Star Trek

I just saw on the sienc channel we actualy have a small amont of antimatter in a Colarado partical exelirator about 300 trillanths of a gram running around  a endless cercal in of all things a powerfull magnetic feeld if it were to touch the wall small BOOM the know that the exchange of energy with a matter antimatter reaction is 100% ie when you see wesly crusher taking the star fleet entrence exame the raitio of mater annd antimatter will alway be  1 to 1

An antimatter universe isn't as far fetched as one might think.  During the initial birth of our universe, there was a battle between antimatter and matter.  Both were being created continuously, and conversely annihilating each other, but by random happenstance, the balance of mutual annihilation was upset and matter gained the upper hand.

Our universe could have just as easily been an "antimatter" universe, and what we now call matter would now be our "antimatter."

Quote (Warhaven @ Jan. 13 2007, 5:00 am)

An antimatter universe isn't as far fetched as one might think. ¿During the initial birth of our universe, there was a battle between antimatter and matter. ¿Both were being created continuously, and conversely annihilating each other, but by random happenstance, the balance of mutual annihilation was upset and matter gained the upper hand. Our universe could have just as easily been an "antimatter" universe, and what we now call matter would now be our "antimatter."

by happenstance, No!.. According to the all the know conservation laws the amount of antimatter and matter created by the big bang would have been exactly equal!!!

The reason matter won over antimatter would be due to the Higg field that would have alter the decay of some particles that would have allow a suplus of normal matter versus antimatter in the milliseconds after the bigbang..Chance would have nothing to do with it.

Instead some yet to be discover higher physics ( whether string theory or various GUT's).

As it stand there is only one know universe and we are it..

It does not appear to matter (no pun intended) since there are an infinite number of matter universes, or areas of our universe, or something.   For clarification beyond what I can possibly offer, see today's article in the Daily Telegraph (UK):  

It's official, Elvis lives
Last Updated: 12:01am GMT 16/01/2007

It might sound a little crazy, but our standard theories of cosmology and physics suggest that an infinite number of Presleys still exist, says Marcus Chown. And if that's not scary enough, it also means that you, and these words, are repeated ad infinitum across the universe

Elvis is alive. No, really! He didn't die of a cardiac arrest in his bathroom at Graceland on August 16, 1977. Instead, he slipped out of the back door under cover of darkness dressed as a nun, had a sex change and worked for several years in a gas station in Ohio. She/he has now retired, is living on the Gulf Coast and is in tip-top health. After all, she's still only 71.

 
The King rules again, and again, and again... as an unavoidable consequence of 'inflation¿ in the universe  
Have I done a David Icke and gone conspiracy mad? Not at all. Elvis is alive and kicking, all right. Not here on Earth - but in an infinite number of other places in the universe. I have just revealed cosmology's dirty little secret ¿ the thing the people who spend their time theorising about the universe rarely like to mention except in a whisper. And who can honestly blame them?

Elvis's survival turns out to be an unavoidable consequence of two things ¿ the standard theory of cosmology and the standard theory of physics, "quantum theory". Take cosmology first.

According to the standard picture, the universe underwent a brief, super-fast period of expansion in its first split-second of existence. It goes by the name of "inflation". You don't need to know much about inflation ¿ what drove it or why cosmologists believe it happened. You just need to know one thing: inflation implies the universe goes on for ever ¿ it is effectively infinite in extent.

The universe we see through our telescopes, however, does not look infinite. Far from it. Everything burst into being 13.7 billion years ago in the explosion of the Big Bang, so we see only the galaxies whose light has taken less than 13.7 billion years to get to us.

advertisementGalaxies whose light would take, say 14.7 billion years, we don't see ¿ their light is still on its way to Earth. For this reason, there is a "light horizon" around our bit of the universe and everything we can see within it we call the "observable universe".

But, just as there is more beyond the horizon at sea, there is more of the universe beyond its horizon. In fact, an infinite amount, according to inflation. Imagine our observable universe shrunk to the size of a soap bubble. Well, according to inflation, beyond our soap bubble are an infinite number of other soap bubbles, all similar to our observable universe.

It is easy to speculate on what it is like in the other bubble regions because we have a pretty good idea how the galaxies in the observable universe came to be. Some regions of the Big Bang fireball were ever-so-slightly denser than others. They acted as "seeds" for the growth of galaxies.

Specifically, they had stronger gravity than surrounding regions and so gathered in matter from about them. This made their gravity even stronger so they could pull in more matter. In a process akin to the rich getting ever richer, they gradually produced the galaxies like our own Milky Way and its neighbour, Andromeda.

Now, inflation is no airy-fairy theoretical idea. It has been pretty much confirmed in the past year by data collected by Nasa's "Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe", which is observing the dim "afterglow" of the Big Bang fireball from far out in space. And inflation predicts more than that ¿ there are an infinite number of bubble regions like our observable universe.

It also predicts something else significant ¿ that the seeds of galaxies were randomly scattered throughout the Big Bang fireball. Consequently, in the next soap-bubble region to our own, the seeds were different, which means that the history of that region was different, and the galaxies that formed were not the same as ours. And the same goes for the next region. And the next...

Though Elvis has not made a look in yet, don't worry, we're getting there!

The last thing you need to know to understand why the King still lives is that the universe is quantum. This means that, ultimately, everything comes in tiny, indivisible grains, or "quanta". Matter comes in indivisible grains. Time comes in indivisible grains. And so does space.

If we could look at space with some kind of super-microscope ¿ way beyond the power of any instrument we can build today ¿ it would resolve itself into a grid of tiny cubes. For the sake of simplicity, think of it instead as the two-dimensional grid of squares of a chessboard.

In this picture, we might have a galaxy-spawning seed of matter on one square, and another seed on another square; and so on. But, and this is the key, there are only a finite number of ways of arranging the seeds just as there are only a finite number of ways of arranging the pieces on a chessboard.

So there are only a finite number of possible histories for a universe leading to only a finite number of possible arrangements of galaxies.

If your head hasn't yet exploded, you now have all you need to understand the first paragraph of this article.

If there are an infinite number of regions like our observable universe but only a finite number of histories for such regions, then every possible history happens not once but an infinite number of times.

"There are an infinite number of places in the universe where Elvis is alive and kicking," says one of the contributors to inflation theory, Alex Vilenkin of Tufts University.

There are also an infinite number of places where Shane Warne was born in Surrey, and England never lose the Ashes. There are an infinite number of places where The Telegraph liked this article so much it decided to pay me a million pounds and run a special colour supplement solely to advertise my new book.

But all of this also has implications for you, not just Elvis and Shane Warne. There are an infinite number of regions in the universe exactly the same as the observable universe. And each contains a perfect copy of you who, up until this instant, has experienced everything you have ever experienced. This is no fanciful prediction.

"It is possible to calculate precisely how far away is the nearest region identical to our observable universe," says Vilenkin.

"It's 10^10^100 centimetres away." (10^100 is 1 followed by 100 zeroes, so I'll leave to imagine how "vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big" 10^ (10^100) is, to steal Douglas Adams's words. As an anorak aside, Google, the name of the ubiquitous web search engine, is a misspelling of "Googol", which means 10^100. There is even a name for 10^Googol ¿ 1 followed by a Googol of zeroes. A "Googolplex"!.

And remember, the existence of your doppelgangers is an unavoidable consequence of our standard theory of cosmology and our standard theory of physics. Your doubles do not exist only if one or both of these theories is wrong, which very few physicists are ¿ frankly - prepared to countenance.

I have a soft spot for this whole idea because, even if you think this is the dullest and most incomprehensible article you have ever read, I can console myself with the thought that, in an infinite number of other space domains, you were so impressed that you emailed it to every person in your address book and bought copies of my book for all your friends and family.

Marcus Chown's book, 'The Never-Ending Days of Being Dead: Dispatches from the Frontline of Science' is published by Faber & Faber on 18 January, 2007 and is available for ¿13.99 (rrp ¿15.99) + ¿1.25 p&p. To order call Telegraph Books on 0870 428 4112
¿ Copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited 2007

Quote (DJL001 @ Jan. 15 2007, 3:25 pm)

It does not appear to matter (no pun intended) since there are an infinite number of matter universes, or areas of our universe, or something. ¿ For clarification beyond what I can possibly offer, see today's article in the Daily Telegraph (UK): ¿ It's official, Elvis lives Last Updated: 12:01am GMT 16/01/2007 It might sound a little crazy, but our standard theories of cosmology and physics suggest that an infinite number of Presleys still exist, says Marcus Chown. And if that's not scary enough, it also means that you, and these words, are repeated ad infinitum across the universe Elvis is alive. No, really! He didn't die of a cardiac arrest in his bathroom at Graceland on August 16, 1977. Instead, he slipped out of the back door under cover of darkness dressed as a nun, had a sex change and worked for several years in a gas station in Ohio. She/he has now retired, is living on the Gulf Coast and is in tip-top health. After all, she's still only 71. ¿ The King rules again, and again, and again... as an unavoidable consequence of 'inflation? in the universe ¿ Have I done a David Icke and gone conspiracy mad? Not at all. Elvis is alive and kicking, all right. Not here on Earth - but in an infinite number of other places in the universe. I have just revealed cosmology's dirty little secret ? the thing the people who spend their time theorising about the universe rarely like to mention except in a whisper. And who can honestly blame them? Elvis's survival turns out to be an unavoidable consequence of two things ? the standard theory of cosmology and the standard theory of physics, "quantum theory". Take cosmology first. According to the standard picture, the universe underwent a brief, super-fast period of expansion in its first split-second of existence. It goes by the name of "inflation". You don't need to know much about inflation ? what drove it or why cosmologists believe it happened. You just need to know one thing: inflation implies the universe goes on for ever ? it is effectively infinite in extent. The universe we see through our telescopes, however, does not look infinite. Far from it. Everything burst into being 13.7 billion years ago in the explosion of the Big Bang, so we see only the galaxies whose light has taken less than 13.7 billion years to get to us. advertisementGalaxies whose light would take, say 14.7 billion years, we don't see ? their light is still on its way to Earth. For this reason, there is a "light horizon" around our bit of the universe and everything we can see within it we call the "observable universe". But, just as there is more beyond the horizon at sea, there is more of the universe beyond its horizon. In fact, an infinite amount, according to inflation. Imagine our observable universe shrunk to the size of a soap bubble. Well, according to inflation, beyond our soap bubble are an infinite number of other soap bubbles, all similar to our observable universe. It is easy to speculate on what it is like in the other bubble regions because we have a pretty good idea how the galaxies in the observable universe came to be. Some regions of the Big Bang fireball were ever-so-slightly denser than others. They acted as "seeds" for the growth of galaxies. Specifically, they had stronger gravity than surrounding regions and so gathered in matter from about them. This made their gravity even stronger so they could pull in more matter. In a process akin to the rich getting ever richer, they gradually produced the galaxies like our own Milky Way and its neighbour, Andromeda. Now, inflation is no airy-fairy theoretical idea. It has been pretty much confirmed in the past year by data collected by Nasa's "Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe", which is observing the dim "afterglow" of the Big Bang fireball from far out in space. And inflation predicts more than that ? there are an infinite number of bubble regions like our observable universe. It also predicts something else significant ? that the seeds of galaxies were randomly scattered throughout the Big Bang fireball. Consequently, in the next soap-bubble region to our own, the seeds were different, which means that the history of that region was different, and the galaxies that formed were not the same as ours. And the same goes for the next region. And the next... Though Elvis has not made a look in yet, don't worry, we're getting there! The last thing you need to know to understand why the King still lives is that the universe is quantum. This means that, ultimately, everything comes in tiny, indivisible grains, or "quanta". Matter comes in indivisible grains. Time comes in indivisible grains. And so does space. If we could look at space with some kind of super-microscope ? way beyond the power of any instrument we can build today ? it would resolve itself into a grid of tiny cubes. For the sake of simplicity, think of it instead as the two-dimensional grid of squares of a chessboard. In this picture, we might have a galaxy-spawning seed of matter on one square, and another seed on another square; and so on. But, and this is the key, there are only a finite number of ways of arranging the seeds just as there are only a finite number of ways of arranging the pieces on a chessboard. So there are only a finite number of possible histories for a universe leading to only a finite number of possible arrangements of galaxies. If your head hasn't yet exploded, you now have all you need to understand the first paragraph of this article. If there are an infinite number of regions like our observable universe but only a finite number of histories for such regions, then every possible history happens not once but an infinite number of times. "There are an infinite number of places in the universe where Elvis is alive and kicking," says one of the contributors to inflation theory, Alex Vilenkin of Tufts University. There are also an infinite number of places where Shane Warne was born in Surrey, and England never lose the Ashes. There are an infinite number of places where The Telegraph liked this article so much it decided to pay me a million pounds and run a special colour supplement solely to advertise my new book. But all of this also has implications for you, not just Elvis and Shane Warne. There are an infinite number of regions in the universe exactly the same as the observable universe. And each contains a perfect copy of you who, up until this instant, has experienced everything you have ever experienced. This is no fanciful prediction. "It is possible to calculate precisely how far away is the nearest region identical to our observable universe," says Vilenkin. "It's 10^10^100 centimetres away." (10^100 is 1 followed by 100 zeroes, so I'll leave to imagine how "vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big" 10^ (10^100) is, to steal Douglas Adams's words. As an anorak aside, Google, the name of the ubiquitous web search engine, is a misspelling of "Googol", which means 10^100. There is even a name for 10^Googol ? 1 followed by a Googol of zeroes. A "Googolplex"!. And remember, the existence of your doppelgangers is an unavoidable consequence of our standard theory of cosmology and our standard theory of physics. Your doubles do not exist only if one or both of these theories is wrong, which very few physicists are ? frankly - prepared to countenance. I have a soft spot for this whole idea because, even if you think this is the dullest and most incomprehensible article you have ever read, I can console myself with the thought that, in an infinite number of other space domains, you were so impressed that you emailed it to every person in your address book and bought copies of my book for all your friends and family. Marcus Chown's book, 'The Never-Ending Days of Being Dead: Dispatches from the Frontline of Science' is published by Faber & Faber on 18 January, 2007 and is available for ?13.99 (rrp ?15.99) + ?1.25 p&p. To order call Telegraph Books on 0870 428 4112 ? Copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited 2007

actually no theory does predict multiple universes, what predict it is a principle called the anthropological principle.

Basically since we donot how our universe came up with the constants that allow life to exist here, then there must have been multiple universes ( at one time or existing in parallel) where all the constants had varying value, we are just lucky to live in one with constants set where human life could have arose.

Being a principle it generally is not of the same status as a theory, it make no provable predictions or allow us to conduct experiments to prove it incorrect.

along with this there is also Everst 's many worlds interperation. What This attempt to do is explain what quantum mechanics means, but like a principle it basically doesnot give a single set of experiments or predictions that are testable..

As it stand there is no experimental prove of alternate dimension, or multiple universes. At best experiment have been done to use gravity to prove that large additional spacial dimension exist, but at best these experiments have show that any additional dimension would be smaller than are present ablities to measure them.

Quote (lanceromega @ Dec. 28 2006, 2:26 pm)

For the last 10 years scientist have conducted 1000's of experiments, search cloud chambers, and stared at distant Quasars to find a hint  that even one of these extra dimensions that string theory predict exist.. No evident in the least, on top of that it has failed to predict dark energy ( which Einstein did in General relativity) or account for several of the surprises that have sprung up in the field of particle physics...As many physicist have comment of late, we have made no major advance in the last 25 years since string theory has reared it eleghant yet ugly head.

Uh, no, actually, they haven't, because scientists "know they can't."

String theory is the biggest load of mathematical bull#### ever; and most notably about other dimensions. The whole thing is about rolling up all these dimensions most notably subspace into tiny tiny little nothings. In short, there are no other dimensions; you'll never see them, they have no effect on our world; apart from in a nice sweet theory that makes them essentially disappear into nothingness; so small, that nobody in our world has the technology to actually probe so small; so nobody will be bother to look for them until they have technology that can look at that small an area.

You see, scientists don't actually want there to be other dimensions. It's not nice for them to be around; that's the sort of thing that would allow for FTL, time travel, and a plethora of other SF stuff, that scientists have been decrying as not true, and can't be done. And with every year, and every new discovery, every new theory based on that, and from that one more thing is found that tosses what scientists have said isn't possible into the our home, making it if not outright possible, at least very very likely. It makes them look closed minded and stupid, and so they don't actually want the stuff to be around and thus don't look for them; and when they see something that might be like that, they either ignore it, or don't bother looking beyond one explanation.

For example; does the universe really have a constant that makes it's expansion speed up even today, or is the extra red shift nothing but extra energy and heat pulled into our 3 dimensions from a higher or lower (aka subspace) dimension because of the electro magnetic and gravitational rotation of the star?

Quote (3DMaster @ Jan. 22 2007, 3:54 pm)

Quote (lanceromega @ Dec. 28 2006, 2:26 pm) For the last 10 years scientist have conducted 1000's of experiments, search cloud chambers, and stared at distant Quasars to find a hint ¿that even one of these extra dimensions that string theory predict exist.. No evident in the least, on top of that it has failed to predict dark energy ( which Einstein did in General relativity) or account for several of the surprises that have sprung up in the field of particle physics...As many physicist have comment of late, we have made no major advance in the last 25 years since string theory has reared it eleghant yet ugly head. Uh, no, actually, they haven't, because scientists "know they can't." String theory is the biggest load of mathematical bull#### ever; and most notably about other dimensions. The whole thing is about rolling up all these dimensions most notably subspace into tiny tiny little nothings. In short, there are no other dimensions; you'll never see them, they have no effect on our world; apart from in a nice sweet theory that makes them essentially disappear into nothingness; so small, that nobody in our world has the technology to actually probe so small; so nobody will be bother to look for them until they have technology that can look at that small an area. You see, scientists don't actually want there to be other dimensions. It's not nice for them to be around; that's the sort of thing that would allow for FTL, time travel, and a plethora of other SF stuff, that scientists have been decrying as not true, and can't be done. And with every year, and every new discovery, every new theory based on that, and from that one more thing is found that tosses what scientists have said isn't possible into the our home, making it if not outright possible, at least very very likely. It makes them look closed minded and stupid, and so they don't actually want the stuff to be around and thus don't look for them; and when they see something that might be like that, they either ignore it, or don't bother looking beyond one explanation. For example; does the universe really have a constant that makes it's expansion speed up even today, or is the extra red shift nothing but extra energy and heat pulled into our 3 dimensions from a higher or lower (aka subspace) dimension because of the electro magnetic and gravitational rotation of the star?

They know they can't? Funny since they if they were sure of it they wouldn't spend the time coming up tons of experiments to probe this question.

Whether scientist like or dislike the idea of extra dimension is basically a personal choice, what determine if there is, would be the results of experimental data.

As I stated before no experiment to date has support any evident that there are.

As for Red shift, actually this is due to the lost of energy, ( red is lower frequency which denote lower energy) standard attempt to attribute this lost of energy to tired light or interaction with dust or imposing matter has failed. Generally light doesnot interact with magnetic fields directly ( magnetic fields are composed of virtual photons, and photons rarely interact with photons). Gravitational rotation or Frame dragging does have an effect, but onless the star is extremely massive or rotating at high velocity the effect is small compare to redshifts that are measured.

One possible alternate explaination to redshift evident of increasing rate of inflation is the existant of Axions.

Photons of Light would be converted to Axions and reconvert to light due to galactic magnetic field, and would redshift the light from distant galaxies, but this explanation had fallen out of favor due to lack of experimental proof that Axion even existed.

But recent experiments ( such as photographic tracks of Axions decaying and the tiny deflection of laser in magnetic fields ( cause by the creation of axion) ) have given new evident to axions existant.

Quote (lanceromega @ Jan. 23 2007, 4:14 pm)

Quote (3DMaster @ Jan. 22 2007, 3:54 pm) Uh, no, actually, they haven't, because scientists "know they can't." String theory is the biggest load of mathematical bull#### ever; and most notably about other dimensions. The whole thing is about rolling up all these dimensions most notably subspace into tiny tiny little nothings. In short, there are no other dimensions; you'll never see them, they have no effect on our world; apart from in a nice sweet theory that makes them essentially disappear into nothingness; so small, that nobody in our world has the technology to actually probe so small; so nobody will be bother to look for them until they have technology that can look at that small an area. You see, scientists don't actually want there to be other dimensions. It's not nice for them to be around; that's the sort of thing that would allow for FTL, time travel, and a plethora of other SF stuff, that scientists have been decrying as not true, and can't be done. And with every year, and every new discovery, every new theory based on that, and from that one more thing is found that tosses what scientists have said isn't possible into the our home, making it if not outright possible, at least very very likely. It makes them look closed minded and stupid, and so they don't actually want the stuff to be around and thus don't look for them; and when they see something that might be like that, they either ignore it, or don't bother looking beyond one explanation. For example; does the universe really have a constant that makes it's expansion speed up even today, or is the extra red shift nothing but extra energy and heat pulled into our 3 dimensions from a higher or lower (aka subspace) dimension because of the electro magnetic and gravitational rotation of the star? They know they can't? Funny since they if they were sure of it they wouldn't spend the time coming up tons of experiments to probe this question.

Name the experiments, and when they were done. You'll find none.

Quote

As I stated before no experiment to date has support any evident that there are.

That's because the experiments were not done, or the data was disregarded, or wrongly interpreted. And in fact; you are wrong. There is one experiment that yielded a result to show different quantum realities/time lines existing parallel to our own; but that was not a experiment to show those time lines, it was a fluke. Sending a laser pulls through one hole of a few parallel hole should result in a simple dot of light. Surprise, surprise, it yielded an interference pattern; the only explanation the scientists could come up with; is that in a parallel universe they chose the other hole, and some light of that interacted with our universe, forming the interference pattern.

Quote

As for Red shift, actually this is due to the lost of energy, ( red is lower frequency which denote lower energy) standard attempt to attribute this lost of energy to tired light or interaction with dust or imposing matter has failed. Generally light doesnot interact with magnetic fields directly ( magnetic fields are composed of virtual photons, and photons rarely interact with photons). Gravitational rotation or Frame dragging does have an effect, but onless the star is extremely massive or rotating at high velocity the effect is small compare to redshifts that are measured. One possible alternate explaination to redshift evident of increasing rate of inflation is the existant of Axions. Photons of Light would be converted to Axions and reconvert to light due to galactic magnetic field, and would redshift the light from distant galaxies, but this explanation had fallen out of favor due to lack of experimental proof that Axion even existed. But recent experiments ( such as photographic tracks of Axions decaying and the tiny deflection of laser in magnetic fields ( cause by the creation of axion) ) have given new evident to axions existant.

Red shift has nothing to do with loss of energy. It's stars moving away; a Doppler affect with light; the same reason that something moving toward you sounds higher than a stationary engine, and sounds lower when it moves away from you. The frequency shifts toward red and infra red; lower, moving away. And you don't understand what I'm talking about; even though you should if you've read my post. Gravitational rotation and frame dragging has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. Via a little known Hyperdimensional Physics, gravity and electro magnetism unite in a lower dimension, a hyperdimensional massless eather, aka subspace, you know, that recent theory :rolleyes: that gravity disappears in different dimensions being the reason it's both so powerful, and so weak at the same time? Well, HD Physics explains it even better; any gravity source that rotates, along with an electro magnetic source that rotates in the same object, will have the two unite in, and generates energy from that subspace; which is pulled into our dimension as heat at key angles from the rotational axis. It's the reason the sun gets solar spots in these few angles, why Jupiter has a giant storm at that angle. This extra heat; infra red, generated by a star from a different dimension, will add to the red shift of a star. And if you can only attribute a red shift from 3D - 4D if you count time - physics, you get movement, greater than the movement really is.

> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (lanceromega @ Jan. 23 2007, 4:14 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (3DMaster @ Jan. 22 2007, 3:54 pm)> id="QUOTE">Uh, no, actually, they haven't, because scientists "know they can't."

String theory is the biggest load of mathematical bull#### ever; and most notably about other dimensions. The whole thing is about rolling up all these dimensions most notably subspace into tiny tiny little nothings. In short, there are no other dimensions; you'll never see them, they have no effect on our world; apart from in a nice sweet theory that makes them essentially disappear into nothingness; so small, that nobody in our world has the technology to actually probe so small; so nobody will be bother to look for them until they have technology that can look at that small an area.

You see, scientists don't actually want there to be other dimensions. It's not nice for them to be around; that's the sort of thing that would allow for FTL, time travel, and a plethora of other SF stuff, that scientists have been decrying as not true, and can't be done. And with every year, and every new discovery, every new theory based on that, and from that one more thing is found that tosses what scientists have said isn't possible into the our home, making it if not outright possible, at least very very likely. It makes them look closed minded and stupid, and so they don't actually want the stuff to be around and thus don't look for them; and when they see something that might be like that, they either ignore it, or don't bother looking beyond one explanation.

For example; does the universe really have a constant that makes it's expansion speed up even today, or is the extra red shift nothing but extra energy and heat pulled into our 3 dimensions from a higher or lower (aka subspace) dimension because of the electro magnetic and gravitational rotation of the star?

										border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (3DMaster @ Jan. 22 2007, 6:58 pm)

They know they can't? Funny since they if they were sure of it they wouldn't spend the time coming up tons of experiments to probe this question.