Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2008
- Posts
- 12,751
it ends after the ocuk server, which is surrounded by the internet
Where does the universe end?
- Thread starter Doosht
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2008
- Posts
- 12,751
some think that the entire universe was like a pixel big, just extremely dense. That was all that was before the big bang
hence as close to truth as you can get
Because this is the internet, on which people feel obliged to spout post-five-pint rubbish pertaining to things they haven't a clue about. The moral of the story is:
It is the most incompetent people who overestimate their own ability, whilst underestimating the ability of others.
See here for details.
You're comment shows a lack of respect for a plausible cosmological theory, please by all means point out why it's silly and is worthy of such disrespect and what theory you believe in this unknown area?
Either you agree there's many plausible but unproven and even unprovable theorys about the universe beyond what we currently know or you don't like to speculate beyond so i ask then what are you doing in this thread?
If people have thought up things like the multiverse existing in alternate dimensions then i think it's only fair to accept this more likely theory of big bang universes happening out there somewhere in our infinitely large space.
How do we know that the universe is infinite and still expanding though?
If light takes 14 billion years (i think) to reach us from the known edge of the universe, then for all we know the universe may of stopped expanding after 14 billion and 1 years and so we just won't see this for another year ?
My head hurts after reading this thread ....
If light takes 14 billion years (i think) to reach us from the known edge of the universe, then for all we know the universe may of stopped expanding after 14 billion and 1 years and so we just won't see this for another year ?
My head hurts after reading this thread ....
I suppose that could happen, there is evidence that the universe is still expanding as galaxies are moving away from us at increasing speed which is measured through thier redshift. I think the universe has to be finite if it's expanding.
You're comment shows a lack of respect for a plausible cosmological theory, please by all means point out why it's silly and is worthy of such disrespect and what theory you believe in this unknown area?
Either you agree there's many plausible but unproven and even unprovable theorys about the universe beyond what we currently know or you don't like to speculate beyond so i ask then what are you doing in this thread?
If people have thought up things like the multiverse existing in alternate dimensions then i think it's only fair to accept this more likely theory of big bang universes happening out there somewhere in our infinitely large space.
How is something you've just made up a plausible comsological theory. You've admitted you are not a cosmologist already.
Sorry if I came across a bit rude. Threads like these pop up on OCUK every 2 months. By theories do you mean stuff like what you've just made up or proper physics theories?
If something is moving towards you at speed it will be blueshifted, if it is moving away then it is redshifted. Besides a andromeda in our local cluster every galaxy is redshifted, and to a greater extreme at a greater distance.
Since when you look at a distant object you are also looking back in time we can look at the different rates of expansion throughout the life of the universe and estimate whether we will have a big crunch or eventual heat death. As i mentioned earlier though the universe now seems to be undergoing an accelerated rate of expansion, which cannot be explained by mavity as that should continue decelerating the universe.
I did a cosmology module in my second year of physics so i know a bit but i'm no expert, it's interesting but can get very confusing.
I'm not saying you are wrong, and I only know what I have read and seen on tv... and I totally agree I don't understand this but...
Have you not missed out time? outside our universe in the 'void / hyperspace / what ever you want to call it' there is no matter and no time therefor it is not space as we know it.. also the laws of physics as we understand them do not necessarly apply?
Why does the fact that textbooks and mathematicians use 0.9r to represent 1 get people to misunderstand the word represent.
Its used to represent 1 as there is only an infinetly small remainder in difference. The significance of an infinitely small remainder is too small to make much of a difference, and it is just an infinitely small difference between 0.9r and 1,
It is a different number, but its just logical to treat is as a representative of 1 for the sake of ease of caluclation.
Its used to represent 1 as there is only an infinetly small remainder in difference. The significance of an infinitely small remainder is too small to make much of a difference, and it is just an infinitely small difference between 0.9r and 1,
It is a different number, but its just logical to treat is as a representative of 1 for the sake of ease of caluclation.
Imagine this.
A snail wants to visit a tree.
The tree is 1 mile away.
On day one, somehow, he moves half a mile towards the tree.
But every day after that, he moves exactly 50% of the distance of the previous day.
Would the snail ever reach the tree?
ps. Snail lives forever. As does tree. As does reality.
A snail wants to visit a tree.
The tree is 1 mile away.
On day one, somehow, he moves half a mile towards the tree.
But every day after that, he moves exactly 50% of the distance of the previous day.
Would the snail ever reach the tree?
ps. Snail lives forever. As does tree. As does reality.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2008
- Posts
- 12,751
Obviously not
If the universe is expanding quicker than the speed of light (300 000 km iirc)
then we have no hope of finding it out
Whilst ease of calculation is all well and good, and you can say it is 'as good as', it doesn't make it the same number
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2008
- Posts
- 12,751
Whilst ease of calculation is all well and good, and you can say it is 'as good as', it doesn't make it the same number
it can be argued as being the same number as 0.9 recurring is effectively 1
there is an infinitley small difference which could mean there's no difference at all.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Nov 2008
- Posts
- 2,925
- Location
- West Midlands
All i am saying is particles or energy didnt just decided to show up one day causing the birth of space, something cannot just appear. jesus thinking about space and its origins is scary.
Effectively 1 doesn't mean the same as 1 though, does it?
However, there is a difference. Doesn't matter how small it is, there is a difference ergo it is not the same thing :/
You're arguing both sides there, by saying there is a difference but it might as well be treated as the same thing. By all means treat it the same, but you've agreed with me...
IIANM it has already been proven that particles can and do appear and disappear in certain situations.
Bit of a nonsensical question but the answer is plainly no, it's be an infinitesimally small distance from the tree in relatively few days.