Cosmology

The best explanation is done by this video http://revver.com/video/99898/imagining-the-tenth-dimension/ Watch it all the way through, and your welcome!

I watched the video.

There is no 11th dimension, but the tenth dimension is all possible universes inside a geometrical point. There cannot be anything more than that.

Space is an infinite extension of any 3D region filled with matter. If that is the case, that would mean that the was no space before the big bang-where the universe begun hence space is the property of the universe meaning space must have been created with/by the big bang .If space were to be destroyed,(which I certainly hope you don't wish for that)I'm afraid even your great-great of your great descendents won't be able to see the results.....Remember you are also existing in space and time , the solar system you are in is isolated in a vastness of space.If the universe expands it can only do that in space-time meaning that space is continually expanding and applying the same theory in reverse it should give us the opposite so as to say contraction might destroy space. ---- Space traditionally exists in three dimensions: width, breadth, and depth. A dictionary definition of the word space is: the unlimited or incalculably great three-dimensional realm or expanse in which all material objects are located and all events occur. A moderntwist is the addition of a fourth dimension: time. Space is the "container" within which everything exists. From our remote position on Earth, we can see aroundfourteen billion light years in every direction, giving the universe an approximatesize of twenty-eight billion light years in diameter. Given that light can travel at 300,000 kilometers a second, and would taketwenty-eight billion years to cross the universe,it's hard to imagine how big that really is. My calculations come out at around 227,059,200,000,000,000,000,000 kilometers across. Is there a name for a number that large? According to Big Bang theory and subsequent observations, the universe is expanding, and accelerating outwards, just like an explosion. The main opposition to this expansion is the amount of gravity generated by all the matterwithin the container,slowing downthe growth of space. Using mathematics and observations, astronomers have calculated the amount of "visible" matter available, but it doesn't appear to account for all the gravity we think there should be.We are now searching for a theoretical type of matterdubbed "dark matter", which may generate the gravity we expect to see. If the amount of gravity in the universe is greater than a particular threshold, it could slow, stop and even reverse the expansion, causing all matter to close back in toward the original location of the Big Bang. This could cause a "Big Crunch" and perhaps another Big Bang, creating a whole new, fresh universe. This supposed cyclical nature of the universe is controversial and as the cycle takes place over tens of billions of years, we are unlikely to ever know for sure.

In this time, assuming protons do not decay, the estimated time until all baryonic matter has either fused together to form iron-56 or decayed from a higher mass element into iron-56.

To brighten anything,light needs to reflect from that medium.Space has nothing,except some heavenly bodies.When light strikes a heavenly body, it probably brightens it.If their is nothing,how light can brighten it?

In this time, low estimate for the time until all objects exceeding the Planck mass collapse via quantum tunnelling into black holes, assuming no proton decay or virtual black holes. On this vast timescale, even ultra-stable iron stars are destroyed by quantum tunnelling events. First iron stars of sufficient mass will collapse via tunnelling into neutron stars. Subsequently neutron stars and any remaining iron stars collapse via tunnelling into black holes. The subsequent evaporation of each resulting black hole into sub-atomic particles (a process lasting roughly 10^100 years) is on these timescales instantaneous.

The Earth was made long after the Big Bang, since the Big Bang occurred around 13.7 billion years ago and Earth is about 4.5 billion years old.

Basically after the Big Bang, energy was converted into matter and the Universe was filled with clouds of hydrogen and helium gas. These clouds would coalesce through gravity to form galaxies and stars. One of these stars, our Sun, would form in the Milky Way galaxy. There would be a disk of gas and dust orbiting our Sun, from which Earth would form.

For more info see the related questions below

No.

Dark matter emits no EM radiation that we can detect, and we can detect light from galaxies outside the Milky Way over 17 orders of magnitude. Specifically, from radio waves as long as 10 meters to gamma rays of over 1 GeV in energy. Since there is far more gravitational interaction between dark matter and baryonic matter (ie, the stuff we understand) than that occuring between baryons, then it would be truly bizarre that we could not detect any EM radiation coming from dark matter. If it were emitting EM radiation, then we should see more of it than we can see coming from baryonic matter. But we don't see anything. So either dark matter has no EM interaction (ie, no EM radiation) or its EM interaction is so weak and different than that for baryons.

In the animated show "Jimmy Neutron", the character's large forehead is simply an artistic choice made by the creators for a unique and visually distinctive design. It is meant to emphasize his intelligence and signal that he is a genius inventor.

Trenches are the deepest parts of the ocean. Abyssal plains are the flattest parts of the ocean, but not necessarily the deepest. For the record, Marianas Trench is the deepest trench in the world, located near the Philippines.

The universe is the totality of intelligible, perceptible, and quantifiable reality that is the focus of human scientific research. It is a four-dimensional space-time continuum consisting of matter, energy, and forces. The universe consists of both inanimate matter (e.g. planets, stars, galaxies, asteroids, comets) and animate matter (e.g. plants, animals, humans, bacteria, fungi). The four fundamental forces in the universe are gravitation, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces.

OR: The universe is everything, or the universe is everything around here -- thus, some talk about other universes. Sometimes the other universes are separated by distance, sometimes by time, sometimes by other imaginary conditions. The universe of real numbers does not include the square root of negative one -- another use of the word universe.

The major axis is the diameter across the widest part. The semimajor axis is half that, and for a planet it's the average of the maximum and minimum distances from the Sun .

It helped prove the big bang theory.

If by "heaven" you mean outer space, it is made up of the same 90 elements or so that are found on Earth. However, in outer space there is also matter that is not made up of atoms - including black holes, dark matter, and dark energy.If by "heaven" you mean a metaphysical heaven, as in what expects us in the afterlife - well, nobody really knows.

1. Hubble constant (galactic red shifts)
2. 3K microwave background radiation
3. light element/isotope ratios (i.e. hydrogen, deuterium, helium, lithium)

Perhaps you refer to the word "entropy"? The concept that everything tends to fall apart and an input of energy is required to maintain order and stability. This could be in reference to one of the Laws of Thermodynamics, or to cosmology, or psychology. Basically, stuff wants to fall apart. :)

Actually, it's not entirely accurate to say that "everything tends to slow down and fall apart". Although that may ultimately be the case, there's nothing to stop things speeding up and coming together in the meantime. Gravity, for instance, tends to speed up things and bring them together. Combine gravity with nuclear forces, and you get a hugely complex coming together of stuff - just look at the interior of your average G-type star.

Big Bang is a model of the universe which specially deals with the question that how the universe might have started.It mainly suggests that 13.798 billion years ago,all the matter in the universe was concentrated into a point of zero size,with infinite density,mass and spacetime curvature.The point suddenly exploded,releasing unimaginable amount of energy. The energy then might have transformed into mass, as particles could be created out of energy.During big bang,universe was infinitely hot.As the universe expanded, its temperature would have decreased to few million centigrades.At this temperature, the molecules lost their capability to overcome nuclear force,and would have started to form atoms and molecules.This process finally gave birth to several trillion molecules,which have been transferred evenly throughout the space available. By this process,the universe is thought to be originated.

The Steady State Hypothesis fails to explain the existence of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation; or to adequately explain the ratio of hydrogen to helium in all parts of our Universe. Big Bang Cosmology successfully explains the existence, isotropy, and spectrum of the CMBR, as well as the universal ratio of hydrogen to helium.

In addition, if our Universe has been in an eternal steady state, then we would see

1) quasars at all distances from us. We don't; we only see them far away.

2) white dwarf stars older than 12 billion years. Again, we don't.

3) more abundant decay products of long-life isotopes. We don't; the ratios never show any age of such isotopes greater than about 10 billion years.

The best theory is that all matter was created at the Big Bang

An interuniversal Einsten Rosen bridge. Interuniversal wormhole for short.

As best can be determined, the Universe (as a whole) does not have consciousness. As such, the Universe lacks a capacity to feel any emotion, or to act upon any emotion it might be "feeling." In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, it is more likely that our Universe does not care. Our natural world most definitely does not develop in any way consistent with caring for anything.

As an aside, I do a lot of hiking; and one of the wiser things I heard as I began to do long hikes is, "Nature doesn't care." Basically, it means that it is best to assume that the natural world we experience will NOT alter itself based simply on how much we are suffering, nor on any degree to which we don't "deserve" to suffer. It is thus a waste of psychological energy to bemoan that it is "unfair" for you to suffer while in nature, simply because our natural world does not act in a way that shows any degree of caring.

The rotation of earth on its axis

Thorium constitutes about 4E-8% of the visible baryonic matter of the universe by mass. Visible baryonic matter is about 4.9% of the total mass of the universe, as per the latest estimates. So the mass-percentage of thorium in the universe would be 4E-8 x 0.049 = ... very little.

The evidence of cosmic microwave background radiation supports the Big Bang theory.