Atheists who love Science!

Information

Atheists who love Science!

A group for science enthusiasts of all types -- professionals, amateurs, students, anybody who loves science.

Members: 1581
Latest Activity: 6 hours ago

Whether you're a professional, a student, an amateur, an enthusiast, whatever! Lots of atheists love science. Might as well have a group for it!

Feel free to nerd out, link articles, talk about your favorite field of research, whatever!

The icon is from www.wearscience.com.


9/28/2008
I've been super busy with school this semester -- no time for Atheist Nexus, sadly!!
If anyone who's around here a lot wants me to toss them moderation privileges to run this group or anything, just send me (Sara) a message! Thanks!

11/14/2009
Removed ability to send mass messages to everyone in the group. At 1000+ members, that seems like asking for spam.

Offer still open if anyone active in the group wants moderation privileges, but it appears everything has been going smoothly with all kinds of great discussions without moderation. Fantastic! :)

Discussion Forum

Quick Ebola tests on the horizon

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Deidre Oct 18. 2 Replies

Tenured Professor shouts "Fire!" in crowded theatre

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by David Layton Sep 27. 4 Replies

Max Planck on New Scientific Truth?

Started by Tom Sarbeck. Last reply by Luara Aug 13. 5 Replies

Lead Ebola Doctor In Sierra Leone Contracts It Himself

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Daniel W (Sentient Biped) Jul 23. 3 Replies

Electric Bacteria

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Luara Jul 18. 3 Replies

Vantablack

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Sean Murphy Jul 15. 1 Reply

Roundup Ready Corn IS Toxic

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Jul 13. 7 Replies

Crowded rooms make you dumb

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Pat Jul 5. 4 Replies

American Lysenkoism

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Grinning Cat Jun 6. 1 Reply

Big Bang, its limits, and being OK with "I don't know"

Started by Gregory Phillip Dearth. Last reply by Idaho Spud May 25. 62 Replies

Decline of Evidence-Based Medicine

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Luara May 16. 6 Replies

Canadian war on science

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Tom Sarbeck May 14. 2 Replies

Nuke close call in 1961

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner May 11. 3 Replies

Green Tea Boosts Brainpower

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner May 11. 3 Replies

Link Discovered Between Prostate Cancer and Vitamin D Deficiency

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner May 11. 1 Reply

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of Atheists who love Science! to add comments!

Comment by Fabio on July 11, 2010 at 8:05pm
Umh, the only two massless particles we know of are photons and gluons. Rather than being matter, they are carriers of different types of forces - electromagnetism and strong force respectively. Photons, however, do have a relativistic mass. Roughly put - and as I understand it, hence I might be wrong - photons acquire mass at relativistic speeds, which means they are affected by gravitation.

Space-time distortion causing mass, sounds weird to me. No, it is definitely mass that distorts spacetime. You can say that spacetime's inability to penetrate atomic nuclei might be the fundamental reason why spacetime is distorted upon contact with mass, but you still need said mass to produce a distortion.
Comment by Fabio on July 11, 2010 at 7:43pm
Rather than being a property of mass I suppose it's an intrinsic property of the spacetime fabric. We don't really know what spacetime itself is made of, but whatever it is made of, it probably cannot penetrate atomic nuclei, hence bending under their mass. That's just my two cents, of course :)
Comment by Susan Stanko on July 11, 2010 at 7:26pm
Looks like a rocket to me.
Comment by Fabio on July 11, 2010 at 7:20pm
The problem with that representation of relativistic gravity is that the sphere used to simulate a mass in space-time is itself subject to the gravitational pull of Earth. In reality - in Relativity models, at least - the very presence of mass distorts space-time. It is not mass weighing down on space-time, because there is no up and down in space.
Comment by A Former Member on July 11, 2010 at 7:16pm
Or just photoshop. : )
Comment by A Former Member on July 11, 2010 at 7:08pm
@ Mike: Great photo, but I wouldn't get my hopes up to quickly just yet. : )
Comment by Fabio on July 11, 2010 at 7:08pm
Whatever that is, it looks pretty awesome :D
Comment by Fabio on July 11, 2010 at 7:06pm
That's pretty much correct. We know the phenomenon of gravity, but don't really know what causes it. Relativity describes gravity as a property of the curvature of space-time itself. String theory describes it the way it does all other fundamental forces, as the result of the exchange of virtual particles called gravitons. To date the two views have resisted all attempts to reconcile them.
Comment by A Former Member on July 11, 2010 at 7:02pm




Comment by A Former Member on July 11, 2010 at 6:58pm
Gotcha Mike. Kind of like I heard in a lecture that the young Universe was like trillions of degrees, but if you were to stand in it you wouldn't get burnt because the molecules were so spread out.
 

Members (1580)

 
 
 

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service