Poll: The universe.
- Thread starter clicketycrack
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'm going to use the cosmologist fall safe to explain that "dark matter". Which appears to effect every that ever happens in the universe (judging from new scientist articles) from gravity to the creation of life.clicketycrack said:
OT; An infinite universe that began at some time? Surely without a universe there is no time for it to begin at.
Personally I think its infinite, but if you go off one side yo come back like a game of pac-man (does that make it infinite or is it merely finite we just can't experience it). The idea of the big bang followed by a big crunch (rinse and repeat) is one I'd go for.
I think our universe was artificially manufactured by a much larger universe in which the inhabitants understand where they came from and what happens when they die, etc. We don't know any of that stuff because we're all living inside a snowglobe on some alien's shelf.
That was pretty funny :bTaerdin said:
But yeah, I really don't think much about people's theories. I'll wait until I die to learn the secrets of the universe. Note: I'm not a christian and I'm not talking about going to heaven and learning from god
How the hell should I know? It's not like I have any knowledge about the universe. And why would I bother with an opinion, when it would be an incredibly uninformed one anyway. It's not like said opinion would matter in any way, shape or form.
Indeed. Well, I have studied enough physics to know that what physicists say is well founded. These people hate every new idea that someone has, and if they accept one as even remotely plausible, it's defintely something worth listening to. My understanding of the current theory among physicists is that...Mollecht said:
* The universe is finite, but expanding indefinitely. The expansion can actually be observed, and that's why the Big Bang theory was first suggested. "Rewind" far enough, and the universe will be infinitely small.
* Time began with the Big Bang. The question "what was it like before the Big Bang?" is meaningless. There is no such thing as "before the Big Bang", at least as far as science is concerned. I'll grant you that this sounds pretty weird, but to someone with even a basic understanding of the theory of relativity, it is quite clear that time is a dimension. Remove the spatial dimensions, and you remove time as well. To draw an analogy: imagine a sheet of paper so thin that it actually has a thickness of zero. This paper can't have height or width either, because it won't exist. If it doesn't exist, how can it have age?
* The idea of a "Big Crunch" may not have been absolutely disproven, but it has pretty much been abandoned, since it was discovered that in fact, the universe is expanding at an ever-increasing rate.
* The "bouncing universe" theory still has some support, as the current universe's increasing rate of expansion says nothing about the history of any previous universe(-s). There are several problems with this theory, though. For one, it violates Newton's 2nd law of thermodynamics by decreasing entropy (or, in English, it restores order to a chaotic universe) without using up energy. Also, there's the problem with time not existing without space, which I already mentioned. According to the currently accepted theory, a Big Crunch would end time, so no Big Bang could follow. Nothing could happen *after* the end of time, just like nothing could happen *before* the beginning of it. So far, no one has been able to explain just how time would "carry through" from Crunch to Bang. And no, the explaination "it doesnt -- a new timeline begins" doesn't cut it, because if it's not the same timeline anymore, the whole theory becomes pointless (there wouldn't be anything *before* the Big Bang, as the "previous" universe existed in a different timeline).
Your belief is actually the one I think humans find the easiest to understand. That's why it's so common. The same goes for the "bouncing universe". People simply want it to be that way. Anything else boggles the mind. The idea of time having a beginning seems absurd, so the mind can't really accept it. I've studied enough physics and maths to understand that it makes sense *logically* -- but it still doesn't seem any less absurd to my puny human brain. We simply haven't evolved (or been created -- whatever floats your boat works in this case) in a reality where we need to understand such things. It makes perfect sense that we don't. It still sucks, though, because we're so curious that we just can't accept answers like "it's beyond our understanding".la-le-lu-li-lo said:
hmmm yea i guess im gonna go with infinite and expanding. who knows? it is mind boggling to think about tho.
If it was finite there isnt much we could do about it
If it was finite there isnt much we could do about it
to really get into detail on my view of the universe, one needs to get ( at least the basics) of M-theory
You know there are theories that hold that you can't qualify the universe like that because "time" didn't "exist" at the "beginning".
It's really hard for me to say. From a scientific perspective the universe needs to have a beginning state which implies that there was a specific point at which the whole thing began. If we go with the big-bang theory, then it can be surmised that since the universe is expanding at a finite rate over a finite period of time, then at the very least the portion of the universe populated by stuff is probably finite as well. What happens at the edge of this space where things exist? I can't say. Relativity would seem to imply (to me at any rate) that beyond this edge of matter and light, there is no existence so far as we can ascertain because space and time are interdependent rather than fixed and finite concepts. Of course, the implication is that this is still effectively infinite since one can further ascertain that any attempt to measure this would result in the expansion of said occupied space.
It all gets very confusing for me from a scientifc standpoint, but given that these are questions that have not been answered beyond vague theories I don't get too worked up about it.
It all gets very confusing for me from a scientifc standpoint, but given that these are questions that have not been answered beyond vague theories I don't get too worked up about it.
Other.
I think M theory has some really interesting ideas. For instance, what constitutes a 'universe'? Are you talking about the space-time that we live in and experience? Or can we talk meaningfully about the possibility of a meta-universe, in which other 'universes' exist?
For example, one universe could experience an event that would cause another 'universe' to be created, but this other universe would effectively be a closed space-time that is separate from its progenitor. Beings within the child universe would be unable to detect the progenitor and would probably derive a Big Bang cosmology, which would be a correct hypothesis but would be limited (naturally) to the evolution of their environs.
Within M theory, universes are confined 'branes' (like space-time membranes) that exist within a meta-universe. One idea is that collisions between these branes would generate enough energy to have powered the Big Bang that we observe as the 3K microwave background.
Definitely something to think about!
I think M theory has some really interesting ideas. For instance, what constitutes a 'universe'? Are you talking about the space-time that we live in and experience? Or can we talk meaningfully about the possibility of a meta-universe, in which other 'universes' exist?
For example, one universe could experience an event that would cause another 'universe' to be created, but this other universe would effectively be a closed space-time that is separate from its progenitor. Beings within the child universe would be unable to detect the progenitor and would probably derive a Big Bang cosmology, which would be a correct hypothesis but would be limited (naturally) to the evolution of their environs.
Within M theory, universes are confined 'branes' (like space-time membranes) that exist within a meta-universe. One idea is that collisions between these branes would generate enough energy to have powered the Big Bang that we observe as the 3K microwave background.
Definitely something to think about!
