Page 1 of 1

really, REALLY tiny...

PostPosted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:22 am
by angel
sometimes i bump into things that make me go "hmm..."

i found one again today. i read the article, and scrolled the picture, and like the author, i can't grasp it either.

http://www.phrenopolis.com/perspective/atom/#electron

PostPosted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:39 am
by Yogi
Amazing as all that emptiness is, ponder the "strong force" that keeps it all together. That's some kind of super glue. :biggrin:

PostPosted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 12:19 pm
by Makinamess
I have often wondered about the smallest things around, similarly the largest .... If the universe is really large and we could go to its limit, then what is just beyond that ? What is the largest thing around that we know of ? Call it *A*.... now where is *A* and how is it contained ? Surely then, the container for *A* is even larger than *A* .... Ok, now for the smallest thing - what is the smallest thing we know ? Let's call it *Z*. What's inside *Z* ? There must be something inside it, or it wouldn't be an *it* - or am I just confusing myself now :lol:

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 1:00 pm
by pilvikki
so, you're saying we're plenty of nothing and i don't need to go on a diet after all?

:tongue:

PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2007 6:52 am
by angel
someone calculated that if all empty space was removed from the atoms that make up planet earth and everything on and in it, it would only be 40 cm (or 16 inches) across.
that's very not all that much.

PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2007 4:12 pm
by Silke
....theoreticly, following that line, it is possible to walk through walls. All that is needed is for your atoms not to collide with any of the atoms in the wall...

.... anyone want to calculate the possibility of that`?

PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2007 4:18 pm
by MargeC
pilvikki wrote:so, you're saying we're plenty of nothing and i don't need to go on a diet after all?

:tongue:


That's correct. Fatness is an illusion caused by the electrons making the protons look really fat.

PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2007 9:07 pm
by pilvikki
so i should hang around more protons to look skinnier by comparison?

this is why they are pro tons?

PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:32 am
by Makinamess
:lmao1:

PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:50 am
by Sandra
pilvikki wrote:so i should hang around more protons to look skinnier by comparison?

this is why they are pro tons?


thanks pilvikki :lmao1:

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 11:55 am
by pilvikki
welcome! :biggrin:

but i still don't get it... if we're nothing but empty space, why do we weight what we do?

why? why? why?