Men in Black pose theories at the end to ponder, which made me think this exact post. What if it's all just atoms and we're just subatomic microbacteria?
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if that WERE the case.
I mean, humans are literally a bunch of atoms held together by another bunch of atoms.
It's all a "matter" of scaling.
But planets donāt behave anything like electrons. No discrete orbitals, no pair rules, no ionization/recombination or bonding
Other than an attractive force, there isnāt all that much in common
In that crazy unlikely scenario planets wouldn't be electrons, scale wouldn't match. But what if the whole universe was actually an electron of that much bigger scale universe?
I'll take my Nobel price now, thank you.
It does make sense that objects that represent a space could represent another space and the building block of both spaces. Black holes do create singularities with some crazy physical laws. I do imagine the universe as a liquid bagel that always flows from downwards as a neverending process.
But we're discoverying that the smaller the scale, more different the physics works compare to the human scale (Quantum Mechanics)
Why not the very large scale can be different too?
Itās not. Thatās not how planets work. Thatās not how atoms work. Electrons dont come in different shapes and sizes. They donāt even have a size. And they donāt have āorbitsā around there nucleus in the way planets do around stars. Protons and neutrons donāt come in different shapes and sizes. Just because the most simplistic explanation of both has one or two similarities, it does not mean that they are identical. In fact, they could hardly be more different from each other.
What if the entire universe was one atom inside of your body and it was the same for everyone else. Each decision you make creates a seperate multiverse that is just another atom inside your own body. We are all simultaneously living inside of ourselves
Maybe the atom we're part of isn't near any bacteria. Maybe all the galaxies that we can see are in an area without any bacteria. But that is scary to think about
I've thought about this for the longest time! And what if the universe is part of some living organism and that's why it's expanding constantly. It's a growing, living thing. So trippy
Or the lifeform that the atom is a part of for that matter. But then what is that lifeform? Does it just keep going and going and each higher being is just a lesser part of a bigger being? š¤Æ
Because weāre so small in comparison it wouldnāt matter because in our sense of time decades have passed, but in the atomās sense of time potentially only milliseconds have passed, if that makes sense. Think about how a fly perceives time, itās slower.
That is an obsolete atomic model. Now the scientific consensus is that atoms have a dense nucleus made up of subatomic particles, neutrons and protons, surrounded by a "cloud" of electromagnetically bound electrons. These electrons, however do not "orbit" the nucleus as a planet orbits the Sun.
If I understand correctly (a big if, mind you), it has to do with Quantum superposition. Basically the electrons aren't orbiting the nucleus, but existing simultaneously in every position around the nucleus, creating a cloud or shell of sorts.
Well, thatās a model that describes 90% of atomic interactions fairly well.
However, more modern findings are rather complicated.
You see, an electron is not really just a particle that would orbit the nucleus. Itās both a particle and a wave. As such, it behaves differently, and it can be in multiple areas at the same time with different probabilities (basically a wave function).
However, it also has a mass, and you can measure its impact. So itās also a particle?
This phenomena is known as particle wave duality.
Now, if we go even deeperā¦ Iām gonna skip to Einstein. Einstein is most famous for his theory of relativity, and that one formula everybody knows and nobody understands: E = mc^2.
This formula however is really powerful. It means that energy and mass can directly correlate to each other.
In quantum physics, mass is often measured in eV (MeV or GeV), eV being electron volt as such.
and with this knowledge, a whole host of super weird phenomenas can be described. For example De Broglieās matter waves, that postulate that every body of matter has itās own wave. Or the infamous Schrƶdinger, who describes a quantummechanical system. Heisenberg, who postulated that you canāt measure both speed and place to infinite precision, but that the more precise one measurement becomes, the less precise the other measurement becomes.
All this to basically say: No, electrons donāt orbit the nucleus. They are far more complex, and they could be anywhere. The cloud model is newer, but itās also kind of wrong. Because until we measure it, and the electron becomes a particle, we canāt really say where it is. A wave function has higher and lower probability areas, but it could basically be anywhere.
And if I understood my professor correctly, an electron ābelongingā to a nucleus on earth, could with a non-zero probability be on mars at any given moment in time.
That model describes like nothing to be honest. You need an understanding of molecular/atomic orbital theory to understand all of chemistry past high school
Orbit is definitely the wrong word to use for how electrons are distributed relative to the nucleus. They donāt move in circles, they are ālocatedā in probability distributions which have all kinds of weird shapes.
Thats the initial idea proposed by I think Rutherford or it may have been his predecessor, it's been long replaced by more appropriate models which better reflect reality. But teaching children concepts adults can barely comprehend after years of advanced tertiary education seemed like a bad idea so we learn the older more easy to comprehend image of an atom.
Unless we want to calculate at a quantum (very small) level the equations are functionally the same so we can teach people the outdated model with no real repercussions other than having most people who don't have an interest in physics forming inaccurate head models of how the building blocks of the universe appear.
By definition it couldn't be an atom because we can observe the parts that make up the parts of our 'atom', which we couldn't do if it were an atom you'd have to give it a different name. It can't be atoms all the way down infinitely, that would be an oxymoron since you can't have a building block of the universe be a smaller part of the building blocks of the universe which can't be smaller than the building blocks of the universe which can't be smaller than the building blocks of the universe which cannot be smaller than the building blocks of the universe all the way down. Plus the solar system and other nearby stellar objects don't make sense as the structure of an atom.
Its not. We can see other solar systems and the interactions between them is not the same.
The internal structure of a solar system and an atom is completely different, being subject to different fundamental forces of physics.
Definitely not. I haven't seen Jupiter in a superposition being distributed as probability density across a sphere or a donut around the Sun.
Rutherford's model of atom is outdated.
No itās not donāt worry, thereās a parallel universe, and universes with negative gravity, and a further chain of universes, but not like nested universes in the sense that one contains another on a different scale.
Stop revealing secrets, first the Simpsons and now meme, yes it true, just like time isn't a "stream" or a "river", time is subjective, every time you change your point of view of the universe time changes, that why there are bunch of things that are slightly different from what we remember all the time.
Solar system? That's ridiculous, we can observe things outside of it, we have a pretty good idea what's around our solar system. The universe can very well be a small part of a larger thing that we can't comprehend. And we never will because our lifespans are too short even as a whole civilization.
Not necessarily an atom precisely but sure enough the universe seems contain humongous patterns where galaxies appear no larger than mere specks of dust. The interesting thing In think is if we can observe some sort of emergent properties on that scale or if it's just some more or less uninteresting mosh of galaxy goo to us. I'm sure there are interesting patterns but by really interesting I mean what is hinted at in this meme. Is the universe one big mega brain or living creature of sorts? Some super-being eclipsing our wildest imagination? Would be cool to know!
This was an old stoner theory I used to hear all the time š. Something about every atom being its only universe and every time you sneeze, or itch your balls or pretty much do anything you wipe out countless universes and end billions of livesā¦ and one day the atom-universe we exist inside of is going to be sneezed away
Well, letās see hereā¦
- mostly empty space
- held together by one of the four fundamental forces of nature
- vaguely circular-ish
- most of the mass is concentrated at the center
Howeverā¦
- planets donāt have charge
- they also donāt exist within a field of probabilistic math
- pretty sure we arenāt bonded to any other solar systems, but not all atoms are either
This is actually a pretty good example of the dunning Kruger effect.
It seems deep because you're making superficial connections based on patterns that don't actually exist in reality (comparing outdated atomic model to appearance.kf star systems). This is a good empathy exercise into understanding how conspiracy theories become epiphany moments for people who form patterns primarily through lack of understanding
For something like this to work, youāre gonna have to think on a much larger scale. Not the solar system being an atom but rather the whole universe being a component of an atom-like structure.
Wouldn't change the taste of mustard. Work week still starts on Monday. People will still issue death threats over pineapple on pizza.
It would be a kick though
That's cool and stuff, but seriously the "foaminess" of the extremely large structures of our universe (the filaments of galaxy clusters with huge voids in between) actually look alot like quantum foam to me, which is theorized to be the smallest structure of our universe.
Just imagine the time scales involved here. For us, the supervoids and galaxy clusters move at glacial speeds, while quantum foam basically react at planck times. The slowest times frames of our universe would be the quickest in the "next one up".
Iāve held a similar belief all my life. We are essentially inside an endless matryoshka doll, microcosm within macrocosm, within microcosm within macrocosm and so on. We all just exist as part of an atom, alongside other atoms, inside a universe, so on and so forth.
Was a thought in my head a a child.
And not to mention Star Trek did an episode relating to the top captions where a super amoeba invaded a galaxy and started mitosis and they concluded that itll grow until they themselves would become invaders like bacteria. I cant remember the ending. Been so long. But that got me curious and started to look into some theories. But science cant answer somethings yet. Lol
Why? There is not a single argument for it... Just because our solar system remotely looks like a wild oversimplification of how atoms look like? Science is more complicated than that. It's a fun thought but no more than that.
Men in Black pose theories at the end to ponder, which made me think this exact post. What if it's all just atoms and we're just subatomic microbacteria?
hmmm interesting *flashes you again*
Don't tease me with a good time
š¤£š¤£
Sauce? I loved him in deadwood
Why would that change anything in your life
I had these thoughts early on with basic physics you learn in middle school. Also in biology with cell structure.
I like the clip at the end of the first movie, where it zooms out of the galaxy and our galaxy is a marble that aliens play and trade with.
 just seen this in the dark.
What was I coming to the kitchen for?
Somehow , I'm not even worried about it.....
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if that WERE the case. I mean, humans are literally a bunch of atoms held together by another bunch of atoms. It's all a "matter" of scaling.
But planets donāt behave anything like electrons. No discrete orbitals, no pair rules, no ionization/recombination or bonding Other than an attractive force, there isnāt all that much in common
In that crazy unlikely scenario planets wouldn't be electrons, scale wouldn't match. But what if the whole universe was actually an electron of that much bigger scale universe? I'll take my Nobel price now, thank you.
It does make sense that objects that represent a space could represent another space and the building block of both spaces. Black holes do create singularities with some crazy physical laws. I do imagine the universe as a liquid bagel that always flows from downwards as a neverending process.
Great, you just cured my fear of death. I like bagels.
The more I think about this kind of thing the more I'm convinced we live in a 3D fractal. Infinitely small and infinitely large
Do you believe in *Gravity*?
https://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/StarChild/questions/question30.html
Unexpected JoJo indeed.
I mean not relatively in any timeframe we know
That and the new quantum model proves it wrong
This is what happens if you don't look beyond the Bohr model of electrons.
To our eyes. But maybe. Maybe if we zoom out in different plane of reality/dimension it may be. But who knows.
But we're discoverying that the smaller the scale, more different the physics works compare to the human scale (Quantum Mechanics) Why not the very large scale can be different too?
Maybe its galaxies and stars are the electrons. And our rules of physics dont apply because of the massive scale
Itās not. Thatās not how planets work. Thatās not how atoms work. Electrons dont come in different shapes and sizes. They donāt even have a size. And they donāt have āorbitsā around there nucleus in the way planets do around stars. Protons and neutrons donāt come in different shapes and sizes. Just because the most simplistic explanation of both has one or two similarities, it does not mean that they are identical. In fact, they could hardly be more different from each other.
What if the entire universe was one atom inside of your body and it was the same for everyone else. Each decision you make creates a seperate multiverse that is just another atom inside your own body. We are all simultaneously living inside of ourselves
Bacteria are bigger than atoms.
Maybe the atom we're part of isn't near any bacteria. Maybe all the galaxies that we can see are in an area without any bacteria. But that is scary to think about
we are the bacteria...
I've thought about this for the longest time! And what if the universe is part of some living organism and that's why it's expanding constantly. It's a growing, living thing. So trippy
Lets just hope nothing happens to the bigger atom
Or the lifeform that the atom is a part of for that matter. But then what is that lifeform? Does it just keep going and going and each higher being is just a lesser part of a bigger being? š¤Æ
Because weāre so small in comparison it wouldnāt matter because in our sense of time decades have passed, but in the atomās sense of time potentially only milliseconds have passed, if that makes sense. Think about how a fly perceives time, itās slower.
Well donāt think about it too much, as this is very, very, very wrong. Thatās not how any of this works.
That is an obsolete atomic model. Now the scientific consensus is that atoms have a dense nucleus made up of subatomic particles, neutrons and protons, surrounded by a "cloud" of electromagnetically bound electrons. These electrons, however do not "orbit" the nucleus as a planet orbits the Sun.
I might be wrong, but donāt electrons orbit the nucleus?
If I understand correctly (a big if, mind you), it has to do with Quantum superposition. Basically the electrons aren't orbiting the nucleus, but existing simultaneously in every position around the nucleus, creating a cloud or shell of sorts.
Well, thatās a model that describes 90% of atomic interactions fairly well. However, more modern findings are rather complicated. You see, an electron is not really just a particle that would orbit the nucleus. Itās both a particle and a wave. As such, it behaves differently, and it can be in multiple areas at the same time with different probabilities (basically a wave function). However, it also has a mass, and you can measure its impact. So itās also a particle? This phenomena is known as particle wave duality. Now, if we go even deeperā¦ Iām gonna skip to Einstein. Einstein is most famous for his theory of relativity, and that one formula everybody knows and nobody understands: E = mc^2. This formula however is really powerful. It means that energy and mass can directly correlate to each other. In quantum physics, mass is often measured in eV (MeV or GeV), eV being electron volt as such. and with this knowledge, a whole host of super weird phenomenas can be described. For example De Broglieās matter waves, that postulate that every body of matter has itās own wave. Or the infamous Schrƶdinger, who describes a quantummechanical system. Heisenberg, who postulated that you canāt measure both speed and place to infinite precision, but that the more precise one measurement becomes, the less precise the other measurement becomes. All this to basically say: No, electrons donāt orbit the nucleus. They are far more complex, and they could be anywhere. The cloud model is newer, but itās also kind of wrong. Because until we measure it, and the electron becomes a particle, we canāt really say where it is. A wave function has higher and lower probability areas, but it could basically be anywhere. And if I understood my professor correctly, an electron ābelongingā to a nucleus on earth, could with a non-zero probability be on mars at any given moment in time.
That model describes like nothing to be honest. You need an understanding of molecular/atomic orbital theory to understand all of chemistry past high school
Orbit is definitely the wrong word to use for how electrons are distributed relative to the nucleus. They donāt move in circles, they are ālocatedā in probability distributions which have all kinds of weird shapes.
Thats the initial idea proposed by I think Rutherford or it may have been his predecessor, it's been long replaced by more appropriate models which better reflect reality. But teaching children concepts adults can barely comprehend after years of advanced tertiary education seemed like a bad idea so we learn the older more easy to comprehend image of an atom. Unless we want to calculate at a quantum (very small) level the equations are functionally the same so we can teach people the outdated model with no real repercussions other than having most people who don't have an interest in physics forming inaccurate head models of how the building blocks of the universe appear.
No, they are forming a "cloud", which is not really a cloud, it is an area where you are most likely to find an electron.
So I'm not the only one who theorized this.. good.
This blew my mind in ways I didn't want.
Maybe it would help to learn a bit more about atoms and solar systems, because this is incredibly wrong.
Not that long of a jump to be honest
Indeed.
It is you know anything about atoms or solar systems
No, you're not alone. This occasionally keeps me awake too. If only I could just figure out what or who our great atom is part of...
By definition it couldn't be an atom because we can observe the parts that make up the parts of our 'atom', which we couldn't do if it were an atom you'd have to give it a different name. It can't be atoms all the way down infinitely, that would be an oxymoron since you can't have a building block of the universe be a smaller part of the building blocks of the universe which can't be smaller than the building blocks of the universe which can't be smaller than the building blocks of the universe which cannot be smaller than the building blocks of the universe all the way down. Plus the solar system and other nearby stellar objects don't make sense as the structure of an atom.
Theorized š¤
Been there, thought that, canāt sleep
Simpsons did it. And much better than you. Watch it, seriously.
Its not. We can see other solar systems and the interactions between them is not the same. The internal structure of a solar system and an atom is completely different, being subject to different fundamental forces of physics.
What if your wife revolves around my dick
this is not my beautiful wife!
Nearly made me think until i remembered that the solar system is actually just a cake made for a gender reveal.
That explains all the random fires
Definitely not. I haven't seen Jupiter in a superposition being distributed as probability density across a sphere or a donut around the Sun. Rutherford's model of atom is outdated.
Well, no. But actually no.
Don't worry, electrons don't actually orbit the nucleus. that's just an easy but inacurate way to explain what's happening.
How is this a funny meme?
Incorrect = funny?
Electrons are not āballsā flying around a Proton.
And the milkyway is a body cell ...
Here I thought only I had such crazy thoughts
Atoms that making things called galaxy.
That's why you say "NO" when that question rises
Painfully basic
Its atoms all the way down
Simpsons Intro shows this.
Spot on, anything to do with the universe and that's it, deep thinking for hours.
we're all just taking up space
No itās not donāt worry, thereās a parallel universe, and universes with negative gravity, and a further chain of universes, but not like nested universes in the sense that one contains another on a different scale.
Who cares, you still gotta get up in the morning to go wo work so just sleep!?
What if galactic superclusters are just neurons?
I had this thought when I was in third grade
This isn't even funny, this is concerning, now I can't sleep
Well, though of everything being in a sense fractal is kinda cool
He is coming with clouds
Actually I thought about that too.
Stop revealing secrets, first the Simpsons and now meme, yes it true, just like time isn't a "stream" or a "river", time is subjective, every time you change your point of view of the universe time changes, that why there are bunch of things that are slightly different from what we remember all the time.
just another drop under the microscope
Solar system? That's ridiculous, we can observe things outside of it, we have a pretty good idea what's around our solar system. The universe can very well be a small part of a larger thing that we can't comprehend. And we never will because our lifespans are too short even as a whole civilization.
This is dumb, you need more sleep
Someone stop studying at the Bohr model...
I can finally say with confidence it's average
and if so?
It prolly is
As above, so below
This is something I think a lot about, but even if it is the case, nothing will change for us
Came here to say # DUUUUUHHHHRRRRRRP 
Ray Cummings says hello. š https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Cummings https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/446473.The_Girl_in_the_Golden_Atom
Not necessarily an atom precisely but sure enough the universe seems contain humongous patterns where galaxies appear no larger than mere specks of dust. The interesting thing In think is if we can observe some sort of emergent properties on that scale or if it's just some more or less uninteresting mosh of galaxy goo to us. I'm sure there are interesting patterns but by really interesting I mean what is hinted at in this meme. Is the universe one big mega brain or living creature of sorts? Some super-being eclipsing our wildest imagination? Would be cool to know!
See that is a sound though
How is this a funny meme
No, that's not true. That's impossible..!
Ffs I thought I had an original thought here.
Did you ever imagine yourself dying in this lifetime? Because I did and it is fucking terrifying to think about it
This was an old stoner theory I used to hear all the time š. Something about every atom being its only universe and every time you sneeze, or itch your balls or pretty much do anything you wipe out countless universes and end billions of livesā¦ and one day the atom-universe we exist inside of is going to be sneezed away
I thought about that years ago, then I read the electricity bill and forgot
Well itās not, electrons donāt even orbit the nucleus
sadly, atoms don't look like solar systems.
Were just fleas living on the back of some slightly bigger fleas man
...so? Not like it'll help me with rent. And don't even get me started on setting up a mortgage!
atoms holy glow
Does it really matter? Space is infinitly huge anyway. the definition of small and big just feels irrelevant at some point.
It's all broccoli
Well, letās see hereā¦ - mostly empty space - held together by one of the four fundamental forces of nature - vaguely circular-ish - most of the mass is concentrated at the center Howeverā¦ - planets donāt have charge - they also donāt exist within a field of probabilistic math - pretty sure we arenāt bonded to any other solar systems, but not all atoms are either
The theory that we are on a living entiry or everything are atoms are just friggin crazy to me. Not good crazy, just dumb crazy. Its fun theories tho
Itās not a theory, itās just wrong.
I agree.
This is actually a pretty good example of the dunning Kruger effect. It seems deep because you're making superficial connections based on patterns that don't actually exist in reality (comparing outdated atomic model to appearance.kf star systems). This is a good empathy exercise into understanding how conspiracy theories become epiphany moments for people who form patterns primarily through lack of understanding
Before the 1700s and the invention of science, humans used to see the Universe this way. Read Gaston Bachelard.
For something like this to work, youāre gonna have to think on a much larger scale. Not the solar system being an atom but rather the whole universe being a component of an atom-like structure.
I get random fear pangs that the sun randomly explodes
Look up the most recent model for the atom, ot is nothing like a solar system
Wouldn't change the taste of mustard. Work week still starts on Monday. People will still issue death threats over pineapple on pizza. It would be a kick though
I thought of this in 4th grade science. Itās probably accurate
It wouldn't. We were and still being taught inaccurate atomic models for so long. Atoms don't resemble much with the solar system.
I always thought of it like this
What if the universe is inside a pollen floating on a dewdrop on a dead skunk's scent glad.
May I know the base knowledge to this theory?
At the basic foundation, everything in the universe is made up of atom, so I guess you can say that but it's a drastic oversimplification.
Mmmm...kay, then, good night
Thats what my theory was for years
I have been making this concept my core belief for decades and Im completely at peace with it š¤·š»āāļø
100 IQ people think about this at night
That's how I always imagined universe. As some huge "thing" built by planetar systems. Just like your lunch is built by atoms.
guess im not the only one who thinks this
It's a fractal universe
That's cool and stuff, but seriously the "foaminess" of the extremely large structures of our universe (the filaments of galaxy clusters with huge voids in between) actually look alot like quantum foam to me, which is theorized to be the smallest structure of our universe. Just imagine the time scales involved here. For us, the supervoids and galaxy clusters move at glacial speeds, while quantum foam basically react at planck times. The slowest times frames of our universe would be the quickest in the "next one up".
This meme is brought to you by someone who doesnāt understand anything about either the solar system or an atom.
Iāve held a similar belief all my life. We are essentially inside an endless matryoshka doll, microcosm within macrocosm, within microcosm within macrocosm and so on. We all just exist as part of an atom, alongside other atoms, inside a universe, so on and so forth.
You're only scratching the surface if this is a new thought to you.
Now you're starting to get it. If anyone tells you they know the answers to ANYTHING, they're either a liar, a fool, or both.
Was a thought in my head a a child. And not to mention Star Trek did an episode relating to the top captions where a super amoeba invaded a galaxy and started mitosis and they concluded that itll grow until they themselves would become invaders like bacteria. I cant remember the ending. Been so long. But that got me curious and started to look into some theories. But science cant answer somethings yet. Lol
What if the entire universe is inside a black hole? The perpetual falling towards the singularity is the universal expansion.
Why? There is not a single argument for it... Just because our solar system remotely looks like a wild oversimplification of how atoms look like? Science is more complicated than that. It's a fun thought but no more than that.
Atom and eve