First "snapshot" of Dark Matter?

[Bruce McAuley]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/12/051212090013.htm

Is it just me, or is this snapshot of a computer simulation reminiscent of a neural network?
Wondrous!

Bruce

[melody]

1. lol - not just you, that's what I thought, too, when I saw it n/t

[Beelzebud]

2. It looks like String Theory.

At least thats what I thought when I saw the pic.

Very cool stuff! :)

[RobertSeattle]

3. OT - I misread your subject line initiallly

Thought it said "Frist "snapshot" of Dark Matter?"

:silly:

[tridim]

4. Does it bother anyone else that whenever they provide an image

of a detailed scientific phenomenon that there is hardly ever a high resolution version available? I want detail dammit! Not a tiny black box with a few white splotches on it.

[eppur_se_muova]

5. Resolution is proportional to fees paid.

I'm sure subscribers get downloadable hi-res versions.

[tridim]

6. It's a Hubble image

I already paid for it.

[Trillo]

7. No. It's not a Hubble image,

The image caption: "Image courtesy of Johns Hopkins University".

Whether Johns Hopkins University is a public or private entity is another matter.

[Up2Late]

12. That image is totally bogus, I don't know where they got it, but...

...it has nothing to do with Dark Matter. If you want to see the actual images the Johns Hopkins University Released, you have to click the link at the very bottom of the "article" (This is actually just the Hopkins Press release, but without the pictures).

Here's the link: <http://www.jhu.edu/news/home05/dec05/darkmatt.html>

You can't ever trust "ScienceDaily." It has a LOT of bogus and rewritten with a RW slant, second hand "news" on it, it all comes from UPI and UPINewsTrack. I've been studying were all the bogus and anti-scientific RW "news" has been coming from, and I recently discovered UPINewsTrack, and it bogus "news" is fed directly onto ScienceDaily.

Google any of the stories at this link: <http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/> and then click the News link (at the top of the Google results) 99 out of 100 times it will turn up the UPINewstrack edited version as posted at Science Daily.

If you'd like to read more, I'm collecting my research at this post in the Media Forum: <http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=109x24072>

Oh, and here's a UPINewsTrack version of this subject, this is how they treat all news: <http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20051212-050446-3399r>

[htuttle]

8. My head hurts...

...from trying to imagine myself in relation to the scale of the dark matter 'webbing' in the simulation image.

Space is big, very big.

[soothsayer]

9. It's a snapshot of a computer simulation, not the real stuff, lol!

What a gyp.

[Bruce McAuley]

10. On the other hand...

Can anyone see Dark Matter directly?
Nope.
We have to rely on crappy computer simulations, woe is us.
I'm still amazed by that simulation, it's not a gyp at all, just a bigger view of our universe is my thought.

Bruce

[TechBear_Seattle]

11. It reminds me of a Sierpinski sponge

For those not familiar with fractals, here is how you can construct one type of Sierpinski sponge (out of a great many possible ways):

1. Take a cube and divide it in to 27 units, 3 units deep, 3 units wide and three units high.
2a. Imagine three "slices" going right to left, each "slice" made up of a single 3 unit by 3 unit square. Remove the center cube from each slice.
2b. Imagine three "slices" going front to back. Remove the center cube of each slice.
2c. Imagine three "slices" going top to bottom. Remove the center cube from each slice.
3. For each of the 20 unit cubes remaining in the larger cube, go to step 1.

You are left with a finite volume posessing infinite surface area and, if I remember correctly, an average density of zero no matter what you might make the cubes out of.

[Bruce McAuley]

13. Interesting idea!

If you just look at your final statement from a slightly skewed direction(as is my wont), you could restate it to apply to our own "ordinary matter" part(less than 10%) of the universe such that our finite volume universe has an infinite "surface area" sculpted by "time"(only apparent in our small part) and producing an infinite variety of material interactions, only a few of which actually coalesce to form galaxies and such.
Can a Sierpinski sponge be sentient(The Great Spirit) do you think? Or if we're just a hologram universe, since we're sentient(I think), does that mean the entire Hologram is sentient?
Interesting indeed.

Bruce