Shape of the universe

[FunkyAce07]

I was thinking about what the shape of the universe must be if it had a shape which it should be more or less a large ball shape that is ever expanding at the speed of light--if the Big Bang Theory were true. However, I thought maybe since our universe seems relativey young and the galaxies seem to have no set orbit around anything and no one can seem to answer what is really at the center of our universe maybe there is no center that exploded. Could it be a ball with a tunnel in the middle; overall a ridiculously large black hole in the center of our universe much larger than any galaxy. A black hole that spews the "ever expanding" universe out one side, the side the Milky Way is on. The galaxies float away from the side of the black hole they were just spewed from somewhat in a random pattern. The giant black hole would be the largest gravitational pull in the "universe" so it would slowly pull the galaxies that were spewed out back into the eating side they had seemlingly floated randomly.

 

This motion being much like pouring a lighter than water substance into a sink full of water. Once hitting the water's surface the substance seperates underwater and begins to float to the top where it is drawn back into the substance that is still pouring into the water and sucked back under only to be spewed out again. The differance being instead of a foreign substance causing the constant rotation and cycle it would be the gravtational pull of the black hole. Of course you would never see the "end" of the universe because the "edge" of the universe would actually only be where the "universe" crosses the horizon and light cannot be seen. This giving the appearance that the universe is ever expanding at the speed of light.

 

Would this theory be possible? If not then how could this theory be disproved?

 

 

 

I was reading somewhere that someone believed the universe was horn shaped... This does not make sense to me nor can I make sense of the force that makes our universe ever expanding as done by the Big Bang Theory. Maybe the black hole theory of mine could also use the idea that the universe moves fluid like. The side freshly spewed out could be slightly higher pressure than the other side. When the black hole "eats" it leaves an emptiness in the universe that is then filled by more... universe... I guess I would say, drawing the universe back into the black hole as if the universe actually had a very slight elasticity or surface tension to it. Pretty much that idea would be using high and low pressure. When I say elasticity I mean that of water when you stick your finger into the water how it draws up onto your finger or in this case it would draw it into a "drain," the eating side of the black hole.

 

Or maybe the universe just slowly circulates due to heating and cooling like convection. The same idea that your ceiling fan uses when rotating backwards. Sucks the cold air up forcing hot air out of the way and then using gravity to pull the cold air back down... dense heavy cold side would circulate to the lower pressure hot side and the the hot side would circulate to fill in for the abscense of universe where the cold portion was. Why would the hot and cold side never equalize and the stop the circulation is a flaw to that idea however. Also light would escape this theory.

 

Hmmm..... Anyway... super large black hole anyone?

[JohnStu]

Good thinking and knowledge you have there.

 

 

 

I see space-time as something that does not stretch. If it does stretch, it has to be a "medium". If space-time stretches then the space of space-time is static, then what is actually space ha.

[ACG52]

There is no center to the universe. The Big Bang was not an explosion taking place at some definitive point. The BB is the expansion of all space. Any and every point in the universe can be said to be at the center.

[FunkyAce07]

I didnt mean to make the universe sound as if there were matter every where in space. It was simply the easiest way to describe the motion. I actually just saw on youtube a perfect explanation of my idea. "The Orange Theory" it seemed very similar to what i had thought of. I just thought that if spewed out of one side of something such as a giant black hole in giant vacumm that eventually though tossed in to the far reaches of the universe would would begin to pick up a loose orbit slowly being drawn back into the consuming side. Also had an interesting idea that since gravity effects light somehow then if pulles out of its straight line 3 inches to the "left" every 3 million light years or whatever then in trillions of light years would light itself not eventually be pulled completely around? Im not saying it would it would be fast but without anything else then our universe would still apply some pull to an object no matter how far it was away... just maybe a very extremely small amount of force. So maybe light itself even would be pulled completely around to be consumed by the black hole.

 

Also, did the universe, according to the big bang theory, not start off on as an explosion? Hinted at a specific point in which all expanded from? Rewind our universe that is ever -expanding in all equal directions away at the same speed, the speed of light, from the originating point.back to the initial explosion. Then there would be a center point in which all expanded. Where there was those atoms colliding, spark and fuel, or whatever people think caused that extremely violent outward expansion of the universe

 

Even if the initial point of expansion was a million light years across it was still localized. Size of the initial expansion of space does not mean it wasnt localized. If you travel faster than the speed of light to eventually come to the edge of our expanding universe and pass it and escape it then looking back it would appear to be a large ball.... i mean you couldnt actually see it due to the fact that the light hadnt reached you yet so youd be staring into nothingness, but it works for a description of the shape. Now you cant have a perfect shaped ball without a center point. Like inflating a balloon... yeah, just described a universe that is mostly a vacuum by talking about inflating a balloon it just makes the description easier

[FunkyAce07]

Hmm... nvm about the light making a complete circle. It may, but it would never hit the same point i dont think. I guess itd just do an outward spiral infinetely. I dont think it would constantly be escaping the gravitational pull and never pick up an actual constant orbit.... it was an under thought idea. Do the planets ever hit that perfect balance? It seema really unlikely. I could best assume we wouldnt be so lucky and that we'd either have a slow inward or outward spiral towards or away from the sun.

[Pugdaddy]

Jean-Pierre Luminet and his colleagues in France say the Universe is shaped like a dodecahedron. Also the expansion of space in not limited by the speed of light(eg Inflation).

[Nobrainer]

Let's start from the beginning;

Current thinking says the universe started out as a very compact, small, finite universe; "the universe in a nutshell", as Stephen Hawkins says in his book title.

 

Now the SPACE of the universe is expanding at an increasingly accelerating rate and had a finite beginning and currently consists as mass energy and space and space is increasing in size, then logically mass and energy as a whole should be decreasing, shouldn't they?

 

And if the universe is changing from mass and energy to space itself and space is the lowest potential of energy then let's say a wave of non absorbable released gravitons but acting as 100% wave and the waves being released combine with other released waves then the overall shape of the universe should look a little like a galaxy flattening at the boundary between the outermost galaxies and empty space. The shape of the universe should be slowly transitioning to a flatter and flatter space aligning all mass and energy. As a ball could be stretched out to a disc, the universe might be flattening as it is expanding...

Edited October 17, 2012 by Nobrainer

[FunkyAce07]

Jean-Pierre Luminet and his colleagues in France say the Universe is shaped like a dodecahedron. Also the expansion of space in not limited by the speed of light(eg Inflation).

 

So it being shaped like a dodecahedron makes no sense. I like the theory that expansion of space isn't limited to the speed of light though. So instead of "inflating" at the speed of light it is more or less just instantaneous. I guess maybe if I could wrap my mind around that crazy concept after having it driven into my mind that it expands at the speed of light it'd be easier to grasp. I don't know if you can really expand at the speed of light into space where there is absolutely nothing. How can you cover a distance in nothing? It's not like there is anything for light to travel through, so maybe it would just instantly be there and it's too much of a concept for people to understand because there is nothing ever seen like what is beyond our universe. So, possibly.

 

Let's start from the beginning;

Current thinking says the universe started out as a very compact, small, finite universe; "the universe in a nutshell", as Stephen Hawkins says in his book title.

 

Now the SPACE of the universe is expanding at an increasingly accelerating rate and had a finite beginning and currently consists as mass energy and space and space is increasing in size, then logically mass and energy as a whole should be decreasing, shouldn't they?

 

And if the universe is changing from mass and energy to space itself and space is the lowest potential of energy then let's say a wave of non absorbable released gravitons but acting as 100% wave and the waves being released combine with other released waves then the overall shape of the universe should look a little like a galaxy flattening at the boundary between the outermost galaxies and empty space. The shape of the universe should be slowly transitioning to a flatter and flatter space aligning all mass and energy. As a ball could be stretched out to a disc, the universe might be flattening as it is expanding...

 

Hmm... brain seems to be operating a little slower than usual tonight, but it seems that if the universe in a nutshell were to have x amount of mass and expanding to 100x that size in area then it would still have x mass with less density... or just more spread out and not as clustered together. For that to take effect though wouldn't you either need an orbit around the center of the universe that is expanding by the outer edge escaping the gravitational force in the center in the universe. Those far edged masses would simply use their gravity to pull the next closer mass outward with it more, and so on and so on? Or you would need space to have mass to push and pull masses through space as it expands like current in a river? Or wouldn't you need the expanding outer edge to have a mass that has a gravitational pull and as it is expands too fast it begins to lose the galaxies and other masses being pulled by its gravity just dropping them off randomly in the universe. Yet they would keep drifting outward at the speed they had accelerated to before losing connection with the outward traveling mass' gravitational pull until stopped or slowed by an outward force due to a lack of air resistance or any kind of friction other than slower or opposite moving masses?

 

So it being shaped like a dodecahedron makes no sense. I like the theory that expansion of space isn't limited to the speed of light though. So instead of "inflating" at the speed of light it is more or less just instantaneous. I guess maybe if I could wrap my mind around that crazy concept after having it driven into my mind that it expands at the speed of light it'd be easier to grasp. I don't know if you can really expand at the speed of light into space where there is absolutely nothing. How can you cover a distance in nothing? It's not like there is anything for light to travel through, so maybe it would just instantly be there and it's too much of a concept for people to understand because there is nothing ever seen like what is beyond our universe. So, possibly.

 

 

 

Hmm... brain seems to be operating a little slower than usual tonight, but it seems that if the universe in a nutshell were to have x amount of mass and expanding to 100x that size in area then it would still have x mass with less density... or just more spread out and not as clustered together. For that to take effect though wouldn't you either need an orbit around the center of the universe that is expanding by the outer edge escaping the gravitational force in the center in the universe. Those far edged masses would simply use their gravity to pull the next closer mass outward with it more, and so on and so on? Or you would need space to have mass to push and pull masses through space as it expands like current in a river? Or wouldn't you need the expanding outer edge to have a mass that has a gravitational pull and as it is expands too fast it begins to lose the galaxies and other masses being pulled by its gravity just dropping them off randomly in the universe. Yet they would keep drifting outward at the speed they had accelerated to before losing connection with the outward traveling mass' gravitational pull until stopped or slowed by an outward force due to a lack of air resistance or any kind of friction other than slower or opposite moving masses?

 

Idk. just seems like to flatten out like that you would either need a centripetal force to be to great for the gravitational pull. gravitational pull from an outside source. or a medium in which would pull it flat much like buying one of those stretchy toys out of the little machine. When you pull two ends in opposite direction it gets more flat because you have the molecules pulling on each other within forcing them to stretch out. Maybe I have the concept you are explaining wrong in my mind.

[Pugdaddy]

The idea that the Universe is the shaped of a dodecahedron is not so crazy.

Luminet looked at the data from the WMAP on Microwave Background Radiation. MBR is really left over sound waves from the Big Bang. When a guitar string vibrates, it's wavelength can only be as long as the string. Luminet reasoned that they should find in the MBR, if the Universe was infinite, very long wavelengths, but the longer wavelengths were missing in the MBR. This he concluded meant the Universe was finite. He then looked for a shape that fit the vibrations in the MBR and the dodecahedron was the perfect shape.

You can view the video here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORSqcaqkI08

[Moontanman]

Our universe might be horn shaped if you think of it in four spatial dimensions...

[EquisDeXD]

Our universe might be horn shaped if you think of it in four spatial dimensions...

 

Horn shape? I've only heard of a torus in 4d. How does a horn shape come about?

[StringJunky]

The idea that the Universe is the shaped of a dodecahedron is not so crazy.

Luminet looked at the data from the WMAP on Microwave Background Radiation. MBR is really left over sound waves from the Big Bang. When a guitar string vibrates, it's wavelength can only be as long as the string. Luminet reasoned that they should find in the MBR, if the Universe was infinite, very long wavelengths, but the longer wavelengths were missing in the MBR. This he concluded meant the Universe was finite. He then looked for a shape that fit the vibrations in the MBR and the dodecahedron was the perfect shape.

You can view the video here.

 

 

The longest wavelength is twice the length of a string not the same as.

 

Strings: Each end of the string is fixed and therefore a node with an antinode in the middle. Since the wavelength is twice the distance between the nodes, the longest wavelength is twice the length of the string. This is known as the fundamental mode or fundamental frequency.

 

http://ibphysicsstuff.wikidot.com/standing-waves

[Dekan]

Horn shape? I've only heard of a torus in 4d. How does a horn shape come about?

 

The Horn is still used in Heaven. Apparently Gabriel will blow it at the Last Trump. He's a traditionalist. No saxophones.

[Caarnji]

Hmm... nvm about the light making a complete circle. It may, but it would never hit the same point i dont think. I guess itd just do an outward spiral infinetely. I dont think it would constantly be escaping the gravitational pull and never pick up an actual constant orbit.... it was an under thought idea. Do the planets ever hit that perfect balance? It seema really unlikely. I could best assume we wouldnt be so lucky and that we'd either have a slow inward or outward spiral towards or away from the sun.

 

Not sure why you need a orbit for the light, since: If the light would pull of an constant orbit around your model, than we would have visible traces of this phenomena in form of amassed electromagnetic radiation/photons etc. from this light which would come from *nowhere*.

 

 

 

 

I like that model tough from a artistic thinking perspective tough (looks cool, in my head =) )

 

 

 

 

What i wonder is the means how matter would *fall* back to that point, and how it´s getting into that loose orbit.

 

Since gravitational pull wears of in Einsteins relativity theory and the *dark energy* how we call it that lets the space surf in the universe with the speed as we observe would have to wear off at a point for that to happen, which would be just another strange mystery.

 

Only reason i can think of is dark energy and that hyper black hole must be interconnected somehow for that to happen, but that now goes beyond my logical comprehension, so i stop there.

Edited November 13, 2012 by Caarnji

[FunkyAce07]

Not sure why you need a orbit for the light, since: If the light would pull of an constant orbit around your model, than we would have visible traces of this phenomena in form of amassed electromagnetic radiation/photons etc. from this light which would come from *nowhere*.

 

 

 

 

I like that model tough from a artistic thinking perspective tough (looks cool, in my head =) )

 

 

 

 

What i wonder is the means how matter would *fall* back to that point, and how it´s getting into that loose orbit.

 

Since gravitational pull wears of in Einsteins relativity theory and the *dark energy* how we call it that lets the space surf in the universe with the speed as we observe would have to wear off at a point for that to happen, which would be just another strange mystery.

 

Only reason i can think of is dark energy and that hyper black hole must be interconnected somehow for that to happen, but that now goes beyond my logical comprehension, so i stop there.

 

We would actually not see the phenomena. If light did make a complete and perfect orbit then if you looked far enough into space you would eventually see the backside of the Earth.... or something along that sort. Instead I'm saying when you look away from the Earth you are actually looking through curved light. The light you see in my theory would be a spiraling outwards. So you would never actually see anything crazy. Say the universe was laid out 2d like a map. Now on that map you you have galaxies that are in slow curved line. When you look at them the universe's strongest gravitational force pull over billions of light years bends the light to make them appear to be in a straight line. Kind of like a Map Declination, but due to gravitational pull over the span of lightyears instead of magnetic declination on our Earth. Of course the further you would look away from the center of the universe the more straight the light would be traveling, but NEVER traveling a perfectly straight line. Like walking halfway across the road, walking the next half, and half of that, and you would NEVER actually get to the other side.

 

The orbit however is caused by things being spewed out of say a black hole or a like object. Afterwards, they begin to collect and orbit and create galaxies and etc. Eventually they run out of momentum and gravity of the "strongest gravitational pull in the universe" would inevitably take control and very slowly begin to pull them back around the universe to the other side where it would be on the "eating side" of the blackhole or like object. Where it would begin to pick up a stronger orbit as it begins to be pulled back in to be recycled.

 

Imagine it like a bathtub... replace the medium, water, with gravitational pull. You run water out and it runs to the back of the tub and even though when it is VERY distant from the drain it slowly begins to drift back to the drain picking up a stronger orbit. It is inevitable that the small drain in the front will eventually pull an object back around without any other outside forces acting upon the object.

 

I hate to compare the universe with a bathtub, but it is the easiest way to explain.... I do not mean the universe is made of water or that there is a drain in the universe draining a medium that sucks galaxies in... Of course it's not 2d either I'd say it was 3d, but yet again it's easiest to explain in 2d.

[justinater22]

I was thinking about what the shape of the universe must be if it had a shape which it should be more or less a large ball shape that is ever expanding at the speed of light--if the Big Bang Theory were true. However, I thought maybe since our universe seems relativey young and the galaxies seem to have no set orbit around anything and no one can seem to answer what is really at the center of our universe maybe there is no center that exploded. Could it be a ball with a tunnel in the middle; overall a ridiculously large black hole in the center of our universe much larger than any galaxy. A black hole that spews the "ever expanding" universe out one side, the side the Milky Way is on. The galaxies float away from the side of the black hole they were just spewed from somewhat in a random pattern. The giant black hole would be the largest gravitational pull in the "universe" so it would slowly pull the galaxies that were spewed out back into the eating side they had seemlingly floated randomly.

 

This motion being much like pouring a lighter than water substance into a sink full of water. Once hitting the water's surface the substance seperates underwater and begins to float to the top where it is drawn back into the substance that is still pouring into the water and sucked back under only to be spewed out again. The differance being instead of a foreign substance causing the constant rotation and cycle it would be the gravtational pull of the black hole. Of course you would never see the "end" of the universe because the "edge" of the universe would actually only be where the "universe" crosses the horizon and light cannot be seen. This giving the appearance that the universe is ever expanding at the speed of light.

 

Would this theory be possible? If not then how could this theory be disproved?

 

 

This is not possible simply because the Big Bang shows that every

 

 

I was reading somewhere that someone believed the universe was horn shaped... This does not make sense to me nor can I make sense of the force that makes our universe ever expanding as done by the Big Bang Theory. Maybe the black hole theory of mine could also use the idea that the universe moves fluid like. The side freshly spewed out could be slightly higher pressure than the other side. When the black hole "eats" it leaves an emptiness in the universe that is then filled by more... universe... I guess I would say, drawing the universe back into the black hole as if the universe actually had a very slight elasticity or surface tension to it. Pretty much that idea would be using high and low pressure. When I say elasticity I mean that of water when you stick your finger into the water how it draws up onto your finger or in this case it would draw it into a "drain," the eating side of the black hole.

 

Or maybe the universe just slowly circulates due to heating and cooling like convection. The same idea that your ceiling fan uses when rotating backwards. Sucks the cold air up forcing hot air out of the way and then using gravity to pull the cold air back down... dense heavy cold side would circulate to the lower pressure hot side and the the hot side would circulate to fill in for the abscense of universe where the cold portion was. Why would the hot and cold side never equalize and the stop the circulation is a flaw to that idea however. Also light would escape this theory.

 

Hmmm..... Anyway... super large black hole anyone?

 

Your theory is not possible if the Big Bang is true. This would mean that any point could be the center of the universe because every object is moving away from each other. It's like a balloon if you put dots on a balloon, and then blow it up then all the dots would separate at an equal rate. So there is no real center for which your black hole could occupy.

Edited December 5, 2012 by justinater22