Strange Posted October 11, 2016 Posted October 11, 2016 First thing I would love to hear about is people thoughts on is what is out side the known universe According to current theory, there is no "outside" the universe. The universe is all there is.
new.perspective Posted October 11, 2016 Posted October 11, 2016 Please read my question again. I did say the known universe (as far as we can observe or predict.) Further out again beyond this, what do you believe is there? Also what do you believe is inside a atom nucleus and what do you think they will discover with the Hadron collider? I would be interested to know what you think!
Strange Posted October 11, 2016 Posted October 11, 2016 Please read my question again. I did say the known universe (as far as we can observe or predict.) Further out again beyond this, what do you believe is there? It is generally thought that the universe beyond the observable universe is pretty much the same as the universe we can see. There is no reason to think it would be different. In other words, someone near the edge of our observable universe would see pretty much the same thing extending around them for the same distance as we do. Also what do you believe is inside a atom nucleus and what do you think they will discover with the Hadron collider? I don't think anyone is expecting to find anything new inside the atomic nucleus.
Ivanov2000 Posted October 11, 2016 Posted October 11, 2016 I don't think about what is beyond the known universe much, doesn't seem to be much point to that. At the other extreme standard model seems to work, but it is just a model. What is actually there, no idea. I doubt human mind can really comprehend, it's too far beyond what it evolved to understand. Hadron, heavier particles. Maybe some clue to dark matter. Not really been any major breakthrough during my lifetime, so maybe something is due.
new.perspective Posted October 13, 2016 Posted October 13, 2016 I would like to put my ideas into the pot for any ones thoughts. As I will try my best to explain these theories are ideas that I have had for many years and over the years and how a lot of new discoveries and theories I hear about, fit in to what I have always thought about. These include Black Holes and how they work and what they do, the Big Crunch and the Big Bang. Also Dark mater and the hidden extra mass of the universe that cannot be explained. First of I would like to get you thinking about the scale of things such as this topic, how big is the universe (and where does it end) and, at the other end of the scale, how small the smallest things can go or be? To me these are related and scalable. First off, imagine a atom nucleus as a large black dot as large as your screen. In the middle of this dot, about the size of the mouse pointer (or about 5mm), is a hollow space. Now in the middle of this space place a single pixel. Now zoom in on this pixel and you see a universe of galaxies and stars like we see as our known observable universe. From here I would like to explain further about how this universe would work, how it would have been created and then later, how a lot of the theories that I have heard about can be applied to my idea. Please have a think about this and let me know your thoughts on this idea.
Strange Posted October 13, 2016 Posted October 13, 2016 Please have a think about this and let me know your thoughts on this idea. It does not appear to have any basis in either science or reality. If you intend to present an idea that you have made up, then you should do it in the Speculations section of the forum. First off, imagine a atom nucleus as a large black dot as large as your screen. In the middle of this dot, about the size of the mouse pointer (or about 5mm), is a hollow space. The protons and neutrons in the nucleus are held together by the string nuclear force. As the name suggests, this force is very strong. So what would allow a gap to appear between them? 1
Ophiolite Posted October 13, 2016 Posted October 13, 2016 Please have a think about this and let me know your thoughts on this idea. I think that this idea is so commonplace that there is some aspect of our culture, or the genetic character that hardwires aspects of our brain, that brings this to the fore in people, time and time again. From a scientific standpoint there is zero reason to consider it a possibility and a host of reasons to reject it outright. It is a positive thing that you are interested in such matters and that you are looking for, to you, novel answers to questions. Your questions would be better formulated and your answers closer to reality, if you now invested your energy in learning some proper science rather than the diluted brand to be found on documentaries and popular science books. Good luck with that. Why not start your new path on this forum by asking how you might go about acquiring real science understanding? 1
Butch Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 IMO the universe is infinite, but that still presents plenty of paradox, we just can't know anything for certain.
Mordred Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 IMO the universe is infinite, but that still presents plenty of paradox, we just can't know anything for certain. could be but can also be finite. We haven't the evidence to discount either possibility.
Strange Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 (edited) we just can't know anything for certain. But what we do know, we know with some known level of certainty. (Just in case you are thinking: we don't know anything for certain therefore we don't know anything therefore anything I make up is just as valid.) Edited November 17, 2016 by Strange
David Levy Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 IMO the universe is infinite, but that still presents plenty of paradox, we just can't know anything for certain. If the Universe is infinite, than somehow its mass must be infinite. If I understand it correctly, the mass of the universe had been set by the Big bang. No new mass had been created after this event. So, how could it be that a big bang (or even a mega big bang) can set the process for infinite mass?
Strange Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 If the Universe is infinite, than somehow its mass must be infinite. If I understand it correctly, the mass of the universe had been set by the Big bang. I don't know what you mean by the mass being "set". Whatever the mass is (finite or infinite) it has always been the same.
Delta1212 Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 Two things. First, infinite volume doesn't necessarily require infinite mass, although that's certainly a possibility. Second, if the universe is infinite, it has always been infinite, and the Big Bang is the process by which it went from an infinitely large and very dense state to an infinitely large and much less dense state. If there is infinite mass in the universe, there has been since the Big Bang. 1
David Levy Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 (edited) Two things. First, infinite volume doesn't necessarily require infinite mass, although that's certainly a possibility. How could it be? Second, if the universe is infinite, it has always been infinite, What do you mean by always? Do you mean that the age of the universe should also be infinite? .. and the Big Bang is the process by which it went from an infinitely large and very dense state to an infinitely large and much less dense state. If there is infinite mass in the universe, there has been since the Big Bang. However - it is unbelievable (for me) that a big bang (or any sort of mega bangs - unless we discuss on infinite bangs) could have the power to set an infinite mass. Edited November 17, 2016 by David Levy
pzkpfw Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 (edited) A very very light view: Say this capital "O" is our current observable Universe. From its expansion, we know it used to be smaller, say ".". That is, the Big Bang took this "." and made it "O". But we don't know how big the whole Universe is. From it's flatness, we know it's at least many times bigger than we currently see, e.g. "OOOOOOOO". That in turn may have expanded from "........". It could even be infinite, "---OOOOOOOO---", coming from infinite denser stuff, "---........---". That is, our finite observable Universe came from something finite at the Big Bang. If the Universe turns out to be infinite, that doesn't mean it all came from the same finite origin as our own observable bit of the Universe. See: Hilbert Hotel. Edited November 17, 2016 by pzkpfw
Sriman Dutta Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 Universe=infinity But, infinity is not equal to universe. LOL
Strange Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 Do you mean that the age of the universe should also be infinite? It may be (or not). We have no way of knowing (currently). However - it is unbelievable (for me) that a big bang (or any sort of mega bangs - unless we discuss on infinite bangs) could have the power to set an infinite mass. What is believable isn't really relevant.
David Levy Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 Universe=infinity But, infinity is not equal to universe. LOL One more question - How could if be that an infinite Universe had been developed in a limited time? Let's assume that the mass can move at any limited speed. (10 times the speed of light, or even 1000 times). After any limited time (even after 13.8 Billion years) it must be a finite universe. Therefore, it seems to me that if the universe is infinity than something must be wrong in our current understanding/theories.
Strange Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 How could if be that an infinite Universe had been developed in a limited time? Because it was always infinite. It never went from being finite to being infinite. Therefore, it seems to me that if the universe is infinity than something must be wrong in our current understanding/theories. I think it infinitely more likely that there is something wrong with your understanding.
David Levy Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 Because it was always infinite. It never went from being finite to being infinite. If the universe was always infinity than it was infinity 1 billion years ago, 10 billion years ago and even 13.8 Billion years ago.. However, if we claim that the universe started 13.8 Billion years ago than by definition 13.9 billion years ago there was no universe. So, how could it be that 13.8 Billion years ago the universe had started from almost nothing or at least a finite spot directly to infinity? Don't you think that it may contradict the whole idea of the BBT?
Strange Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 However, if we claim that the universe started 13.8 Billion years ago than by definition 13.9 billion years ago there was no universe. There is no evidence that the universe started 13.8 billion years ago. Don't you think that it may contradict the whole idea of the BBT? The big bang theory describes the evolution of the universe from an early hot, dense state. If the universe is infinite now, then that hot dense state was infinite. If the universe is finite now, then that hot dense state was finite. Not too difficult, is it.
pzkpfw Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 ... So, how could it be that 13.8 Billion years ago the universe had started from almost nothing or at least a finite spot directly to infinity?... See also post #940.
kasboy Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 just adding more chaos to it. what if the starting point of the universe, was the same as the initial point? that means that it doesn't have to have an end. because it's end will be it's start. you can say that if you have a ring, you can start from point A(start) to point A(end) and have a distance. but what if the point A(start) was not reachable because it has to do with when was it done or how. maybe all universes are a result of a infinite chain reaction. the ending universes creating a starting ones. so that maybe ours, that some says might be 13.8 billions years old, was a result of a distant universe collapsing or... disappearing or whatever might happen to a single universe. and when our universe comes to an end, we might be creating other/others universe/universes. so it will never end. and probably has never had a start because probably, such an explosion(if an explosion) can travel through time and be the ignition force (so to speak) that starts all in the first place. that would make an endless loop of time, creation and destruction
Strange Posted November 17, 2016 Posted November 17, 2016 The idea that the universe would gradually stop expanding and then collapse again to a "big crunch" before rebounding and expanding again is an old one. However, the accelerating expansion makes that look very unlikely.
David Levy Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 (edited) There is no evidence that the universe started 13.8 billion years ago. Why? So, what is the real age of the Universe? The big bang theory describes the evolution of the universe from an early hot, dense state. If the universe is infinite now, then that hot dense state was infinite. How could it be that the universe was infinite hot dense in the early stage (13.8 billion years ago) while its age at that moment is Zero? What was the status of the universe before that moment? If the universe was hot dense also 14 Billion years ago (or even 100 Billion years ago), then why we don't agree that the universe age is higher than 13.8 Billion years? However, if it was not there, then there was a stage that there was no universe. If there was no universe then by definition there was no universe ---- no mass, no atoms, no friction of particles, no energy, no hot dense stage - just nothing. Nothing at all. In other words, we must count the age of the universe from the transient point of nothing to something. If we start from infinite hot dense stage, then this can't give us the real age of the Universe. So, please - what is the real age of the Universe? When the Universe started to get something? Edited November 18, 2016 by David Levy
Recommended Posts