Horizon-To infinty and beyond

[metalmonkey]

Did anyone else watch this?

I though it was awesome:cool: Now I'm not much good at maths, but it does make you think...

The way an infinite number, then releates to the universe. So from watching the program, it is belived that the universe is infinate, however if that is the case they any possiable outcome, would happen-also maybe the impossiable.

So that would mean, there would be an infinate number of all us out there, but we could never meet that copy of ourselves. So a copy of me somewhere may well be good math!

I find the whole very interesting, is anyone fansinated by this? I always came unstuck to trying understand it in maths though, theromdyamics was a head f*** for me.

[SoulKiss]

So a copy of me somewhere may well be good math!

Chances of one being good at English are slim tho :) :D

[Woz]

One question that fascinates me is:

If the universe is infinite but, as scientists claim, constantly expanding... what is it expanding into?

[metalmonkey]

Chances of one being good at English are slim tho :) :D

Dude we have time to find out...but you will never that me.

[metalmonkey]

One question that fascinates me is:

If the universe is infinite but, as scientists claim, constantly expanding... what is it expanding into?

What do you think it will expand into? Why does it have to expand into anything? Is there anything to saying, that the multi-univerese will expand at the same rate, what would happen if they didn't?

[Alpinestarhero]

One question that fascinates me is:

If the universe is infinite but, as scientists claim, constantly expanding... what is it expanding into?

infinity

:reaper:

I watched the programme aswell, and found it very intresting but, much like quantum mechanics, a bit of a head-f***. I enjoyed the concept of "one graham". The last digit...is 7!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham's_number

:lol:

[the_lone_wolf]

One question that fascinates me is:

If the universe is infinite but, as scientists claim, constantly expanding... what is it expanding into?I don't think current understanding says the universe is infinite is it?

Either way it's not expanding into anything, you can't think of it as a balloon being inflated

Everything is contained within the bounds of the universe

There is no "outside" because everything that is is within the universe

Hope that makes sense:smt101

[Alpinestarhero]

I don't think current understanding says the universe is infinite is it?

Either way it's not expanding into anything, you can't think of it as a balloon being inflated

Everything is contained within the bounds of the universe

There is no "outside" because everything that is is within the universe

Hope that makes sense:smt101

Nope :D I don't think anyone can understand it, you just have to accept the concept

[edit] expanding into time?

[the_lone_wolf]

[edit] expanding into time?Hmm, not really possible

The problem comes when people "draw" the universe from the outside, like you're looking at a balloon - it gives the impression that you could somehow exist outside when in reality the universe is it, everything, there is nothing "outside" because there is no outside...

Saying the universe has to exist within another container because that container is infinite is flawed, infinite isn't a measurable distance or calculatable number, it's the concept to explain what happens when you end up dividing by zero, at best mathematics can only explain what happens as you tend to infinity, the point at which you hit zero is still a messy byproduct of our flawed mathematics system...

[sinbad]

I think the idea that it could be viewed from outside stems from the way the big-bang is described as the creation of "The Universe". If it is actually the creation of all the debris we call galaxies within the universe then that is different, and the universe existed before the big-bang and is of course far bigger than the furthest reaches of the explosion.

If that's true, and this infinity theory is apt, then is it not also possible that there are infinite big bangs creating infinite numbers of what we call "The Universe" throughout the much larger actual Universe?

[the_lone_wolf]

I think the idea that it could be viewed from outside stems from the way the big-bang is described as the creation of "The Universe". If it is actually the creation of all the debris we call galaxies within the universe then that is different, and the universe existed before the big-bang and is of course far bigger than the furthest reaches of the explosion.

I don't think that's how it's currently understood, the Big Bang wasn't just an explosion within the confines of a pre-existing container

The Big Bang is the point at which all the energy in the Universe was contained in a zero volume, and then expanded - that's about as much as we can say, but as before, when you're dealing with zeros the maths to explain exactly what's occurring in the physical system doesn't exist yet, and it becomes a singularity

[Sudoxe]

I don't think that's how it's currently understood, the Big Bang wasn't just an explosion within the confines of a pre-existing container


What if infinity is us filling a pre-existing contaier like a Bonsai Kitten (http://www.ding.net/bonsaikitten/)eventually it'll fill the container and the collapose in on it's self, i.e. Stephen Hawkins prediciton of the big cruch ?

[sinbad]

I don't think that's how it's currently understood, the Big Bang wasn't just an explosion within the confines of a pre-existing container


I'm not saying it was, but if you watch documentaries on it they'll all say how "The Universe" was created, how out of nothing came this point and from that everything we know was flung outwards. The big bang theory offers no explanation of how and why or what came before. It's just "the start", so if absolutely nothing existed before, then why should the void we call space even be there?

I should add that I don't believe that to be true, just playing devil's advocate on the "expansion into what?" argument.

[sinbad]

What if infinity is us filling a pre-existing contaier like a Bonsai Kitten (http://www.ding.net/bonsaikitten/)eventually it'll fill the container and the collapose in on it's self, i.e. Stephen Hawkins prediciton of the big cruch ?

I watched a program recently which suggested that expansion is not and will not decelerate, all the stars will die and the universe will be a lifeless mass of blackholes. How bleak.

[the_lone_wolf]

The big bang theory offers no explanation of how and why or what came before.

But it isn't supposed to, it's a theory that offers an explanation as to how the Universe came into existence that is consistent with the observed evidence so far - the "why" is a philosophical question and what came before is beyond the scope of the physical laws that govern "our" universe

The other question is why does anything need to come before? Quantum fluctuations allow for violations of energy and momentum conservation, the universe may just be the biggest damn quantum fluctuation you ever saw, and it billions of years it'll cancel itself out and return the borrowed energy back to the void

Not picking at your arguments at all mate, at the end of the day "I dunno" is as valid explanation as pretty much anything, we're getting away from proper science and entering the wooly world of philosophy...

[the_lone_wolf]

I watched a program recently which suggested that expansion is not and will not decelerate, all the stars will die and the universe will be a lifeless mass of blackholes. How bleak.

Thermodynamics means that the trend will be towards a uniform distribution of energy, so no cold space and incredibly hot stars, just a uniformly dense distribution of matter with uniformly distributed energy and nothing standing out as being at all different from the blandness surrounding it


Bit like Milton Keynes

[metalmonkey]

But how could it al go to nothing? As in no energy as it can neither be created or destroyed. To make a black a hole, a star has to go supernova then the collaspe on its self due to gravity.

Also we don't understand what balck holes are either, this is a theory of white holes in which matter/enegery comes out of. Also could they not form worm holes? If that is the case, then its just a matter getting out alive...

The other thing is mult-universe theory, that quatam mechines allows for this to be possiable, so if there are multi-universes that co-exist all at the same time would that occour within the one universe, that we just can't prove they are there?

Also if the speed of light isn't constant, how it would it be possiable to have intersella travel, not to mention the power requierments and the changes is mass and way space time passes.

[the_lone_wolf]

But how could it al go to nothing? As in no energy as it can neither be created or destroyed.
Quantum vacuum fluctuations violate conservation of energy, see Hawking radiation for an observed example

Also we don't understand what balck holes are either...
We know exactly what black holes are, we just don't have mathematics that can describe the physical situation at the singularity where the density tends towards infinity

Also if the speed of light isn't constant...
The speed of light in a vacuum is constant, not only that, it's constant for all observers in different inertial frames of reference, that's one of the basic tenets of relativity and is one of the biggest scientific realisations of all time:cool:

[metalmonkey]

Quantum vacuum fluctuations violate conservation of energy, see Hawking radiation for an observed example

I have a look at that, thx.


We know exactly what black holes are, we just don't have mathematics that can describe the physical situation at the singularity where the density tends towards infinity


The speed of light in a vacuum is constant, not only that, it's constant for all observers in different inertial frames of reference, that's one of the basic tenets of relativity and is one of the biggest scientific realisations of all time:cool:

It appears what I read was the wrong thing! So if you at point A me Point B same distance from each other and a star, the light should reach us both at the same time?

[the_lone_wolf]

It appears what I read was the wrong thing! So if you at point A me Point B same distance from each other and a star, the light should reach us both at the same time?

I said the speed of light was the same for all inertial frames of reference...;)


Without knowing more on the velocities of you, me and the star would be impossible to say

If you want to bend your head go look through the wikipedia entry on relativity;)

[sinbad]

Not picking at your arguments at all mate, at the end of the day "I dunno" is as valid explanation as pretty much anything, we're getting away from proper science and entering the wooly world of philosophy...

Not my arguments, and to be fair I never said the Big Bang Theory should explain anything that preceded it. I was simply suggesting why it would be easy to believe that, if you take The Universe as everything including the void we call space, then its creation must have occurred within something else, or perhaps be some kind of divine act. Again, not my beliefs, or even theories.

[yorkie_chris]

One question that fascinates me is:

If the universe is infinite but, as scientists claim, constantly expanding... what is it expanding into?

It is not, the further away from the epicenter of the big bang something is, the faster it is moving away, so at some point it is expanding at the speed of light, obviously it can't expand faster, so there is the edge...

[the_lone_wolf]

I was simply suggesting why it would be easy to believe that, if you take The Universe as everything including the void we call space, then its creation must have occurred within something else

It's easy to think that way because our minds have trouble processing something like the universe existing with nothing "outside" - no void, no space, not even "nothing" - Everything that is is in the Universe, by definition:smt101:D

[yorkie_chris]

Quantum physics will always be difficult for a brain designed to remember where the best bananas are.

Is in someones sig here lol

[the_lone_wolf]

Quantum physics will always be difficult for a brain designed to remember where the best bananas are.

Is in someones sig here lol

Oh god I laughed:smt037

Not seen that before

:smt043

[tj2]

42 :reaper:







:D

[beabert]

It is not, the further away from the epicenter of the big bang something is, the faster it is moving away, so at some point it is expanding at the speed of light, obviously it can't expand faster, so there is the edge...

There is no epicenter, everwhere and nowhere is the center of the big bang, the matter doesnt expand int space, space is also expanding.

The expansion is speeding up, light is like a bloke on a conveyor belt, as the belt gets faster he will be pulled away even if he is running towards us, so we see less and less as everything disapears over the visible horizon.