ydoaPs Posted September 18, 2005 Posted September 18, 2005 wow, that was fast. he was gone within the first minute blike was online.
Mart Posted September 18, 2005 Posted September 18, 2005 We know what the universe is like in our local neighbourhood. We can only guess what it's like several billions of light years distant. Unless there is some way to circumvent the limitation on the speed of data transfer we will have to continue guessing or give up and focus on local stuff.
calbiterol Posted September 18, 2005 Posted September 18, 2005 I find it funny that everyone (or everyone that I've seen so far) arguing with the original post and against the accepted and (by all means) tried and true model of the universe (I'd like to see one of them try to prove it wrong) all bear the words "Banned" or "Permanently Banned" directly under their names. In all honesty, I did not know some of these people had been exterminated, and felt some satisfaction/relief upon seeing so. I also find it ironic that this thread continues to live on despite this.
buzsaw Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 I find it funny that everyone (or everyone that I've seen so far) arguing with the original post and against the accepted and (by all means) tried and true model of the universe (I'd like to see one of them try to prove it wrong) all bear the words "Banned" or "Permanently Banned" directly under their names. In all honesty' date=' I did not know some of these people had been exterminated, and felt some satisfaction/relief upon seeing so. I also find it ironic that this thread continues to live on despite this. [/quote'] Do I understand you to agree with me that space is unbounded?
imasmartgirl Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 space ends that way it has a shape and outside of space there is nothing actually i have a theory where space does end and it does have a shape. Its in the shape of a torus that moves from inside to out to outside to back inside in a loop. and we are floating somewhere on one side where all matter exists and appear to be expanding as space moves further towards the edge and stretches over to the next side where i think its all anti-matter or something. Just an idea i came up with.
calbiterol Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 Do I understand you to agree with me that space is unbounded? Not quite sure of your wording, so I'll put it this way. I think the universe is infinite and expanding (receding), and am in agreement with the general scientific community. If that isn't a clear enough answer, let me know and I'll try to further clarify it. Note that as I'm planning on going into aerospace/aeronautical/astronomical engineering, I have somewhat of a responsibility to obey the current laws of physics.
buzsaw Posted September 24, 2005 Posted September 24, 2005 Not quite sure of your wording, so I'll put it this way. I think the universe is infinite and expanding (receding), and am in agreement with the general scientific community. If that isn't a clear enough answer, let me know and I'll try to further clarify it. Note that as I'm planning on going into aerospace/aeronautical/astronomical engineering, I have somewhat of a responsibility to obey the current laws of physics. 1. How does something infinite recede? 2. As I understand unbounded and infinite relative to the universe which includes all existing space, if it's infinite it is unbounded and if it's unbounded it's infinite, as I understand these terms. 3. It appears that you are applying the same definition to both of these words; "expanding (rededing)." You're puzzling the heck out of me here.
calbiterol Posted September 24, 2005 Posted September 24, 2005 I'll answer these as best as I can. 1. What I meant by this is that the parts of the universe (individual galaxies, etcetera) are receding from each other. Hence, the parts of something infinite are receding from each other. Just a bad way of wording it. 2. I don't remember saying anything about unbounded. But yes, I am using these interchangeably. 3. Expanding (the overall size of the universe) and receding (the parts from each other). Again, a poor choice of words on my part, for which I apologize.
t777 Posted September 24, 2005 Posted September 24, 2005 I'll answer these as best as I can.1. What I meant by this is that the parts of the universe (individual galaxies' date=' etcetera) are receding from each other. Hence, the parts of something infinite are receding from each other. Just a bad way of wording it. 2. I don't remember saying anything about unbounded. But yes, I am using these interchangeably. 3. Expanding (the overall size of the universe) and receding (the parts from each other). Again, a poor choice of words on my part, for which I apologize.[/quote'] the world used to be thought of as being flat and infinitely large the same people thought the universe was infinitely large and people still think the universe is infinitely large. but space ends and it has a shape
buzsaw Posted September 25, 2005 Posted September 25, 2005 2. I don't remember saying anything about unbounded. But yes' date=' I am using these interchangeably. 3. Expanding (the overall size of the universe) and receding (the parts from each other). Again, a poor choice of words on my part, for which I apologize.[/quote'] Thanks for clarifying. I was me who used the word unbounded, asking if you agreed with me that the universe was unbounded. However, your wording in item 3 has a problem, imo, in that something infinite can't expand, i.e. the universe. Only dimensions within the universe can expand, i.e, things in the universe or distance between things in the universe, etc. I believe mainline science maintains that space itself in the universe expands, which would imply that the universe is finite and itself expanding, since space is inclusive in the universe. This is needful to argue for the theory of the big bang. I'm of the minority opinion, and I don't buy that theory.
calbiterol Posted September 25, 2005 Posted September 25, 2005 There's a (new) theory out there that eliminates singularities at the end of black holes and the singularity before the big bang. I can't really explain it, but it's intriguing. (That was a bit of a tangent.) I 'spose if I were to picky I should have said space is unbounded, because there is a subtle difference between unbounded and infinite. Infinite means it goes on forever, unbounded means it has nothing stopping it from going on forever (IIRC). I don't know all that much about the current accepted scientific position, so a lot of my "information" is me filling in the gaps, but new stars and systems are being created all the time and are receding from each other, therefore the overall space is expanding. Again, it's really hard to visualize or interpret some of this stuff due to the difficulty of grasping the concept of infinity.
buzsaw Posted September 26, 2005 Posted September 26, 2005 There's a (new) theory out there that eliminates singularities at the end of black holes and the singularity before the big bang. I can't really explain it' date=' but it's intriguing. (That was a bit of a tangent.) . Infinite means it goes on forever, unbounded means it has nothing stopping it from going on forever (IIRC).[/quote'] Not exactly. Unbounded means there's no bounds to all existing space, i.e. that it is infinite and dimensionless in all directions. but new stars and systems are being created all the time and are receding from each other, therefore the overall space is expanding. If the universe's space is unbounded and infinite/dimensionless, there's no way space is going to expand. Infinity cannot expand. It would have to have bounds and dimension to have the ability to expand. You can't have it both ways. If the universe's space is expanding it must have dimensional bounds which are expanding, increasing the overall size/dimensions of the universe.
buzsaw Posted September 26, 2005 Posted September 26, 2005 space endssounds good to me I would assume that you would agree with me that if (I say if) space ends it is not infinite and could expand, i.e that it is bounded. If so, you have the problem of what to call the area beyond bounded space's bounds. You would also have the problem of what the properties of spaces's alleged bounds would be. I doubt that QM has the answers to these questions.
Rasori Posted September 26, 2005 Posted September 26, 2005 Excuse me if this has already been said (if it has, and been answered, just give me the page, thanks) but I need to head to bed soon. Why is it that space can't be infinite and the universe expanding? I have trouble grasping an infinite object expanding (although I did read that earlier and understand that it is possible) but I don't see why it needs to be expanding if the universe is expanding.
CPL.Luke Posted September 26, 2005 Posted September 26, 2005 buzsaw the "border" to space that your seeking would be the edge of the hubble volume, this is something like 13.6 billion years away, and is the greatest distance that we are capable of viewing with a telescope on earth. however if you were located at the edge of our hubble volume, you would define an equivalent hubble volume with the earth on one of its edges. all experiments point to the universe as being flat, if this is true there can be no bound to space as how could you have a border to space? you could easily cross the border and then what would you be in? the distance between objects continues to expand, this does not conflict with an infinite universe, as infinity+1=...
calbiterol Posted September 26, 2005 Posted September 26, 2005 Buzsaw, I don't think t777's argument is based on anything other than opinionated bullshit that is not grounded in any way in the scientific world. As such, it is my firm belief that any attempt to talk scientifically with him will result in utter failure. But that's just me. Feel free to talk to him if you like, and your arguments are indeed interesting, but I don't think anything intelligible is going to come out of his mouth. Or hers, if I got the pronouns mixed up.
t777 Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 Buzsaw' date=' I don't think t777's argument is based on anything other than opinionated bullshit that is not grounded in any way in the scientific world. As such, it is my firm belief that any attempt to talk scientifically with him will result in utter failure. But that's just me. Feel free to talk to him if you like, and your arguments are indeed interesting, but I don't think anything intelligible is going to come out of his mouth. Or hers, if I got the pronouns mixed up.[/quote'] where is all this great scientific evidence that space goes on forever, the infinity of space has always been the generally accepted concept and that is big evidence that that is wrong, the universe doesn't give up its secrets so easy --------- space ends!
calbiterol Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 Then list some solid evidence. Any and all scientific evidence. And NO, an infinite universe has NOT always been the accepted concept! I dare you to try to legitimately cite some information, real information. And religion is NOT science. There is also a significant amount of mathematical data that supports the infinitely large universe theory.
buzsaw Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 buzsaw the "border" to space that your seeking would be the edge of the hubble volume, this is something like 13.6 billion years away, and is the greatest distance that we are capable of viewing with a telescope on earth. So what can be viewed by our telescopes may be only a speck in the total volumn. How do scientists know this is the boundary? How do scientists know that space does not exist beyond the hubble volumne?
t777 Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 Then list some solid evidence. Any and all scientific evidence. And NO' date=' an infinite universe has NOT always been the accepted concept! I dare you to try to legitimately cite some information, real information. And religion is NOT science. There is also a significant amount of mathematical data that supports the infinitely large universe theory.[/quote'] i just did show you some evidence that is what everyone has always believed that space is infinite and that is a big reason to believe that is wrong now you show all your evidence that space is infinite and i have more evidence but you have to pay for the evidence i just showed you and that will cost you one trillion dollars how can you afford the rest!
Rasori Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 Wow... People like this ruin this site. Thankfully, they are avoidable.
CPL.Luke Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 buzsaw thats just it, they don't believe that that is the border, besides the fact that that border expands by about 1 ly every year, there is no evidence to show that the universe ends there. so it is logical to think that the universe goes on after 13.6 billion years the idea that the universe is infinite is the mainstream viewpoint of the scientific community.
Recommended Posts