| |
Main
Date: 18 Nov 2006 05:33:15
From: west
Subject: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or body
and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
west
|
|
| |
Date: 18 Nov 2006 05:52:03
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 05:33:15 GMT, "west" <restccq2@verizon.net > wrote:
>If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or body
>and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
>earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
>will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
Dark matter isn't "nothing". Presumably it is a form of matter that has
a very weak interaction with electromagnetic radiation. I think it is
very uncertain what the nature of its interaction with normal matter is.
A bottle of the stuff in bulk might be readily observable in a lab.
Certainly, it should be observable by its gravity- we have sensors that
can detect very small masses (the simplest, of course, being a scale).
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| |
Date: 18 Nov 2006 07:45:53
From: Brian Tung
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
west wrote:
> If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or body
> and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
> earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
> will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
It is expected to be matter that interacts weakly with ordinary matter.
In particular, I don't think it interacts electromagnetically with it.
Therefore, a bottle probably won't hold any dark matter; the dark matter
will slip through the spaces between the bottle's atoms as though they
weren't there.
--
Brian Tung <brian@isi.edu >
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.html
|
| |
Date: 18 Nov 2006 10:09:01
From: Davoud
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
west wrote:
> If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or body
> and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
> earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
> will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
My guess is you would have the Nobel Prize for Physics.
"Nothing" is the answer to the question "What does it all -- 'Life, the
Universe, and Everything' -- mean? What does our existence mean?"
Davoud
--
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com
|
| | |
Date: 18 Nov 2006 16:06:11
From: CeeBee
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
Davoud <star@sky.net > wrote in sci.astro.amateur:
> "Nothing" is the answer to the question "What does it all -- 'Life, the
> Universe, and Everything' -- mean? What does our existence mean?"
42
--
CeeBee
*** Democracy is not a spectator sport ***
|
| | | |
Date: 18 Nov 2006 16:47:28
From: west
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
"CeeBee" <ceebee@novalidmail > wrote in message
news:Xns987FADFB9AA46ceebeechesterstartco@213.75.12.164...
> Davoud <star@sky.net> wrote in sci.astro.amateur:
>
> > "Nothing" is the answer to the question "What does it all -- 'Life, the
> > Universe, and Everything' -- mean? What does our existence mean?"
>
> 42
>
> --
> CeeBee
>
> *** Democracy is not a spectator sport ***
***Nor is Democracy a sport***
|
| | | |
Date: 18 Nov 2006 17:09:33
From: Davoud
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
Davoud wrote:
> > "Nothing" is the answer to the question "What does it all -- 'Life, the
> > Universe, and Everything' -- mean? What does our existence mean?"
CeeBee replied:
> 42
*****
Nope. You may recall that Deep Thought equivocated when giving this
answer. It was incomplete. The answer is 6X7 - 7X6.
By the way, I have the complete /original/ HHGG, which was not a book,
but a 12-episode radio play that was broadcast on the BBC back in the
early 1970's. In those pre-Internet days I recorded it on cassettes
from a home-made short-wave radio. No book or movie has done justice to
the original.
Davoud
--
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com
|
| | | | |
Date: 21 Nov 2006 23:54:16
From: Richard Tobin
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
In article <181120061709332566%star@sky.net >, Davoud <star@sky.com> wrote:
>Nope. You may recall that Deep Thought equivocated when giving this
>answer. It was incomplete. The answer is 6X7 - 7X6.
I think you're misremembering. There's no doubt that the answer is
42. Deep Thought is merely somewhat reluctant to reveal it because,
as he says, "I don't think you're going to like it". What Deep
Thought can't do is tell them what the question is. Instead it
designs the Earth as a biological computer to find the question, but
it is destroyed by the Vogons five minutes before the program is
completed.
Arthur Dent determines that the question is "what do you get if you
multiply six by nine", but it seems likely that the program was
corrupted by the arrival of the Golgafrinchan telephone sanitisers who
wiped out the indigenous population.
-- Richard
--
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 22 Nov 2006 19:51:35
From: Iordani
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
Richard Tobin wrote:
>>Nope. You may recall that Deep Thought equivocated when giving this
>>answer. It was incomplete. The answer is 6X7 - 7X6.
>
> I think you're misremembering. There's no doubt that the answer is
> 42. Deep Thought is merely somewhat reluctant to reveal it because,
> as he says, "I don't think you're going to like it". What Deep
> Thought can't do is tell them what the question is.
But the mice did, no?
"How many roads must I man walk down" is a beautiful question :)
As good as any...
|
| | |
Date: 18 Nov 2006 18:51:32
From: starburst
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
Davoud wrote:
> west wrote:
>
>
>>If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or body
>>and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
>>earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
>>will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
>
>
> My guess is you would have the Nobel Prize for Physics.
>
> "Nothing" is the answer to the question "What does it all -- 'Life, the
> Universe, and Everything' -- mean? What does our existence mean?"
>
> Davoud
>
You might enjoy a book called _Leviathan and the Air Pump_ about Hobbes
and materialist thought. Hobbes didn't believe that nothing could exist.
Interesting take on the history of science and philosophy.
|
| | | |
Date: 19 Nov 2006 02:21:49
From: Ioannis
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
"starburst" <nope@nospam.net > wrote in message
news:ejo69l$ke4$1@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu...
>
> Davoud wrote:
[snip]
> > "Nothing" is the answer to the question "What does it all -- 'Life, the
> > Universe, and Everything' -- mean? What does our existence mean?"
> >
> > Davoud
> You might enjoy a book called _Leviathan and the Air Pump_ about Hobbes
> and materialist thought. Hobbes didn't believe that nothing could exist.
> Interesting take on the history of science and philosophy.
On the contrary, "nothing" not only exists, but it is the creator of all
things.
The First Mind ponders, alone...
Nothing = {}
0 =
|
| |
Date: 18 Nov 2006 14:32:27
From: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
west wrote:
> If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or body
> and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
> earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
> will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
>
> west
>
>
It is likely that any bottle already has some dark matter in it.
|
| | |
Date: 23 Nov 2006 03:04:36
From: Hey American Moron!
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
Brilliant but they wont know it!
Sam Wormley wrote:
> west wrote:
> > If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or body
> > and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
> > earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
> > will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
> >
> > west
> >
> >
>
> It is likely that any bottle already has some dark matter in it.
|
| |
Date: 18 Nov 2006 21:06:56
From: Ambixious
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
On Nov 18, 6:33 pm, "west" <restc...@verizon.net > wrote:
> If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or body
> and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
> earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
> will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
>
> west
Well I would think that you would need a vacuum to capture this space
so if you use a bottle, as Brian said, it would slip out through the
atom's gaps. And even if you DO capture this space in a vacuum, it
presumably will be nothing.
|
| |
Date: 18 Nov 2006 15:01:57
From: Joe S.
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
"west" <restccq2@verizon.net > wrote in message
news:vWw7h.1636$JQ.1544@trnddc06...
> If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or
> body
> and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
> earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
> will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
>
> west
>
>
Guinness makes a good bottle of dark matter -- you can get it by the single
bottle or the case.
|
| | |
Date: 18 Nov 2006 16:14:39
From: Allan Mayer
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
Joe S. wrote:
> "west" <restccq2@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:vWw7h.1636$JQ.1544@trnddc06...
>> If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or
>> body
>> and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
>> earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
>> will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
>>
>> west
>>
>>
>
> Guinness makes a good bottle of dark matter -- you can get it by the single
> bottle or the case.
>
>
>
Case is definitely better !!!
;-)
Allan
http://sctuser.home.comcast.net
|
| | | |
Date: 18 Nov 2006 14:31:43
From: Howard Lester
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
"Allan Mayer" wrote
> Case is definitely better !!!
Better than what - Ohio State?
;-)
|
| |
Date: 19 Nov 2006 12:44:58
From: Pat
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
"west" <restccq2@verizon.net > wrote in message
news:vWw7h.1636$JQ.1544@trnddc06...
> If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or
> body
> and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
> earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
> will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
>
> west
>
>
You would prove that 'all the analyzers known to man' don't amount to much.
We know very, very little, but hate to admit it.
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------
|
| | |
Date: 19 Nov 2006 15:58:33
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
On Sun, 19 Nov 2006 12:44:58 -0000, "Pat"
<patclough@wembleypark57.fsnet.co.uk > wrote:
>You would prove that 'all the analyzers known to man' don't amount to much.
The analyzers we currently have seem to do a pretty good job of
detecting dark matter.
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| | |
Date: 19 Nov 2006 15:26:21
From: west
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
"Pat" <patclough@wembleypark57.fsnet.co.uk > wrote in message
news:45604350$0$25953$8d2e0cab@news.newsgroup-binaries.com...
>
> "west" <restccq2@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:vWw7h.1636$JQ.1544@trnddc06...
> > If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or
> > body
> > and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return
to
> > earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
> > will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
> >
> > west
> >
> >
>
> You would prove that 'all the analyzers known to man' don't amount to
much.
> We know very, very little, but hate to admit it.
I think this last answer is the best answer ... nothing is something and
something is nothing ..., I think.
west
>
>
> -----------------
> www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
> Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
> -----------------
|
| |
Date: 19 Nov 2006 19:49:24
From: Shawn
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
west wrote:
> If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or body
> and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
> earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
> will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
The matter that we readily detect accumulates along with dark matter.
If you go far from any visible matter (e.g. between galaxy clusters) you
will not find much dark matter either. You will find dark energy
though...maybe. ;-)
Shawn
|
| |
Date: 20 Nov 2006 17:05:27
From: Rich
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
west wrote:
> If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or body
> and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
> earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
> will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
>
> west
Be interesting to see the "reaction" of that capped bottle once it hit
a pressured area.
|
| |
Date: 21 Nov 2006 05:46:48
From: esmartguy
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
Well I believe Chris, what you call dark matter? And what I call dark
energy? I'll bet they are the same thing I'll bet you can't bottle it
like you say you can. I have a theory and because every time I say
something someone else takes credit for it I do indeed believe you can
make dark energy but you just can't bottle it!
Chris L Peterson wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 05:33:15 GMT, "west" <restccq2@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or body
> >and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
> >earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
> >will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
>
> Dark matter isn't "nothing". Presumably it is a form of matter that has
> a very weak interaction with electromagnetic radiation. I think it is
> very uncertain what the nature of its interaction with normal matter is.
> A bottle of the stuff in bulk might be readily observable in a lab.
> Certainly, it should be observable by its gravity- we have sensors that
> can detect very small masses (the simplest, of course, being a scale).
>
> _________________________________________________
>
> Chris L Peterson
> Cloudbait Observatory
> http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| | |
Date: 21 Nov 2006 15:06:56
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
On 21 Nov 2006 05:46:48 -0800, "esmartguy" <tjtocco@netzero.net > wrote:
>Well I believe Chris, what you call dark matter? And what I call dark
>energy? I'll bet they are the same thing I'll bet you can't bottle it
>like you say you can. I have a theory and because every time I say
>something someone else takes credit for it I do indeed believe you can
>make dark energy but you just can't bottle it!
You may have your "theory", but as far as the entire scientific
community is concerned, the only thing dark matter and dark energy have
in common is the word "dark".
Dark matter is just that- matter. It has mass, appears to obey the same
gravity laws as ordinary matter, and presumably could exist in bulk.
There's no reason to think it couldn't be bottled, although as others
have pointed out, its weak electromagnetic interaction with ordinary
matter might make the design of a bottle an interesting problem.
Dark energy is a property of the structure of space itself.
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| | |
Date: 21 Nov 2006 19:59:54
From: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
esmartguy wrote:
> Well I believe Chris, what you call dark matter? And what I call dark
> energy? I'll bet they are the same thing I'll bet you can't bottle it
> like you say you can. I have a theory and because every time I say
> something someone else takes credit for it I do indeed believe you can
> make dark energy but you just can't bottle it!
>
Hey smartguy...
Background on Dark Matter
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm#News
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap060824.html
21 Aug 2006 - NASA announced updated information about the "bullet
cluster" 1E0657-56 today. Two clusters of galaxies have recently
collided in this X-ray source. This cluster is filled with hot gas
so X-ray observations by the Chandra X-ray Observatory show where
the ordinary matter is located. 90% of the ordinary matter (the
"baryonic" matter) is hot gas. The new results [Clowe et al.,
Bradac et al.] use gravitational lensing of background galaxies to
show where the sources of gravity are located. The sources of
gravity in the cluster are not located where the ordinary matter is
located, so this cluster is a counter-example to MOND. All of this
was known in 2003 but with less precision. Sean Carroll has a nice
post about this at Cosmic Variance.
Background on Dark Energy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy
http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/10/11/16
17 November 2006
The mysterious substance known as dark energy has been fuelling the
expansion of the universe for at least nine billion years,
according to astronomers in the US. Adam Riess of Johns Hopkins
University and colleagues made the discovery by using the Hubble
Space Telescope to study ancient exploding stars. They have also
concluded that dark energy appears to be related to the
"cosmological constant" first proposed "3 and then retracted -- by
Albert Einstein.
In 1998 the astronomical community was astounded when data from
Hubble and other telescopes established that the rate of expansion
of the universe was increasing "3 something that physicists are
still struggling to explain. Astronomers had long known that the
universe is expanding, but the rate of expansion was expected to
slow as the finite energy of expansion is depleted by the
gravitational attraction that holds the universe together.
Physicists have tried to explain the acceleration in terms of
"cdark energy", which boosts the expansion of the universe by
counteracting the effects of gravity. To be effective, dark energy
must account for about 70% of all energy in the universe -- but it
has yet to be detected and physicists don"9t really know if its
behaviour remains constant or if it changes over time.
The most popular explanation for dark energy draws on the
"ccosmological constant" first proposed by Einstein. A consequence
of the constant is that energy density of empty space is the same
regardless of whether the universe was expanding. Therefore when
one cubic centimetre of the universe expanded to ten cubic
centimetres it would somehow end up with ten times more energy.
Now Hubble has shed more light on this mysterious energy. Riess and
colleagues used the space telescope study light from 24 type-1a
supernovae that exploded 8-10 billion years ago. Such supernovae
are considered "cstandard candles" because they all have a similar
brightness and this can be exploited by astronomers to reveal when
a supernova occurred and how the universe has expanded in the
intervening years.
The observations reveal that dark energy was around nine billion
years ago and has been acting in a consistent way ever since. The
data suggest that the effect of dark energy was rather weak until
about five to six billion years ago when it defeated gravity in a
"ccosmic tug of war" and the rate of expansion began to increase.
The observations also confirm that the cosmological constant is
currently the best explanation for dark energy, casting doubt over
alternative theories such as quintessence.
Einstein proposed the cosmological constant in 1917 in order to
reconcile his general theory of relatively with the contemporary
notion that the universe was not expanding. This changed in 1929
when the US astronomer Edwin Hubble established that expansion was
indeed occurring and Einstein retracted the cosmological constant.
Now, data from the telescope named after Hubble has resurrected a
concept that Einstein called his "cbiggest blunder".
|
| |
Date: 22 Nov 2006 07:45:32
From: esmartguy
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
Well Richard,
It sound's like to me your story is talking about particles clouds,
similar to a volcanic ash which could appear black in color, and be
effected by gravity. I guess they should rethink it.
Sam Wormley wrote:
> esmartguy wrote:
> > Well I believe Chris, what you call dark matter? And what I call dark
> > energy? I'll bet they are the same thing I'll bet you can't bottle it
> > like you say you can. I have a theory and because every time I say
> > something someone else takes credit for it I do indeed believe you can
> > make dark energy but you just can't bottle it!
> >
>
> Hey smartguy...
>
> Background on Dark Matter
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter
> http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm#News
> http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap060824.html
>
> 21 Aug 2006 - NASA announced updated information about the "bullet
> cluster" 1E0657-56 today. Two clusters of galaxies have recently
> collided in this X-ray source. This cluster is filled with hot gas
> so X-ray observations by the Chandra X-ray Observatory show where
> the ordinary matter is located. 90% of the ordinary matter (the
> "baryonic" matter) is hot gas. The new results [Clowe et al.,
> Bradac et al.] use gravitational lensing of background galaxies to
> show where the sources of gravity are located. The sources of
> gravity in the cluster are not located where the ordinary matter is
> located, so this cluster is a counter-example to MOND. All of this
> was known in 2003 but with less precision. Sean Carroll has a nice
> post about this at Cosmic Variance.
>
>
> Background on Dark Energy
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy
> http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/10/11/16
>
> 17 November 2006
>
> The mysterious substance known as dark energy has been fuelling the
> expansion of the universe for at least nine billion years,
> according to astronomers in the US. Adam Riess of Johns Hopkins
> University and colleagues made the discovery by using the Hubble
> Space Telescope to study ancient exploding stars. They have also
> concluded that dark energy appears to be related to the
> "cosmological constant" first proposed "3 and then retracted -- by
> Albert Einstein.
>
> In 1998 the astronomical community was astounded when data from
> Hubble and other telescopes established that the rate of expansion
> of the universe was increasing "3 something that physicists are
> still struggling to explain. Astronomers had long known that the
> universe is expanding, but the rate of expansion was expected to
> slow as the finite energy of expansion is depleted by the
> gravitational attraction that holds the universe together.
>
> Physicists have tried to explain the acceleration in terms of
> "cdark energy", which boosts the expansion of the universe by
> counteracting the effects of gravity. To be effective, dark energy
> must account for about 70% of all energy in the universe -- but it
> has yet to be detected and physicists don"9t really know if its
> behaviour remains constant or if it changes over time.
>
> The most popular explanation for dark energy draws on the
> "ccosmological constant" first proposed by Einstein. A consequence
> of the constant is that energy density of empty space is the same
> regardless of whether the universe was expanding. Therefore when
> one cubic centimetre of the universe expanded to ten cubic
> centimetres it would somehow end up with ten times more energy.
>
> Now Hubble has shed more light on this mysterious energy. Riess and
> colleagues used the space telescope study light from 24 type-1a
> supernovae that exploded 8-10 billion years ago. Such supernovae
> are considered "cstandard candles" because they all have a similar
> brightness and this can be exploited by astronomers to reveal when
> a supernova occurred and how the universe has expanded in the
> intervening years.
>
> The observations reveal that dark energy was around nine billion
> years ago and has been acting in a consistent way ever since. The
> data suggest that the effect of dark energy was rather weak until
> about five to six billion years ago when it defeated gravity in a
> "ccosmic tug of war" and the rate of expansion began to increase.
>
> The observations also confirm that the cosmological constant is
> currently the best explanation for dark energy, casting doubt over
> alternative theories such as quintessence.
>
> Einstein proposed the cosmological constant in 1917 in order to
> reconcile his general theory of relatively with the contemporary
> notion that the universe was not expanding. This changed in 1929
> when the US astronomer Edwin Hubble established that expansion was
> indeed occurring and Einstein retracted the cosmological constant.
> Now, data from the telescope named after Hubble has resurrected a
> concept that Einstein called his "cbiggest blunder".
|
| |
Date: 22 Nov 2006 21:08:36
From: Jim Klein
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
"west" <restccq2@verizon.net > wrote:
>If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or body
>and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
>earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
>will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
>
>west
>
My preference for bottled dark matter is Guinnes Stout.
Jim Klein
James E. Klein
jameseklein@earthlink.net
Engineering Calculations
http://www.ecalculations.com
ecalculations@ecalculations.com
Engineering Calculations is the home of
the KDP-2 Optical Design Program
for Windows.
1-818-507-5706 (Voice and Fax)
1-818-823-4121
|
| |
Date: 22 Nov 2006 12:28:25
From: Ernie Dunbar
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
Rich wrote:
> west wrote:
> > If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or body
> > and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
> > earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
> > will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
> >
> > west
>
> Be interesting to see the "reaction" of that capped bottle once it hit
> a pressured area.
Well, considering the fact that normal glass pop bottles typically
withstand a pressure differential of about 60-75 PSI, I suspect they'd
hold up fine. :)
|
| |
Date: 23 Nov 2006 03:06:02
From: Hey American Moron!
Subject: Re: Bottle of Dark Matter?
|
suggest you bottle the air in your nose first. Dont waste a trip to
the Deepest Reaches of ................. or open the closet door and grab some
there, ................ its ever-where.
west wrote:
> If I can go in the deepest region of space that far from any matter or body
> and scoop a bottle of this empty space, what will I have? When I return to
> earth, I can use all the analyzers known to man to test this space. What
> will it reveal? Is there such a thing as "Nothing?"
>
> west
|
|
