I admit it, I certainly am no genius. Not only am I not a genius, but every once in a while I just can't understand a concept that is being discussed by science. One of the things that really baffles me is how astronomers say that when they are looking back at the furthest galaxies they might be looking back at galaxies that were formed at the beginning of time, so they are very young when they see them. I look at it this way, those galaxies were formed, according to most scientists, by a big bang. Before they became galaxies, they were part of some sort of super atom or huge ball of crushed matter. At the second they were born, they were one second old. If they traveled 14 billion light years away, shouldn't we be seeing them as 14 billion years old, not extremely young as they say? It seems to me that to see them as young, they would have had to have been placed where they are instantly, but they weren't. I know I will probably get a million emails about this, but this is just something that I don't get.

How can we be absolutely certain that black holes exist when we can't see them and we only see a disk of swirling matter and gas being sucked into something? How do we know that this stuff is not being drawn into some sort of super gravitational field from a type of star that we know nothing about, a star that might be far denser than a neutron star? Don't you ever wonder about something that you are told exists and yet not one person has ever actually seen it? It could turn out that there is nothing in the area that is sucking in material and matter except some sort of tear in the space and time fabric, or perhaps an entrance into another dimension and some of our matter is being pulled into it. This is all speculation of course, I have absolutely no evidence to prove that this is possible, but on the other hand, where is that first photo of a black hole where you can actually see it?

Another thing that I would like to know is what are some clouds doing circling the earth at a height of 53 miles? This is not supposed to be possible, yet the astronauts aboard the International Space Station reported seeing thin blue clouds right at the boundary between the Atmosphere and space. If something looks like a cloud, does it necessarily mean that it is a cloud? I shouldn't mention UFOs in this article, but I can't help but think of what some witnesses said during a recent UFO sighting. They said the UFOs were hiding in the clouds. Could these clouds actually be some by-product of earth's pollution? What may look like pretty clouds might just turn out to be some chemical that has bonded together to form what appears to look like an ordinary cloud, but is entirely something else.

Scientists are now telling us that there are many different dimensions, but what exactly is a dimension? I could say that it is the minimum number of coordinates needed to specify every point within it. I could also say, “any of the fundamental units (as of mass, length, or time) on which a derived unit is based”, that is what Webster's on line dictionary states. We are used to thinking about things in terms of length, width and height. We live in a three dimensional universe, or at least we thought that we did until something called string theory came along. We can see each of the three dimensions. String theory states that the universe has 11 dimensions or more and could have up to 26. Has anyone seen them? Sometimes time is called a dimension, I will grant that one, as for the rest, show me the money, or should I say show me the dimensions. Scientists say the string theory is formulated on cold black holes. Does this mean that if it turns out that the whole black hole thing is wrong that string theory has to fall? Again if we accept the extra dimensions we are accepting something that none of us can really verify. When some scientists were asked about this, they conveniently stated that we as humans are not equipped to see other dimensions.

Everybody thinks that they know what gravity is. Sure it may keep us from falling off of the earth, because the earth has more mass than us, so it attracts us to it. Yet gravity must be a very weak force, because if it weren't, the huge difference in mass between one of us and the mass of the earth, would crush us as we were drawn to the bigger object, the planet. Why is it that extremely large objects are still being held by gravity to the earth? Why is it that they don't float off into space? The Great Pyramid is many times our puny mass, yet the earth holds it to it, the same as it holds us. The balance between the earth's gravity and that of the moon keeps that delicate balance intact and the moon remains in orbit. Could it be that there is also something else at play here, something that we don't suspect or understand? You would think that we would all be glued to the earth and if we could survive, we wouldn't even be able to move. It is even said that gravity is what holds the earth together.

We really have a lot to learn about the universe. We are like first graders right now, but hopefully we will graduate. It might even turn out that if we were able to look into some of the secret projects that the governments of the world keep under wraps, we would find out that we already have some more answers.