booper54 Posted December 26, 2003 Posted December 26, 2003 According to the Big Bang Theory, at the time of the big bang, say 10^-99999 seconds after, everything was condensed into a tiny space because the universe had not yet expanded much. But what is keeping all this matter, all the matter in the entire universe, in fact, into its tiny ball? Well, the speed of light according to the Special Theory of Relativity. Nothing can travel at or faster than the speed of light, so all the matter must have been traveling at very close to the speed of light while the universe is expanding at the speed of light. So wouldn't there have been a large gap between all this matter and the edge of the universe, at least compared to the space between the matter? Which means at this point in time there must be a HUGE gap between any matter and the edge of the universe. And would this gap be proportional to the gap during the Big Bang? I'm just thinking out loud, but this is wierd to think about..
alt_f13 Posted December 29, 2003 Posted December 29, 2003 I don't get it That ball is the universe. ~_~
Sayonara Posted January 2, 2004 Posted January 2, 2004 What Alt means to say is that the universe is only what's in that ball. Outside that ball there is only nullity. The surface of the ball is the edge of the universe.
Skye Posted January 2, 2004 Posted January 2, 2004 Hey! There might be stuff outside the universe, most likely odd socks and bic pens, taken there by transuniversal theiver monkeys.
YT2095 Posted January 2, 2004 Posted January 2, 2004 it would certainly be interesting (and equaly as impossible) to travel a few meters into that Zero turn around and have a look, maybe open a test tube, scoop some zero up put a lid on and bring it back just to see what it would do, but of course the only flaw would be that if you were in that Zero, then so would the universe (or part of it) by default, so realisticly there would be no real way to determine it`s true nature (or lack of). infact isn`t it just possible that the big bang didn`t "blow appart" but the Zero was so intense that the 1`st particle to pop into existance was actualy SUCKED apart?
aman Posted January 2, 2004 Posted January 2, 2004 We're only able to detect speed of light effects and some particles like neutrons are hardly detectable. There is an idea about faster than light effects like tacheyons and maybe the faster than light quanta built the space ahead of the expanding universe. If you went outside the edge of the matter universe you might need a really ultra sensitive instrument to see something else. Just aman
YT2095 Posted January 2, 2004 Posted January 2, 2004 but then surely that "something else" would merely be a part of the existing universe, and that in turn would say that you had not traveled outwards far enough? Just a thought
elfin vampire Posted January 4, 2004 Posted January 4, 2004 Very nicely presented topic posting. There is only one body of reference within the proto-universe during the BB: the universe itself. All existence is contained within that shell of space-time, regardless the point at which it is measured. When we find ourselves perplexed by the universe it is usually because our understanding of established physics is confused or incomplete. Let us remind ourselves that relativity (not to mention established physics) also states quite formally that all matter is comprised of electricity and gravitation, which is a dynamic provided by space-time. Thus as the universe expands, so too does the environment of matter: at the same rate.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now