say a human being was sucked into a black hole - Let's assume he was shielded in such a way he could survive the intense heat and radiation near the center of it. For anyone watching him from outside, he would appear to slow to a stop and never really reach that event horizon. From his point of view, however, he would fall normally, and as he fell the universe around him would speed up. Before he reached that event horizon, he would see the end of the Universe, the end of time itself. Picture that for a second. [editline]15th January 2013[/editline] To answer your question, Humanabyss, if a ship were to theoretically travel to the boundaries of the universe, the exact same thing would happen to it as would to a person falling into a black hole.
[QUOTE=archangel125;39225727]Don't we?[/QUOTE] No. We don't. Various modern cosmological theories predict an infinite universe. It comes from the flatness problem. On the largest distance scales, spacetime looks flat. Not just almost flat, but perfectly flat. Still, other models predict a large but finite universe. I tend to agree with you. I feel that the universe is finite, but there really is no consensus among scientists.
[QUOTE=Zackin5;39199485]Your scale is a bit off, just for reference: [url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Earth%27s_Location_in_the_Universe_%28JPEG%29.jpg][img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b6/Earth%27s_Location_in_the_Universe_%28JPEG%29.jpg/1280px-Earth%27s_Location_in_the_Universe_%28JPEG%29.jpg[/img][/url][/QUOTE] That's just awesome and also makes you feel so small. But also makes you think what else is out there..
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39229385]No. We don't. Various modern cosmological theories predict an infinite universe. It comes from the flatness problem. On the largest distance scales, spacetime looks flat. Not just almost flat, but perfectly flat. Still, other models predict a large but finite universe. I tend to agree with you. I feel that the universe is finite, but there really is no consensus among scientists.[/QUOTE] The idea of an infinite universe is a frightening thought because it means that nothing is finite or unique. Not humanity, not Earth, not our history, or solar system, or the particular arrangement or quantity of molecules that make up our bodies - There are literally an infinite number of copies of us somewhere out there, because possibility itself is infinite.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.