what if solar systems are synonymous to atoms in that they are the minute building blocks of something greater?

3 years ago by Vupperware to c/showerthoughts

Prove me wrong, I dare you!

WhiteTiger 1 point 3 years ago

Prove me wrong, I dare you!

Well, the thing about atoms is that they arrange themselves in patterns to create those larger building blocks you speak of. Solar systems move much too slowly, so that by the time they would have arranged themselves into anything resembling the patterns exhibited by atoms, the heat death of the universe would have occurred.

The resemblance you see is orbit, but the major issue with uniting the orbit of atoms and the orbit of planets under one theorem is the scale of the forces at work. Gravity is many orders of magnitudes weaker than electromagnetic force holding electrons in place (and it needs to be that much stronger because of how much faster electrons move relative to their size than planets).

But now we're getting into string theory.

save

path: 0 730361, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 7

Kata1yst 1 point 3 years ago

Great point. We should also add for @Vupperware 's benefit that subatomic orbitals the way they're envisioning them are a lie we tell ourselves because quantum mechanics is too damn weird to think about.

In fact, probably the greatest argument against atoms as smaller scale worlds is the fuckiness (technical term) of quantum mechanics on that scale. "Worlds" existing only as a probabilistic distribution might make existence difficult.

save

path: 0 730361 733997, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 1

WhiteTiger 2 points 3 years ago

See I'm the opposite, the fuckiness at that scale is my greatest argument for their possible existence, accepting that their existence would be in a manner completely alien and unintelligible to me. There's SO MUCH fuckiness that anything is possible.

save

path: 0 730361 733997 746760, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0

avalanche 1 point 3 years ago

But, that assumes that it is the same time horizon as what we experience. I've often thought of the scenario where we are living on something that is like a quark of an atom of a much larger existence. And that maybe we make up a small bit of a dude who is sitting around having similar thoughts. But, this enormous (to us) dude moves on an extremely slower timeline. So slow that they there is no possible way we could communicate, even if either of us realized. And in the same regard, there are whole worlds that exist inside the quarks that make up the atoms that make up us. Maybe it is even a recursive existence that goes on to infinity. Because, why not? Prove me wrong. :-)

save

path: 0 730361 730940, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 3

Photon 1 point 3 years ago

Subatomic particles are still constrained by the same speed of light as larger objects. As you scale up the speed by which this recursive universe operates in, this limit becomes more and more significant, and fewer interactions can occur in the relative unit of time.

To put it another way, if this super-universe were to use solar systems as atoms, the speed of light would mean their timescale would be in the billions of our years to their seconds. This is derived from the picosecond delay of forces acting between our atoms and scaling up to the solar system "atoms" that make up our galactic neighborhood (10-100 light years apart). So solar systems couldn't be atoms on this timescale because they would do little but coalesce some of the intergalactic medium and die in seconds.

save

path: 0 730361 730940 731800, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 2

Niello 1 point 3 years ago

The solar system and many like it are already part of a galaxy, and multiple galaxies form a galaxy cluster or filament due to gravity. Overall they already formed a neural-network-like pattern.

save

path: 0 730361 731400, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0

Rules

Rules