The Big Bang Bamma

Matter or energy cannot be created or destroyed , it can only change state , i.e. ejecting radiation of different types , but even then that radiation will still be present in the universe . Infact the only logical way i can see of matter being destroyed is if its sucked into a black hole . But then we don't even know what happends to matter once it enters a black hole , if it still exhists or is erased completely from the universe , or is ejected elsewhere from an opening .However , at some stage in the universes life , all energy will have change state so that all we are left with is a dark universe of radiation flying around . This is one theory anyhow . But as for the actual universe being destroyed , i've never heard of any theories describing how the actual universe , the construct which contains all matter and antimatter could be physically destroyed .(BTW , hello all , 1st post)

Interesting , i wasn't aware of this pair creation or annihilation , although im not exactly up to date with my physics , last time i learnt any actual physics was in my final year of school 4 years ago . I would like to learn more of this pair creation if you can direct me to a site explaining it , or even explain it yourself how this works .As i said my understanding is grimm at best , but i was under the impression that there is more to an electron that just on single particle called the electron , it is made of other smaller particles , and thus the combination of photons to for an electron would seem possible and not to be creation but rather re-uniting of particles into a larger one which we call the electron .I am probably wrong on this , but i have somehow come to the impression that electrons are made of smaller particles .

So you are saying if you start out with a point , and project or move the point in a perpendicular direction , you get a line . Then you project that line in a perpendicular direction and you get a square , then if you project that square in a perpendicular direction you get a cube , then if you project the cube in a perpendicular direction you get a hypercube , a 3D representation of a 4D object , is this correct ? So that you have a Larger cube (the new dimension?) surrounding a smaller cube , and all points projected are connected . So the surrounding objects of this cube are like pyramids with the top chopped off .My question is , in what direction is the cube projected ? Are all 8 points projected outwards ? I can visualise that quite easily in a 3D sense , but it still is hard to percieve this new cube as a new dimension .Okay , thats what i first thought about hypercubes , but then i saw this link http://www.well.com/~abs/SIGGRAPH96/4Dtess.html which tries to explain the formain of a hypercube from a 4D beings perspective . The hypercube is made of 8 cubes supposedly , but when looking at this picture i see only 7 hexahedrons .http://www.well.com/~abs/SIGGRAPH96/Fig6a.gifI think maybe the last one is the entire cube correct ? But then , the surrounding cubes arent actualluy cubes to us . But to a 4d being they are , so to us 3d beings , our inability to visualise the 4th dimension forces us to almost fold it in with the other 3 dimensions . Or atleast thats how i try to think of it . The 4D is the joining of the cubes to look like hexahedrons .Atleast thats the conclusion i have drawn from that links explaination .EDIT : I did a bit more searching and found this :http://members.aol.com/jmtsgibbs/draw4d.htm
Its a 3d java visualisation of a hypercube . But you can rotate the hypercube , firstly around the 3 normal dimensions , but also along the 4th dimensions . The scrollbars on the far left , near left and top control this . Now when i manipulated them along the 4th axis , i was completely stumped . And im guessing everyone else is , because i cant visualise this object rotating , atleast not yet . Maybe if i play with that thing long enough it will hit me . It also lets you do other polytopes , though i havent been game to try the others yet .This message has been edited by Darkmatic, 11-26-2005 10:53 AM