I believe in Crunch-bang-expansion-crunch-bang-expansion and that in singular terms one state has one of these periods has all existed for all of time.
yes, me too. The universe could have crunched and banged 2, 20, or even billions of times. and who is to say it crunched back into 1 singularity? could be other universes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
join off topic IRC at #otter on esper.net, there is cake*
*there may or may not be cake
I'm often fascinated with the concept of the universe being infinite. I mean, it has to end at one point, but if it did, what would it be like? A wall we can't go through? But wouldn't there be something on the other side?
Aaaah, so hard to wrap one's head around x-x
I think that on the other side of that wall, would be another universe.
On the subject of what lies beyond the universe, which I have often questioned myself, what would be beyond the nonexistence.
To my own understanding, nothing can truly be infinitely large, everything must end somewhere. So then, what is beyond the nothing. Because I believe nothing can be infinitely large, then there must be some sort of impassible barrier of all that exists. But what is beyond that? So long as there is a wall, surly something must be on the other side. So then that can't be the border of existence. But then where is it? Perhaps it is just because that my feeble and insignificant human brain can't grasp the concept of true nothingness.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Taking trolling to a whole new level, one post at a time.
What science knows of as the observable universe that was started by a "big bang" could just be an isolated pocket of something still larger with even more dimensions to it. There could be a multiverse containing an infinite number of universes.
And how about infinite in terms of scale? You could just dig down smaller and smaller, where does that end?
Thinking of scale, the size of a human being compared to the observable universe is proportionately the same as the size of a quark compared to a human being. In the dimension of scale, we are halfway between the largest observable thing and the smallest observable thing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic."
-Muad'Dib
Oh, wow. Why didn't I post this earlier? Scale of the Universe
It goes down to Planck length and as high as the entire estimated size of the universe. The estimated size of the universe is 93 billion light years, and the universe is only 14 billion years old, so we are only observing a small part of the universe because the light from the rest of it has not reached us yet.
There has to either be a spatial end, or a chronological beginning, because we can't see past a certain point. That can mean 1 of 2 things:
1. The universe isn't old enough for the light from past that point to get to us.
2. That point is the spatial edge of the universe.
So pick and choose which one, because you can't have both. I personally believe that it's "finite yet unbounded," and that there was a beginning of time.
There's actually a possibility that the visible Universe is bigger than the Universe.
I'll attempt to explain.
Think of the universe like a ball.
A really big ball, with the stuff on the outside.
I heard somewhere that light could just loop round the ball. Due to things like redshift, the "looped" image would look different, making the illusion of another place.
Since the light took longer to get to us, it would seem "further away".
Weird, right?
That actually doesn't make sense, as you explain it.
But I'd be interested to see where you got the concept from, and read the complete theory, if you could find it?
I'm always open to new ideas, when they make sense, and I haven't heard one like that before.
You will never fully understand the universe, deal with it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I believe in freedom, Mr. Lipwig. Not many people do, although they will, of course, protest otherwise. And no practical definition of freedom would be complete without the freedom to take the consequences. Indeed, it is the freedom upon which all the others are based.
13.7 (give or take .14) billion years ago, the Universe began. Our knowledge of the Big Bang begins one Planck second after the Big Bang (10^-43 seconds). After that came the inflationary period, 300,000 years after, the Universe was cool enough for nucleosynthesis to begin, and the lightest gases were fused. A couple hundred million years later the first stars formed.
We know this all happened. The evidence points to the Universe not being infinite. It could be, but we know that it happened. It's always good to question the current predominant theory, but saying it's downright wrong is ignorant.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. -Carl Sagan
The Universe is cool enough without making up crap about it - Phil Plait
False,
time is a dimension. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime
It's actually part of the theory of relativity.
Why weren't you here when I was arguing with Steks about the same thing?
My DeviantArt
Damn beaten,lol.
6
x9
yes, me too. The universe could have crunched and banged 2, 20, or even billions of times. and who is to say it crunched back into 1 singularity? could be other universes.
*there may or may not be cake
because it was infinite
I think that on the other side of that wall, would be another universe.
or on the other side of the wall could be nothingness in its truest form. No time, space, matter, energy, physics, no reality.
*there may or may not be cake
If nothingness in it's truest form existed beyond the wall, the nothingness would not truly be nothing, because it would exist.
To my own understanding, nothing can truly be infinitely large, everything must end somewhere. So then, what is beyond the nothing. Because I believe nothing can be infinitely large, then there must be some sort of impassible barrier of all that exists. But what is beyond that? So long as there is a wall, surly something must be on the other side. So then that can't be the border of existence. But then where is it? Perhaps it is just because that my feeble and insignificant human brain can't grasp the concept of true nothingness.
And how about infinite in terms of scale? You could just dig down smaller and smaller, where does that end?
Thinking of scale, the size of a human being compared to the observable universe is proportionately the same as the size of a quark compared to a human being. In the dimension of scale, we are halfway between the largest observable thing and the smallest observable thing.
-Muad'Dib
It goes down to Planck length and as high as the entire estimated size of the universe. The estimated size of the universe is 93 billion light years, and the universe is only 14 billion years old, so we are only observing a small part of the universe because the light from the rest of it has not reached us yet.
*there may or may not be cake
1. The universe isn't old enough for the light from past that point to get to us.
2. That point is the spatial edge of the universe.
So pick and choose which one, because you can't have both. I personally believe that it's "finite yet unbounded," and that there was a beginning of time.
My DeviantArt
That actually doesn't make sense, as you explain it.
But I'd be interested to see where you got the concept from, and read the complete theory, if you could find it?
I'm always open to new ideas, when they make sense, and I haven't heard one like that before.
bam
No, that is just not possible.
We know this all happened. The evidence points to the Universe not being infinite. It could be, but we know that it happened. It's always good to question the current predominant theory, but saying it's downright wrong is ignorant.
The Universe is cool enough without making up crap about it - Phil Plait