I think I'll just reiterate my earlier sentiments:
Where does the universe end?
- Thread starter Doosht
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2008
- Posts
- 12,751
Is this applying to everyone of specific individuals?
I ask which is more correct - the random idea that is correct but has no proof ,or, the idea that has a full proof but doesn't quite answer the question?
People have the right to think. Dreaming, discussing those ideas are the basis for fielding future theories and become the pillars for thought, philosophy, science and understanding.
I wonder... the greatest line in the universe (and beyond).
The link you have restated is basically "The greatest knowledge is knowing you know nothing" rehashed..
Last edited:
I'm specifically referring to the people who claim 1>0.9r.
EDIT: sorry, I missed this:
No, it's a study revealing that incompetent people aren't aware of their incompetency. What is more, it is the incompetent who most greatly overestimate their own ability, whilst not appreciating the ability of others.
Last edited:
I read it more like 'I've studied maths and you haven't, and I'm clever and you are not'.
I don't know you, so I wouldn't like to comment on your general level of competency. However, evidence in this thread suggests you are mathematically incompetent. This is nothing to be ashamed of - plenty of people can't do maths.
The article relates to people such as yourself, in as much as you seem to be mathematically incompetent, yet believe your judgement on a mathematical result is likely to be better than all the worlds mathematicians. Thereby vastly overestimating your own ability, whilst underestimating the ability of others.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 14,081
- Location
- Between Realities
But surely that's fractions and decimals
1 is decimal as is .9r
1/2 written in decimal is 0.5
BTW guys,
I've been doing some research on the question in the OP
Conservatives estimates from WMAP by leading cosmologists puts lower limit on the entire universe at least 300billion light years (radius). But honestly it could be larger but not infinite.
Worth comparing to the observable universe at 45billion light years.
I hope that somewhat answers the question. ish
I've been doing some research on the question in the OP
Conservatives estimates from WMAP by leading cosmologists puts lower limit on the entire universe at least 300billion light years (radius). But honestly it could be larger but not infinite.
Worth comparing to the observable universe at 45billion light years.
I hope that somewhat answers the question. ish
![[FnG]magnolia](/styles/overclockers/avatars/9.png){kind=avatar}
Caporegime
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 28,763
- Location
- Auckland
FFS, someone give me some pictures or graphs to look at! Words are the mathematicians best ally and the student's the worst learning block.
The way I look at it is
0.9r = 1 in maths
However in real life 0.9r does not equal 1. however seeing as everything is finite in the real world. You will get extremely long numbers but you will never ever get 0.9r. As such 0.9r is a problem thrown up by the maths model and is promptly solved by the maths model. It is a totally useless number and hence the error.
I'm certainly no expert probably not even average, but that's how I like to look at it.
0.9r = 1 in maths
However in real life 0.9r does not equal 1. however seeing as everything is finite in the real world. You will get extremely long numbers but you will never ever get 0.9r. As such 0.9r is a problem thrown up by the maths model and is promptly solved by the maths model. It is a totally useless number and hence the error.
I'm certainly no expert probably not even average, but that's how I like to look at it.
But surely that's fractions and decimals
1 is decimal as is .9r
1/2 written in decimal is 0.5
It's always when approach to rather than moving away. At what point does 1 not become 1.11111r as we move towards 2 ?
I know I know..I think finding the area of the universe would be an interesting one due to the unknowns at the smallest level. I would have though edges would be interesting to see in addition to see if there's any oddities caused.
Last edited:
Surely your meaning of universe is one giant void (i.e. "nothing", a.k.a a giant vacuum, as a vacuum is by definition nothing), containing matter and energy.
So therefore, once you've gone past the last planet/asteroid/molecule/atom/photon, you'll just keep going in the same direction and all you'll see is black nothing.
One philosophical question though, is how do we define "direction" ? We're all so used to "direction" using a fixed point on earth as a reference point, and we all use the sun as a reference point for the position of earth, solar system uses galaxy, galaxy other galaxies etc. But how do we know we are ever moving in a straight line? What if galaxies travel in curves or other weird directions?
So I think the real question is, how can we ever be sure we would ever reach the "end" of the universe? How do we know for sure we are travelling in a straight line?
And another fundamental question is, what allows a vacuum to exist? Does this vacuum have to exist being contained inside something else? Before the big bang, was there a big vacuum, or was there literally "nothing", not even a void (although "no void" should suggest something does exist).
One last important note to mention is, the word "universe" in itself is defined as everything in existance. Whether that includes empty void space or not, I'm not sure. So to ask "is there anything beyond the universe" is like asking "does anything exist outside the realm of existance?" Which is not really answerable
So therefore, once you've gone past the last planet/asteroid/molecule/atom/photon, you'll just keep going in the same direction and all you'll see is black nothing.
One philosophical question though, is how do we define "direction" ? We're all so used to "direction" using a fixed point on earth as a reference point, and we all use the sun as a reference point for the position of earth, solar system uses galaxy, galaxy other galaxies etc. But how do we know we are ever moving in a straight line? What if galaxies travel in curves or other weird directions?
So I think the real question is, how can we ever be sure we would ever reach the "end" of the universe? How do we know for sure we are travelling in a straight line?
And another fundamental question is, what allows a vacuum to exist? Does this vacuum have to exist being contained inside something else? Before the big bang, was there a big vacuum, or was there literally "nothing", not even a void (although "no void" should suggest something does exist).
One last important note to mention is, the word "universe" in itself is defined as everything in existance. Whether that includes empty void space or not, I'm not sure. So to ask "is there anything beyond the universe" is like asking "does anything exist outside the realm of existance?" Which is not really answerable
Don
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 17,148
- Location
- In a house
When you fly out past the furthest piece of matter in space. You are in the absense of matter. Space has just not yet expanded into this space with the initial energy of the big bang.
This "space" continues forever, but there are no distinguishing features. It's just empty. So essentially, it does not exist, it has nothing in it to define it.
Eventually matter will all start to come together again, attracted by each other's mavity, and make a big massive ball of matter in the middle, and probably trigger another big bang, and everything will start over again
That is my "understanding" or "interpretaton" of the science.
This "space" continues forever, but there are no distinguishing features. It's just empty. So essentially, it does not exist, it has nothing in it to define it.
Eventually matter will all start to come together again, attracted by each other's mavity, and make a big massive ball of matter in the middle, and probably trigger another big bang, and everything will start over again
That is my "understanding" or "interpretaton" of the science.
Actually the question of what the universe is expanding into is moot because space (itself) is being created. In modern cosmology you don't really talk about what lies outside the universe or what its expanding into as there is no real need to think the universe is embedded in a higher Dimensional space (it may be but that would be speculation)
sid
sid
Even more fun - donuts. Place yourself on the surface of a donut (one with a hole in the centre).
If you go around the outside you'll end up where you started having covered the entire surface between the points.
Now move through a path around from the outside to the inside whole and back out again. You'll arrive at the starting point but you will have missed completely the rest of the donut and you'll not have even seen any of the space on the other side of the hole in the middle.
Last edited: