![]() |
Re: Impossible to answer?
I'm not reading this whole topic atm but I'd like to point out that the universe is not a sphere as in the 3 dimensional object but is actually a four dimensional surface that wraps back on itself.
Think of how you can fold a two dimensional piece of paper into a three dimensional object, and if you travel along the surface of this object you'll never reach the edge because there IS no edge, and if there is no edge there is nothing beyond. Our universe is equivalent to this, only it is a three dimensional sphere that has been wrapped into a four dimensional manifold, and we're on the three dimensional 'surface' and can't leave it. |
Re: Impossible to answer?
well, that sounds good.....but ! hole in your explanation......wouldn't that paper be surrounded by air? so is our universe surrounded by a larger universe? answer that.
|
Re: Impossible to answer?
in my view, every single theory has holes, christianity, big bang, string theory, evolution, blah blah blah. it is unfair to take one and try to convince everyone it is the right one.
|
Re: Impossible to answer?
Saying that every theory isn't completely proven is a meaningless statement. The fact that it isn't completely proven is -why- it is a theory and not a law.
|
Re: Impossible to answer?
Quote:
|
Re: Impossible to answer?
Quote:
The analogy is imperfect, as are all analogies. Don't take it at its face value but grasp the concept I am trying to convey. |
Re: Impossible to answer?
Quote:
Just a thought. Peace, Shay |
Re: Impossible to answer?
Quote:
If the space was sitting in something, then obviously that space wasn't the entirety of all space, because there is still more space for it to be in. If we take the whole universe, there is no space "beyond" it because there is no "beyond" it, because we define the universe as the entirety of all space. Also, there is nothing beyond the universe because that literally means that there isn't a beyond the universe. The universe isn't in a vacuum of nothingness, because it is impossible to be inside of something which does not exist. |
Re: Impossible to answer?
So that space extends out for an infinite distance in all directions? That means that outside the current outer reaches of where matter actually is, there is just an infinite stretch of void space that the universe's matter is expanding into?
|
Re: Impossible to answer?
Quote:
|
Re: Impossible to answer?
Quote:
|
Re: Impossible to answer?
If it ends, what's on the other side of that border?
|
Re: Impossible to answer?
I didn't really mean that it does end. It is just that it seems that somehow it can't end. Here is a universe size comparison video just for further arguments: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FwCMnyWZDg
|
Re: Impossible to answer?
Quote:
Quote:
I understand your folded space analogy, but your talking about it being infinite from OUR point of view. Someone used the universe as a cup analogy before, said yadda yadda yadda its filled with all our stuff and that's it, lets bend it so it becomes a mobius strip or what have you and tada now it's infinite! . . . . ya, to US. However, it's still in existence somewhere, we just can't see that place from our own perspective. Something exists on the outside of that cup, and if we reach the end of that and there is a barrier, then something is on the other side of that. I know it makes you feel much more insignificant and meaningless when you look at it that way, but I don't see how logic can dictate things just STOP. Logic would dictate to me that things never stop, they go on in all directions for ever. Just a thought. Peace, Shay |
Re: Impossible to answer?
Does anyone here belive in multiverse?
|
Re: Impossible to answer?
Quote:
The differentiation between a theory and a law has nothing to do with how correct it is. They're only two different ways of formulating a model. Theories have explanatory power and laws have descriptive power. That's really the only difference. Laws can be wrong, certainly. Newton's law of universal gravitation was, in some respects, wrong, and was replaced by Einstein's *theories*. The difference here is meaningless, except that Newton's law is a mathematical description of planetary motion where as the theories of relativity have explanatory power in that they explain how gravity works. I could give another example - if I formulated a mathematical description of energy production within a call, showing it is proportional to some constant times whatever, I would call it a law, though if I formulated a model describing the electron chain and transport mechanisms involved I would refer to it as a theory and a not a law. As such, models such as the big bang or evolution will always be theories. Quote:
Also, the idea of a border to the universe is a bit of a fuzzy concept. I mean, sure, there's a limit to the universe we can actually see because of how fast light travels, but the actual 'border' of the universe would be a very fuzzy thing indeed. I explained one possible scenario in my first post I think. |
Re: Impossible to answer?
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Impossible to answer?
Quote:
Your under the impression that the universe can't be a bubble of space time expanding and existing in something else, that also could house other bubbles of similar types. The expanse of this other stuff universes sit in is either infinite, or is housed in something else, that is either infinite, or . . . . . etc etc etc. Why are you so quick to dismiss this highly likelly scenario? Just a thought. Peace, Shay |
Re: Impossible to answer?
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Impossible to answer?
is it at all possible that our entire universe is just being pulled by a super-mega-massive black hole that is still trillions of light-years away?? i realize the chances are quite slim, but hey, i don't see any other definitive answers.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:05 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright FlashFlashRevolution