A question about the universe?

Discussion in 'Science' started by Yant0s, Jan 8, 2021.

  1. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    For YOU they are "mysteries" which is a result of your lack of understanding.

    For those of us that understand Science there is factual knowledge, logic and reason upon which we can obtain an understanding of concepts like infinity, the Singularity, Space-Time and our Natural World.

    We have no obligation to educate those that prefer to have zero understanding of Science and scientific knowledge.
     
  2. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,773
    Likes Received:
    14,565
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I haven't asked for any education and certainly not from you.
     
  3. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    :roflol:

    That is GLARINGLY obvious to EVERYONE who reads the vapid content of your posts.
     
  4. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Theoretical physics has absolutely NOTHING to do with near death experiences, dreams, or other concoctions of the human brain.
     
    Derideo_Te and DennisTate like this.
  5. DennisTate

    DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    31,491
    Likes Received:
    2,601
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Respectfully..... and I do even thank you for replying to this topic.....

    but.... I believe that String Theory......... and even The Cyclic Model of the universe / multiverse...... were planned..... .much like a programmer comes up with html...... Near death experiencer Rabbi Alon Anava who was an Atheist at the time of his 2001 NDE stated that he was shown how the html of the universe / multiverse..... were even somehow connected to the Hebrew language...... no kidding.....




    My Life After Death Experience" with Alon Anava
     
  6. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This does not sound like what you were saying before. The point being made was that there is a question of whether the universe is infinite or finite.

    I suspect there are issues such as the geometry of this universe and maybe what is meant by finite and infinite.

    Is there an answer to this:

    Our space/time does not allow for anything "outside" of our universe. (There may be other universes, or whatever, but our space/time is limited to this one universe.) So, let's say the universe isn't expanding (and thus light speed travel would not be overcome by the expansion). What would it mean to come to the "end" of the universe if it is finite? Does the universe curve back on itself somehow, so it is more like traveling Earth's equator - never coming to an end?

    I just don't think one can say, "I see no OTHER infinities, so this one can not be an infinity". I think we have to actually look for evidence of what is going on.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  7. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't even have a clue what you mean by that.

    I'd point out that string theory is in relative disrepute.

    So, I really think you should shy away from connecting your religions ideas to string theory if only because of the damage such connections can do to your religious ideas.

    Beyond that, you're trying to mix the methods of science and the methods of religion. But, those methods are not even SLIGHTLY similar, and mixing them is sure to obtain garbage.
     
    An Taibhse and Derideo_Te like this.
  8. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is another way to look at this and arrive at infinity.

    When it comes to the Time aspect of Space-Time one could divide time into an infinite number of smaller divisions and none of them would ever be the same point in time.

    Furthermore since time is unidirectional in our universe an infinity of time could never return to the same point in time that has already past.
     
  9. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,773
    Likes Received:
    14,565
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes my comment was that it has to be finite since we can't identify the existence of infinity anywhere in nature. How the universe began and when is a mystery. The cosmologists have a calculation for the age of the universe but its origin is still a mystery.

    Pretty simple. Infinity is the lack of boundaries.

    As I said there are certainly mysteries about the universe like your premise and yes they are looking for evidence all the time.
     
  10. Pycckia

    Pycckia Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2015
    Messages:
    18,224
    Likes Received:
    6,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If time exists infinitely far into the past, how did we ever get to the present? I mean it would take like forever just to get to the present day.
     
  11. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's true that the origin of this universe isn't known. And, knowing the origin might well be interesting when it comes to considering what this universe is. But, I don't see a reason for that lack of knowledge to mean that our universe is finite.

    Whether we have identified other infinities in nature really has no bearing on whether this universe is infinite.
    I don't see where you have identified any boundaries.

    Also as pointed out above, time is part of our universe - space/time. What is he end of time? And, there are the questions concerning the geometry of our universe.
    Yes - I agree with you on that.

    It might be interesting to think of where our universe is headed right now. I think a leading theory is that this universe will expand so that every atom, every quark, every everything will gradually decompose leaving ... what? What's left may be a still expanding energy field. Would time still have meaning? Would there be an end to that expanding energy field? What could "finite" or "infinite" mean in the context of where we're headed right now?
     
  12. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The conception of infinite ...

    Infinite has got known borders. This can sound incredible, I know.
    But it's the observer to determine dimensions. Stars don't measure ... they exist and that's all.
    Intelligence beings tend to measure, that is to say the observers who observe the notorious observables, so famous in quantum mechanics.

    The limits of our observation are the borders of infinity.

    It's like for the numbers.

    You can imagine any number ... you will always be able to add 1, to make +1.
    But in the moment you imagine your super-giant number ... that's a limit, that a border of infinity.

    Because infinity cannot be observed. It can only be theorized. From the perspective of quantum mechanics this is quite interesting.
     
  13. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, there is a concept of the "observable universe" which is defined by the speed of light, expansion rate of the universe, and doesn't count such issues as luminosity or technical capability of telescopes, I think. That is not infinite, as there is a maximum distance within which observation is possible given perfect ability to observe.

    But, the size of the universe is known to be hugely larger than the portion which is observable. And, I think that is more than just theoretical, as the fact of the expansion of our universe means that objects within the observable range are moving into the portion of the universe that is not observable.

    I think the question being asked doesn't have to do with what is observable.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  14. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If you cannot observe ... how can you determine? Einstein said that the Moon is there, even if you don't observe it. Sure, but to determine where the Moon is ... you need at least one observation from which to start [than, applying gravity laws you can calculate where the Moon is now].

    It's like to wonder what is happening beyond the event horizon of a black hole.
    We know ... but we cannot observe. So we cannot determine. We do what we can do with the Moon: we start from the last observations to guess what's going on beyond the "observable horizon" of the universe [from our perspective].

    I'm not satisfied with this: we need to find a way to observe.
     
  15. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Would you agree that we do have serious evidence that matter leaves our observable universe?

    With black holes, there certainly are a lot of questions about what happens to matter that sinks in beyond the event horizon. But, we do know it goes there.

    I'm only claiming that matter does leave our observable universe. I'm not suggesting how much has left or what it does after becoming beyond our possibility of observation.

    I would presume, however, that leaving our observable region does not mean the laws of physics are any different. After all, the observable universe demarks an extent from the obserever, and the observer could be anywhere in the universe. This is different than with black holes, as our physics breaks down at some point within black holes. Also, a black hole has nothing to do with the location from which it is observed. If I fly to some other star, the observable universe to me will have changed, as it is relative to me. My flight to another star system can't be responsible for any change in physics that occurs outside of the observable part of our universe. That is, surely physics doesn't depend on the location of the observer - changing based on my personal rocket ship flight schedule. After all, what if there were more than one of us astronauts?

    So, I believe that physics is the same outside of our observable universe.

    If there are differences in physical laws in our universe, they aren't dependant on the location of the observer - they would have to be dependant on some other factor. Physics doesn't care where we are.

    I would argue that the matter that has departed our ability to observe (from where we sit) is still part of the universe. It's just not observable to us (from where we sit).
     
  16. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The answer is 42.
     
  17. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Perhaps the most important constant in physics!!
     
  18. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Of course!
    [​IMG]
     
    WillReadmore likes this.
  19. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Actually I was reconnecting the discussion to the initial question.
    The end point ...

    The universe is expanding "faster" than the speed of light [from a geometrical perspective this is true, but the system of reference hasn't got a physical velocity, it's a geometrical expansion]. Physical laws are the same everywhere [also beyond the observable horizon] and we could even know something about what's beyond: in an ideal experiment we could find a particle entlanged with an other one beyond the observable horizon. The quantum status of the two particles is a whole, they are not independent ... [with good peace of local realism].

    If the expansion is uncertain as for its own nature, and the geometry of the space time has got no end ... how could we find an and?
     
    WillReadmore likes this.
  20. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,773
    Likes Received:
    14,565
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It means even less that it is infinite.

    No the scientific method makes observations and measurements. Then it attempts to explain them. Finally it proves or disproves them. You cannot develop an explanation for something that has never been seen.

    I don't see where you have identified the lack of any boundaries.

    I have no idea what the end of time is. Neither does the scientific community.

    The problem with theories is that they are not proven. They are a fairly early process in the scientific method. I can't answer your questions any better than a cosmologist could. There are only theories and opinions about them.
     
  21. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes. But, as I understand it you are stating that the universe is finite. And, you aren't giving measurement or evidence.

    My suggestions were only made to suggest that the universe MIGH be infinite in some way. I made more than one suggestion and I don't claim that any one of those is known to be true, nor am I suggesting that there aren't other ways in which the universe might be infinite.

    So, yes. To the best of my knowledge, more work is required.
    The point with boundaries is that if he univeres is expanding (which is well accepted, I think), what would ever cause it to stop?

    It sees strange to me that time is an integral part of our space/time and time is infinite, but space/time is not infinite.
    OK, there is theoretical physics and experimental physics.

    In experimental physics, one starts with testing hypotheses. A theory is formed of one or more hypothesis that survive significant testing and reiew and are found to be useful in further exploration (roughly seaking). In this case, a theory is the closest approach to truth that science can create.

    In theoretial physics, physicists create mathmatical models that extend known physics into realms that can not be tested. The hope is tha it will lead exerimentalists to new areas that are testale. So, "string theory", "multiverse", etc. are theories of theoretical physics and for which it is unknown how one could possible test against the real world.

    In theoretical physics and in day to day conversation anyone can create a theory. In experimental sciences, not so much.
     
  22. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,773
    Likes Received:
    14,565
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The accepted estimates are that the universe is about 13.7 billion years old and about 95 billion light years in diameter. You could have found that yourself without any trouble.

    Your suggestions go against scientific thinking. You say the universe could be infinite. The better response would be that the universe is probably not infinite since no evidence of its infinity is available while evidence that it is finite is readily available.

    I'm sure the cosmologists will be surprised at that statement. ;)

    Another mystery. It could be gravity or entropy or even fusing with another universe or who knows?. Your guess is as good as mine.

    Einstein's theories are well accepted by physicists but they are still theories after all. If you can prove Einstein wrong and prove that space-time is infinite you will win a Nobel prize.

    You seem to be having a tough time with the concept of mystery.

    Any one can offer up a hypothesis based on physical thinking or models but it would require other scientists to exercise support for it even to become a theory. You may want to consider that many of Einstein's theories have been tested and have passed the tests. Yet they are still theories. Any cosmologist will tell you that there are more mysteries than certainties in what they do.
     
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2021
  23. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's the size of the observable universe. The rest of the universe is known to be hugely larger than that, and possibly infinite.
    YES! There is also no evidene that it is NOT infinite. And (probably more importantly,) experts don't agree on a statement concerning whether the universe is infinite or finite. So, again I'll continue to claim that there isn't agreement on the size of the universe.
    Yes, in science (experimental science, scientific method) anyone can propose a hypothesis. However, a hyothesis must be able to be tested - proven false if it is indeed false. So, there are no hypotheses concerning string theory, or anything related to god in any way, etc.

    Einstein's theory was not a theory until it had been tested. That required waiting several years for a total solar eclipse that would allow the bending of light to be measured.

    Theory is the very best "truth" that scientific method can possibly produce. Also, theories need to have usefulness in furthering the study of the natural world. So, of course Einsteins theories are theories. And, all theories are available to be falsified or preempted by new theories that have more global application in some way.

    Again, this is quite unlike what is meant by "theory" in theoretical physics (where testing against the real world isn't even possible) or in popular culture where anyone may call any idea they have a "theory".
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  24. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,773
    Likes Received:
    14,565
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm tired of running in circles with you. Best of luck
     
  25. politicalcenter

    politicalcenter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    11,101
    Likes Received:
    6,787
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Einstein showing that gravity bends light has nothing to do with the size of the universe. It is very, very, big. But can't you guys figure how big by how long since expansion started?
     

Share This Page