You guys here seem like an intelligent and curious lot, so just wanted to see what you guys make of this It isn't related to the game directly but it's about space, the game main theme For some this may be an outrageous statement and I will not try to corroborate or debunk it in any way or form, it may even have religious connotations for others which I will not go into either Will not try to prove it or contradict either but I will say that this was discovered by Max Tegmark, professor of physics at MIT, so I'm sure any possible counter argument you may come up with were already debunked Earth may be the center of the universe There's a great movie about it that features Max and other well known physicist from many other universities, it's not new so you may even have heard of it already. The Principle So what you guys make of this? Are we in a simulation already?
The probability that the Earth is the actual physical center of the universe is almost infinitely less likely than the probability that any other location is the center of the universe. Even if our universe is a simulation, there's no reason to believe that Earth would be the center of said simulation. Probably should be moved to off-topic though!
I think it's going to take a lot of evidence, hard work, and time to prove the claim correct (as correct as we can prove such things). I'll leave the question up to those who study it, and change my opinion as a layperson to match the scientific consensus as it evolves.
NASA launched a second satellite with a better radio telescope in 2013 that corroborated the evidence, it's explained in the movie, but yes will take a lot of years for people to digest it....
Well there's also movies that claim aliens built the pyramids (and no, not talking about Stargate) so as I said, the evidence and the resulting scientific consensus are what I'll wait for. It is really interesting to think about.
Here is my little opinion. It's just an opinion. I'm not s scientists and I don't claim to be ..... Are we in a Simulation ? The universe could function in a way that resembles a simulation to us humans but that concept is the best analogy we humans can find for it. I think we still have a very very very limited understanding of something that Existed way before us. Religion tried and scientists are doing to the best they can but I think it's arrogant of us to think we have the ability to fully understand something that would exist even if we didn't. We're like ants trying to describe a major city from our ant perspective. Our little planet is like a grain of sand on the beach when you compare it to the known Universe. Also if you look at the fact that NASA have discovered other "Earth Like" planets(Some of them Bigger than our Earth) in the past it leads me to believe there is nothing important or unique about our Planet at all. To say it's the Center of the Universe doesn't seem right to me but again I'm not a scientist. Who knows there may not be anything unique about the human race but maybe and this is a big MAYBE because of where we're located in our Galaxy we just live under the illusion that we're special and alone.
I'd say that MIT physics professors and NASA researchers are the best we have to get evidence of that, who else you're expecting to prove it? Well in fact until 2010 thanks to Copernicus we were under the impression that earth was not that especial but the fact is that even Einstein could't prove earth was actually moving and the dark energy and the dark matter were indispensable crutches so the model could work There are many possibilities to explain the phenomenon of course but the fact is that it's not just the place earth is in, most impressive according to the cosmic microwave background is how the universe is arranged around the solar system
It's important to remember the limitations of the cosmic microwave background data that we've collected, which notably include that much of the Milky Way has to simply be removed (not enough signal-to-noise there to pull out anything useful). It's also worth noting that general relativity works just fine no matter what reference frame you pick, so that shouldn't be cited as a point in favor of a geocentric model. For me, this falls into the realm of "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." It may be that there are currently enough free parameters that one could construct a geocentric model of the universe that works as well as existing non-geocentric models, but that may change as we accumulate more data (as an experimentalist, "collect more data" tends to be my reaction to most claims of this sort).
Wikipedia link on the matter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_of_evil_(cosmology) Personally I think it's quite plausible that there are reasons why any given reference point would believe itself unique in the Universe, while not actually being special at all. If there are holes in our understanding (there are), then there's no way to know if we have the true picture, or if there's a bias of interpretation creating the appearance of difference out of nothing. In other words: We need more data, ideally repeating the experiment somewhere very very far away, in order to know whether there's a difference in fact or perception.
So basically we need to form a long (very long) distance line of communication with an alien civilization far away, then wait the thousands of years for their signal containing their observations to reach us so we can compare notes in the longest running experiment in the universe. That would make for an interesting story...
Something really similar: https://www.space.com/37191-we-live-in-a-cosmic-void.html I have a hypothesis that specifically hints at every galaxy/cluster seeing itself as being inside the largest void visible from within. It might even be related to the original topic of this thread. Unfortunately determining whether it's realistic or not will require more precise measurements due to the scale involved (and how good of an approximation our current understanding is--resulting in even more extraordinary precision required to support a significant change of model).
You are, the rest of us are payed to play along. I am telling you this now because they missed my last 2 checks and I am not happy.
Yes both Geocentric and Heliocentric frames of reference can explain the exact same phenomenon we watch in the universe but the curious part was this in fact..... The universe seems to have a north and south pole as well and the north is colder than the south, weird stuff Not only that but the galaxies seem to aggregate in concentric shells around the solar system just like the layers earth has, the nucleus and magma and crust and atmosphere But yes better radio telescopes and different means to observe the cosmos are required Ok, I will need a boat now...
My reaction is "Hmmm...welp add to the pile of theories that various highly accreditted guys have already come up with". Its certainly an interesting idea even stripped of the theological angle. However, even the "Big Bang" is just one of many competing ideas among the "mainstream" academics. As such I'll reserve an uneducated (at least on high level physics and astronomy) opinion on it, just as I do for even more popularly accepted theories.
Well, the radio telescopes do seem to be hitting a wall with the CMB so the Big Bang Theory may stand some ground there but we may need better radio telescopes so we can get better detailed CMB maps
You mean MIT that has been rocked by any number of scandals and NASA that has to keep apologizing for all of the lies they tell? pssst Mars isn't really orange....lol You are looking at a paper written to garner attention, the same as the high brows that decided that suddenly Pluto is not a planet. Sensationalism and an unproveable claim....Exactly where is the point of reference that says that our solar system is the center of existance? Is Alpha Centauri the center if we are over there?
Only way to learn more about if "we are the center of the Universe" would be achieved by putting all Military Budgets into Science and Space Explorations. But as we rather point our High-Tech Satellites towards Earth instead towards the Stars... This kind of thinking makes us exactly what Carl Sagan pointed out ages ago..."we are a Back Water Planet, lingering on the outside of a Spiral Arm of the Milky Way, which is by itself a 2nd or 3rd Class Galaxy in Terms of Size". And as other Galaxies move with different speeds away from us..does this not point towards the conclusion that "we are not the Center of the Universe"?
If we are indeed in a simulation -AND- we are also the subject of the simulation, then I would say chances are good Earth is smack dab at the center.
