HOME | DD
TheModerator — Disappointment
by-nc-nd
Published: 2013-12-11 22:29:05 +0000 UTC; Views: 1612; Favourites: 21; Downloads: 5
Redirect to original
Description
I never sat a physics lesson, but from what I can gather, this is legit.
*Under string theory, each electron is just a vibration on a string which travels in between the three dimensions we live in, and according to quantum theory, for every motion where an electron has two possible outcomes, there's another universe made that covers the outcome we didn't experience, including the electron motions which led up to pokémon existing and everyone decided that education was second to becoming a Pokémon master
In other words, we're sat right next to an infinite amount of universes where an infinite amount of events are playing out, including one where all your wildest dreams are true. Unfortunately, you're unable to travel down these strings, so although your're right next to your dreams, you will never see them or be a part of them.
Sorry to all those beings who are unable to travel down the pan-dimensional superstrings that are two four dimensional beings what a set of train tracks are to three dimensional ones.
Related content
Comments: 17
Well that made would crush a poor child's heart easily (if he/she understands any of this). But it's good to know that there is still something like it out there... *sighs* the dream will live on... only in our dreams though.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
... And in several thousand quantum universes right next to you
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Our childhoods have just been smashed...XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I would reply to toetag's comment string, but she's done something sensible for once, and blocked me. Just in case anyone watching wants to know.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Well, almost correct. Seeing as multi-verses can be chaotic to calculate, with worm-holes and time conundrums (Even a possible paradox) it's possible that you could be, but unlikely. Not only does the multi-verse function in space, but time...
...Greek letters, math, and brain melting puzzles...ah physics, you're so fun but so confusing...I'll stick to psychology...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, that wasn't so much of an explanation as a sentence that displays a mild interest in the subject and then trails off... Plus, as an engineer, I take offense at someone who describes themselves as a "paranormologist" trying to tell me how physics works. You can't say I'm "almost correct", but then not provide any reasoning as to why not. Because NOW I'm going to have to explain the maths and mechanics behind what you just said, and why it has nothing to do with me not being correct.
1) Time is a completely separate dimension and so couldn't have an impact on the running of the dimension the strings run in. That would be like saying "Yeah, I dropped some toast downwards, and it suddenly appeared at the other side of the kitchen". I fail to see how that argument is relevant to string theory.
2) The theory behind a wormhole/blackhole is that it crushes everything down until it collapses under it's own gravity. Even Steven Hawking can only guess at what happens in this singularity, but for the most part we can assume that any absorbed matter/energy appears in another universe. That is, another 'Universe' (Think 5th dimension), not another 'Time' (Think 4th dimension). For it to travel in time WOULD create a paradox, and so it is unanimously considered that it is taken into another universe, not another time in the current one.
3) You used the word 'unlikly' Let's do some math. Since we're on about a plank scale resolution of difference (That is, for each universe there are x amount of electrons (also known as Eddingtons number) that's motions are 'modified' in plank time), The new universes spawned from each individual universe would be Eddingtons number times plank time, or in other words, 539,056,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (almost a googleplexian) new universes, every second - Edingtons number multiplied by plank times in a second. No complicated maths there. Just multiplying the amount of boolean probabilities by the amount of times they would occur every second.
Things don't stop there.
For each universe, one of those again will be created, increasing exponentially. So, it's perfectly feasible - given such a large amount of universes - that there will be one where our orbits around the sun, galaxy and universe are identical AND the electron sequence that prompted the existence of pokémon both occur, so the two earth's would be in the same location in different universes at the same time, only one had pokémon evlove on it, and the other doesn't. Even if the chances of each were 1 in 1 googleplexian, it would still be solved within five seconds of the first universe existing.
When you're working with infinite pools of data, there is no such thing as 'unlikely'.
On a personal note, your profile says "Don't correct my work". Don't do that. You can't do it in the real world (if you tell your boss not to correct you when you're doing something wrong, you will be sacked), so don't do it online. Not only is it essentially censorship of debate - which only goes to show that one can not answer people who contradict them - but it brings about bad habits, and ultimately, a generation that can't take being wrong. Which, I might add, we are rapidly approaching.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
"The new universes spawned from each individual universe would be Eddingtons number times plank time, or in other words, 539,056,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (almost a googleplexian) new universes, every second - Edingtons number multiplied by plank times in a second. No complicated maths there. Just multiplying the amount of boolean probabilities by the amount of times they would occur every second."
O.O
Both THIS... and the PICTURE...
I... figured... ALL THIS... (Except the number, of course)
...ON MY OWN...
I'm gonna Shoryuken myself on the balls.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Geez, you're worse than I am. Physics is much too boring for someone like me, and absolutely pointless when you consider the true facts.
And I CAN. My work is MY OWN, copyrighted legally by ME. Anyone who attempts to "correct" what's uncorrectable is offending me (such as you are) and possibly crossing a legal barrier.
I must say, you're laughable attempts to belittle me are futile. I stopped caring about physics years ago and I could care less about it know. As for the upcoming "generation": It's going to die quick and painfully. And I will surely laugh as I hang myself, cursing this pitiful excuse for a world. I have no faith in the future for this world, or any disgusting copy that could be out there. They're all doomed by the one consistent error: The Human.
I don't know why I even humored you...a waste of my time. I saw your art as interesting, but flawed, the same way puny minds must view mine...
...and holy crap do I sound narcissistic... 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, just because you copyright something does NOT mean someone isn't allowed to correct it. I believe they called it 'Freedom of Speach' or something. If what you were saying was true and copyrighting something DID mean someone could not correct it, society wouldn't work. For example, If I were to say, "'You're an asshole' - Copyright TheModerator", you'd contest it and prove me wrong. According to your own version of how things work, though, that's against the law. Teaching would also be illigal, and so would scientific journals, patent applications, News programs and anything else that involved peer review. It's actually laughable, so if you want to sue me, feel free. My address is attached to the whois data from one of any of the four domains I have registered,so please, take your pick. But first, grow up and learn to accept criticisms as an opportunity for improvment instead of a personal assault.
Which leads me onto this point :I'm not belittling you. I'm trying to help you get a grasp of the incredibly large scale of numbers you'd misjudged. Just remeber, I have a job and a family to look after. If I really wanted the satisfaction of belittling someone, I'd do it at work where I can enjoy the look on their faces when I know they know I'm right. not on the internet.
No, If I really wanted to belittle you, I could've brought up any number of things about you that are seen as undesirable (and a simple google search gets me to some that I won't mention, because I'm not trying to belittle you.If I really wanted to, I could have encouraged others to heckle along with me. Note, however, that I didn't.
So, as always happens, someone on the internet has extrapolated a criticism as to a death wish. I find your assumption that I would laugh as you hang yourself offensive, as I know people who have committed suicide, one by hanging and one by jumping in front of a train, and I myself was forced to have antidepressants aged 12 as a result of it. So please don't try that with me, or I'll have to notify a deviantart admin to file the appropriate paperwork to have your carrier review your IP's internet connection (I'm not sure about the US, but in the UK, ISPs have the legal obligation to restrict access of 'upsetting or disturbing material' to those diagnosed with mental illness, which often means they just drop the connection). And we both know you don't want that.
You're telling me my art is fundamentally flawed? They're f**king pictures of children's cartoon characters. If they put accross a message enough for you to say they are fundamentally flawed, you should stop reading so much into things.
The only reason I'm even replying to this is to correct you so that there might be one less misguided and ilinformed individual in the world (and don't make the mistake that misguided = stupid, because it doesn't. It means that a person does not have enough information to make an informed decision, which isnt their fault) So don't take it as harrasment. See it as an opportunity to better yourself. I will not reply unless you do.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You, sir, make me laugh. (and that's a rare incident indeed)
Reread the sentence, you wise prodigy. I said I would laugh while pulling the trigger.
And you are sub-consciously belittling me, you don't realize that. You are calling me stupid, putting me beneath you, and saying I need to IMPROVE WHO I AM. Really, that's immoral and heartless. I am not ill informed, nor am I misguided. I say that you should look in the mirror, pal. NEVER JUDGE SOMEONE UNTIL YOU'VE JUDGED YOURSELF. You don't know who I am. You don't understand me. You're just another username, and will fade from my miserable life in time.
You didn't even READ the rest. Shame, shame, shame....
👍: 0 ⏩: 0