Agnostic.com

11 3

For decades scientists thought that galaxies were randomly scattered across the cosmos but now after years of research this is not true.

Galaxies are clustered into " Super Clusters" of 50 to 100 Galaxies, arranged in a spirals, stretched and elongated across space, billions of light years in length.

And guess what? It looks like a DNA strand! And that is what many of the top scientists believe today. They say we live on a different dimension, the 27th I believe and we're smaller than the nucleus of an atom. 100 billion billion times smaller they think! We're on a sub-atomic level. That's why everything looks so big to us.

Here is the thing; size does not exist at all the way we think of it. We may be actually a part of a another beings or maybe we're part of ( insert semantics here ) Gods DNA that created us? Heavy!

By the way they've know about this theory for about 20 years and I have published in every edition of my publication since then.

I believe this far more than what religious dribble spews out about the universe. I've mocked up a drawing taken from my publication.

This theory is known as the " Super String Theory ". Click on drawing to enlarge.

This is the exact drawing that was published in the New York Times. (1998 Circa) But I did not scan it, I redrew it from scratch.

For posting this I've been accused of having "mental" issues and several other things. Not cool or professional. To the rest who may find it thought provoking and interesting, thank you!

valentine4real 5 Feb 22
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

11 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Ever since I was a child and I saw the similarities between the sun and planets and atoms, I have hypothesised that perhaps we are just and atom in the spot on a great space monsters bottom that makes up our universe.

But that's it. The wild random speculation of an over-imaginative child - now turned into a theory, allgedly,

πŸ™‚

0

Wow, haven't kept up with "string theory" for last twenty years. Superseded by "superstring " theory" ? 26 dimensions lost me. good vibrations

1

Wicca teaches, "as above, so below"........

"And Harm None" - not a bad tenant.

1

I like chaos, and find patterns in randomness. Consider Mandelbrot sets.
When I began playing with computers I would set each pixel on a screen to a different randomly chosen colour and every time a Mandelbrot type pattern would appear. Changing the number of options would change the pattern which would change every time I ran the script.

I put a lot of it down to the way the human mind seeks to find order in things and always assumed pattern in the cosmos.

My old DOS computer! I used to let it run overnight to see what it would produce!

Fractals! I love fractals.

1

What chit you on?

godef Level 7 Feb 22, 2018

Nothing and I don't do drugs. Call the NYT and ask them it was in their paper.

1

So size "doesn't" matter? Or is SIZE matter? πŸ˜‰

Terrible pun! (Well done)

Depends on your "taste" in puns.

1

It's not anything I've heard from a scientist. What scientist do you claim said this? By the way, Superstring Theory is explained in Wikipedia, and it doesn't say what you said.

0

Source is from the New York Times, Science Section, 1998 circa. "Many top scientists" was the quote .

1

Could you provide a cite for these scientists, or for anything going on in any dimension beyond 11?

Thanks.

Call the NYT and ask them

Make us search for evidence? That’s your job bro @valentine4real

@valentine4real I read the Times every day, I've been printed in the Times, and I would know if the Times reported that there were 27 dimensions. A search of the Times database shows nothing like what you described. Perhaps you're thinking of Silly String Theory? You may consider that the place most likely to demand backup for a statement is, of course, an AGNOSTIC web site. An BTW, how can you be publishing something scientific-ish without references at hand? Step up your game, dude.

It was in NYT, Science Edition and yes please call them and ask as it was 1998 Circa. @andygee

2

It's a postulate at this point, with no real way to verify it. Nice background for a sci fi fantasy story though!

0

I always pictured myself living on the skin of some big thing!

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:27574
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.