Middle of the universe

[swansont]

If we consider the Global Universe as the total Universe. (infinite or finite). and we consider Our Universe like that Universe that we know (from 10 exp -35 to 10 exp +27 meters), I propose the idea that we can divide the Global Universe in various (infinite) power of 10 levels or spectra (see attached file). Like a RAINBOW or MATRYOSHKA DOLLS.

 

deletia

 

!

Moderator Note

dapifo, taking this thread off-topic, especially to a speculative discussion, is against the rules. You already have a thread on this, so most of the post and the link have been deleted. Discussion of that subject belongs in that thread and only in that thread.

 

Any response to this modnote should not take place here

[dapifo]

Well..I just answer his question using the ideas of the other thread....I supose tha I can use the same reasons in different threads...

 

 

I don´t understand what is wrong (??)

[Ophiolite]

This is a science forum for discussion of mainstream science. Novel ideas are welcome, but these are two confined to the appropriate thread.

 

It is wrong to put forward an unproven hypothesis in response to questions for which their is a well establised mainstream explanation because this is misleading.

 

It is also wrong to respond to a modnote in the thread when the moderator specifically says "Any response to this modnote should not take place here"

 

I hope that helps - I'm just a regular member like you.

[dapifo]

I´m sorry I´m new here...but I don´t thik I heve done an wrong answer...just my opinion.

[Aethelwulf]

The reasons why there is no center have been explained here by many. It has to do with the fact that the universe is expanding isotropically and homogeneously. There can be some kind of ''imaginary center'' we all think about, a place or rather a point where spacetime began, but thinking of that point after the expansion is useless when you take into account that all objects move away from each other, not from a single point.

[mississippichem]

I´m sorry I´m new here...but I don´t thik I heve done an wrong answer...just my opinion.

 

I word of advice:

 

The universe doesn't care about your opinion. I mean that in a helpful way. I think you have deep conceptual misunderstandings about what science is and how it is conducted.

[dapifo]

The universe appears to be homogeneous on the largest scales, so mass is uniformly distributed, and there is no "center of mass".

 

A manifold is a topological space that is locally Euclidean -- locally just like ordinary space. The surface of a balloon, or of a globe is a 2-dimensional manifold, in this case a 2-sphere.

 

An intrinsic manifold is a manifold that is not explicitly embedded in anything larger.

 

Isotropic means essentially "the same in every direction".

 

You can talk of the center of the solar system, of the galaxy and of the local group, and you can continue as you expand to any number of subsequent steps, but that does not get you to a center of the universe. If you started with a point on the surface of a balloon and expanded in concentric circles you would always find the center to be the point that you started with. But the surface of a balloon is homogeneous and no point is distinguished from any other.

 

So what is the HUDF?

 

I understud that HUDF is the place of the universe that we can see the youngest galaxies...as they were 13.000 millions of years...and that in this direction will br the CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE.

 

so difficult is to understand that Our Universe (Universe 1) is just one bubble among thousands of millions of bubbles that exist in a universe (Universe 2) a larger scale?

 

In this case, Our Universe itself to be a center, which is the singularity that created the big bang, and will be expanding into the Universe 2.

Edited June 13, 2012 by dapifo

[descovery2time]

If the universe was infinte,and without boundaries would it be logical to conclude it would be infinite in time also?And if the universe was infinite in space/time How could this be understood in the antropy princeable,or laws of thermodynamics.Is there in a literal sense such thing as infinite?Either way you answer the question you have some explaining to do.And to my understanding if the universe was finite in time/space how could it be explained how something came out of nothing.I have read of subatomic particles pop in and out of existance,but the increment of time would be measure in nano-seconds.And there is nothing that would lead me to believe we live in the only universe.If our universe some how came into existance out of nothing by todays understanding of physics.Why would it be improbable for this advent or creation to have accured maybe millions or billions of times leaving untold number of universes perhaps from other demensions?

[dapifo]

If the universe was infinte,and without boundaries would it be logical to conclude it would be infinite in time also?And if the universe was infinite in space/time How could this be understood in the antropy princeable,or laws of thermodynamics.Is there in a literal sense such thing as infinite?Either way you answer the question you have some explaining to do.And to my understanding if the universe was finite in time/space how could it be explained how something came out of nothing.I have read of subatomic particles pop in and out of existance,but the increment of time would be measure in nano-seconds.And there is nothing that would lead me to believe we live in the only universe.If our universe some how came into existance out of nothing by todays understanding of physics.Why would it be improbable for this advent or creation to have accured maybe millions or billions of times leaving untold number of universes perhaps from other demensions?

 

 

It´s not clear for me your opinion...

 

- First you say: that iif "the universe was infinite in space/time How could this be understood in the antropy princeable,or laws of thermodynamics"....then I understand that you think the universe is finite.

- But then you say: would it be improbable for this advent or creation to have accured maybe millions or billions of times leaving untold number of universes perhaps from other demensions?...then I understand that you thik theu niverse is infinite.

 

I think that it is like the live: I don´t think we are the only live beings in the universe, as I don´t think our universe is the only one ("and the best!!").

 

If something happened once...the normal and logical is that happen more times (!!?)...And the experience give us a lot of examples for it.

Edited June 14, 2012 by dapifo

[dapifo]

I word of advice:

 

The universe doesn't care about your opinion. I mean that in a helpful way. I think you have deep conceptual misunderstandings about what science is and how it is conducted.

 

 

Take a look to the following forum:

 

 

Stephen Feeney at University College London and colleagues say they’ve found tentative evidence of four collisions with other universes in the form of circular patterns in the cosmic microwave background.

 

In their model of the universe, called “eternal inflation,” the universe we see is merely a bubble in a much larger cosmos. This cosmos is filled with other bubbles, all of which are other universes where the laws of physics may be dramatically different from ours.

 

http://www.kurzweilai.net/astronomers-find-evidence-of-other-universes-in-cosmic-microwave-background

 

 

 

[ACG52]

Take a look to the following forum:

 

 

Stephen Feeney at University College London and colleagues say they've found tentative evidence of four collisions with other universes in the form of circular patterns in the cosmic microwave background.

 

In their model of the universe, called "eternal inflation," the universe we see is merely a bubble in a much larger cosmos. This cosmos is filled with other bubbles, all of which are other universes where the laws of physics may be dramatically different from ours.

 

http://www.kurzweilai.net/astronomers-find-evidence-of-other-universes-in-cosmic-microwave-background

 

 

 

 

You looked at the headlines, but didn't bother to actually look at the study, did you? (of course you didn't).

 

Let me link you to it and quote the opening statement:

 

http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.1995

 

The eternal inflation scenario predicts that our observable universe resides inside a single bubble embedded in a vast inflating multiverse. We present the first observational tests of eternal inflation, performing a search for cosmological signatures of collisions with other bubble universes in cosmic microwave background data from the WMAP satellite. We conclude that the WMAP 7-year data do not warrant augmenting LCDM with bubble collisions

 

Read you cites before making yourself look like an idiot.

[imatfaal]

!

Moderator Note

ACG52

Refering to fellow members in those terms is unacceptable. Do not do it again. Please reacquaint yourself with the forum rules - especially 1.a

1 Be civil

a. No flaming. Refrain from insulting or attacking users in a discussion.

Do not respond to this modnote in the thread. You may PM me or another member of staff, or report this message if you feel this message is inaccurate or unjustified.

[dapifo]

You looked at the headlines, but didn't bother to actually look at the study, did you? (of course you didn't).

 

Let me link you to it and quote the opening statement:

 

http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.1995

 

 

 

Read you cites before making yourself look like an idiot.

 

 

I really do not understand why you are so offended.

 

I Only referred you this link to show current studies on the multiverse ... that they are still in study.

 

It is clear that some people do not have enough level to create and imagine, and that the only thing they can do is to read the studies of others and to look through a telescope looking for supernovae.

Edited June 19, 2012 by dapifo

[Airbrush]

So the question is, What does it mean when physicists say there is no center of the universe?

 

That means the universe is obviously larger than the visible universe, so we can never say where expansion began. They will say expansion began everywhere, but that is hard to visualize I must admit.

[mississippichem]

Take a look to the following forum:

 

 

Stephen Feeney at University College London and colleagues say they’ve found tentative evidence of four collisions with other universes in the form of circular patterns in the cosmic microwave background.

 

In their model of the universe, called “eternal inflation,” the universe we see is merely a bubble in a much larger cosmos. This cosmos is filled with other bubbles, all of which are other universes where the laws of physics may be dramatically different from ours.

 

http://www.kurzweilai.net/astronomers-find-evidence-of-other-universes-in-cosmic-microwave-background

 

I think "tentative evidence" is the key word here. I readily admit that I know next to nothing about cosmology, but I really don't see how this link supports any of your above assertions. If you are going to link to a technical paper it would be nice if you could take the time to explain its relevance to the topic and how you interpret it as support for your claims.

 

But be careful, we are not in the speculations sub-forum and I'm unsure if this has strayed off topic.

Edited June 18, 2012 by mississippichem

[Aethelwulf]

If the universe was infinte,and without boundaries would it be logical to conclude it would be infinite in time also?

 

Yes, it can be contending to think that it is infintely expanding, meaning that there is an infinite amount of space (including time) abound. Infinity just means ''one more than now''.

Edited June 18, 2012 by Aethelwulf

[dapifo]

I think "tentative evidence" is the key word here. I readily admit that I know next to nothing about cosmology, but I really don't see how this link supports any of your above assertions. If you are going to link to a technical paper it would be nice if you could take the time to explain its relevance to the topic and how you interpret it as support for your claims.

 

But be careful, we are not in the speculations sub-forum and I'm unsure if this has strayed off topic.

 

This thread is trying to answer the question about why current state of the art of the science says that there is no center of the universe.

 

But I think there is a overlooked issue that is above this one, and that can clarify the purpose of the initial thread subject: "Is the observable universe (Our Oniverse) the only one?"

 

If Our Universe could be only a bubble more of the Global Universe, then the question about the center of the universe (Our Universe or Global Universe ?) has another dimension.

 

If Our Universe is expanding isotropically, could mean that there are not center, but if it is a bubble more within a Global Universe, then must be a center.

 

But if as universe you refers to the Global Universe ... then that is a question currently beyond our knowledge.

[Airbrush]

Yes, it can be contending to think that it is infintely expanding, meaning that there is an infinite amount of space (including time) abound. Infinity just means ''one more than now''.

 

The difference between finite and infinite is, literally, infinite. There is no comparison. Infinite is so much greater than finite, it is infinitely greater.

[D H]

So what is the HUDF?

 

I understud that HUDF is the place of the universe that we can see the youngest galaxies...as they were 13.000 millions of years...and that in this direction will br the CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE.

You understand incorrectly.

 

Astronomers see objects very far away in every direction, not just the where the Hubble Deep Field was taken. Every direction. So does that mean that we are the center of the universe? In a sense yes, but a better answer is no. Astronomers in one of those far, far away galaxies would see exactly the same thing, that the they can look in any direction and see objects that are very far away, and the further afield they look the higher the recession velocity. So does that mean that that far, far away galaxy is the center? The answer is that same as before, in a sense yes, but a better answer is no.

 

The better answer is that the universe doesn't have a center.

 

 

 

This thread is trying to answer the question about why current state of the art of the science says that there is no center of the universe.

 

But I think there is a overlooked issue that is above this one, and that can clarify the purpose of the initial thread subject: "Is the observable universe (Our Oniverse) the only one?"

 

If Our Universe could be only a bubble more of the Global Universe, then the question about the center of the universe (Our Universe or Global Universe ?) has another dimension.

 

If Our Universe is expanding isotropically, could mean that there are not center, but if it is a bubble more within a Global Universe, then must be a center.

 

But if as universe you refers to the Global Universe ... then that is a question currently beyond our knowledge.

If one of the many multiverse conjectures is true (which, BTW, is off-topic for this thread), the concept of a center of the multiverse makes even less sense than does the concept of the center of the universe.

[Aethelwulf]

The difference between finite and infinite is, literally, infinite. There is no comparison. Infinite is so much greater than finite, it is infinitely greater.

 

I didn't compare them.

 

Anyway, the only way you can have a center to the universe is by saying that every point on the spacetime map was the center.