[sivispacem]

QUOTE (oysterbarron @ Wednesday, Mar 28 2012, 15:10)

Basically tyler what im trying to get at is elements are made up of groups of atoms eg 4 carbon atoms 2 oxygen to form an element

Straight up, you're wrong. Elements are formed of a single kind of atom in varying quantities.

[oysterbarron]

Ok then well bit confused there. So depending on star size depends on what kind of elements you get. larger the size of star the denser elements you get. Our solar system is a collection of atoms of varying quanties that could make up a penultimate element of withch is contained within our heliosphere. Therefore our heliosphere could be an element in itself.

This post has been edited by oysterbarron on Wednesday, Mar 28 2012, 20:51

[K^2]

Lets start with the fact that the atom you posted the image for actually looks something like this.



And the picture you posted is an illustration for little children. The rest of your argument just doesn't even make sense.

[oysterbarron]

I think the problem here is people cant comprehend what im trying to say! I probably dont help in my explanations!

OK i made a picture up. Hopefully this will help people understand where i'm trying to come from I have made up terms in order to try and explain in an easyier manor.

Atoms>elements>super elements>Greater elements>Object



This post has been edited by oysterbarron on Friday, Mar 30 2012, 09:58

[3niX]

Well...

QUOTE

And the picture you posted is an illustration for little children. The rest of your argument just doesn't even make sense.

Indeed, physics on the micro and macro level have little to nothing to do with each other (which is something that even nowadays keeps scientist up at night).

You cant really compare a planets orbit with an electrons probability cloud.

[oysterbarron]

Thinking about it when we measure the light coming from the different stars in order to work out what they are made of, The heliospheres could actually act as a filter just like if you put a piece of colored perspex in front of a white light!

[Viperman]

QUOTE (3niX @ Friday, Mar 30 2012, 14:47)

You cant really compare a planets orbit with an electrons probability cloud.

Probability being the important word there

Yeah, the connection from in small to large is currently the holy grail of physics. Quantum theroy explains the small, Einsteins theroy explains the visible and large. Connecting the two is still larger unknown. Although great progress is currently happening.

I find it remarkable that in the topic about belief in science the general feeling was, well no. But yet in hear many replys are straight up a belief that our model of atoms, and the basic building blocks of the 3 particles (quarks, leptons etc etc) is being put across as the way it is. Too many confused folk around here.

[oysterbarron]

Other than them making up the next level of matter i dont beleive they are connected. Thats what im trying to get at here. Allthough they bear a resemberlance each stage is different. But i believe that after our scale of atoms of witch we are, the next step of matter is solar systems then galaxys then the wider galaxy, that goto making up the universe. Wether there are any other stages of matter after the universe who knows.

[El Zilcho]

You do realise that an atom isn't exactly shaped like that? Electrons at that level don't tend to orbit; rather they're in a state of flux. Quantum mechanics at that level mean that it's more like a cloud of electrons, covering the area they're likely to be. That, and galaxies, galaxy groups and galactic filaments look nothing like that. What you're describing is the similarity between orbiting systems.

[oysterbarron]

Yes we have come to that conclusion throughout the previous post's in the topic! allthough i was confused about science basics at first, it was that original child's representation that got me thinking about the wider picture!

what do the filaments look like then?

[Toup]

QUOTE (Tyler @ Monday, Mar 26 2012, 22:13)

QUOTE (oysterbarron @ Sunday, Mar 25 2012, 01:49) Can we break the planets down to certerain elements e.g earth has an oxygen atmospher so that could be oxygen +1. Not sure what you mean by this to be honest, oyster. We already know how to find out what elements planets are made of, and planets are (usually) made of varying parts. We may have oxygen but we're a planet heavy in carbon, for instance. QUOTE Man, I've wondered about this since I was 10. Fun thing is, you'll never know, you wont live that long. With that attitude we wouldn't get anywhere. Curiosity and the need to find out is what fuels almost all scientists out there. Just accepting that you'll never know is the same thing as giving up.

I meant you won't live to travel through space in light speed.

Curiosity is a thing I'm not missing, but today's society just take's it out of me. Until the day that I get enough courage to show everyone the finger, I won't be studying physics (which is something I really want to do, by the way). It's happening right now, I'm studying Latin instead of Maths&Physics and I don't even know why. Anyway, this topic is not about me.

Now, I cannot wait for the day someone discovers something so incredible that it changes life as we know it.

Btw, oyster, you keep ignoring some laws that, well, are basic stuff that you learn on 7th grade.

This post has been edited by Toup on Tuesday, Apr 3 2012, 18:30

[oysterbarron]

QUOTE

Btw, oyster, you keep ignoring some laws that, well, are basic stuff that you learn on 7th grade.

Care to help me out here then? or do people forget how to debate and discuss?

[Leftcoast]

QUOTE

Curiosity is a thing I'm not missing, but today's society just take's it out of me. Until the day that I get enough courage to show everyone the finger, I won't be studying physics (which is something I really want to do, by the way). It's happening right now, I'm studying Latin instead of Maths&Physics and I don't even know why. Anyway, this topic is not about me.

Toup,

Don't let the way society reacts to things keep you from studying physics. Think about it, I'm not saying "don't study Latin" but if that's all you study what kind of jobs will be available to you? You don't have to become a physicist either. I took a ton of physics and now I'm a mechanical engineer and I was able to avoid getting laid off even when the economy was bad. Just because there are things we won't live to see discovered doesn't mean we shouldn't study in those disciplines.

[elanman]

Toup, mathematics and physics are wonderful disciplines, you shouldn't let apprehension dissuade you. I've no intention of being condescending here, but if you want to start looking at advanced physics and maths in earnest, you could do a lot worse than Khan Academy and naturally MIT's Open Courseware.

Anyway, Oysterbarron, I'm afraid your model is quite flawed. Your problem is quite simple. You're trying to compare our solar system to a classical, Newtonian picture of the atom where electrons "orbit" a central nucleus. But this simply isn't so. Electrons exist in discrete, quantised energy levels within atoms in charge clouds, wherein we cannot determine with certainty to where they'll go. Instead we can only say that they exist in regions of electron density (orbiatls) where an electron is likely to be found. This is why planetary motion and particle physics are so different--Newtonian mechanics provides an excellent estimate in determining planetary motion, but F=ma is useless when trying to describe the behaviour of sub-atomic particles.

[oysterbarron]

Yeah i think we can disregard my first comparison i realize there alot different now but it was originally what got me thinking about the bigger picture. Someone made a good point about the m8cro world is very different from the micro world so im suggesting that the solar system is the super macro world and is made up from the atomic world we live in. I dont really know how to put it but its kind of like our view on dimensions we have a scale of dimensions and 8 beleive that there are more dimensions after our world but on the same plain.

[Jeeebuuus]

Perhaps that famous picture of human brain cell and electrical activity in the universe would make a better comparison. They both appear similar with the naked eye.

[oysterbarron]

Oo youve interested me now please feel free to post it.

[Jeeebuuus]

[oysterbarron]

Wow that picture was well worth the wait found something like it but that looks amazing so we could be part of a biological being.

[goin-god]

QUOTE (oysterbarron @ Monday, Apr 9 2012, 15:50)

Wow that picture was well worth the wait found something like it but that looks amazing so we could be part of a biological being.

Just because they look alike dosn't mean the Universe is recursive.