It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The end of universe

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2005 @ 05:02 PM
link   
I just got in on the tail end of this discussion but hope you all will not mind me putting in my two cents worth; such as it is. Let me preface everything by stating that I am not an astronomer or astrophysicist and all of my views are just that: views and opinions; I make no pretense of having all the answers, never the less, here's what I think:

When the universe began(at least this time around)everything, all matter
was compresssed into a space so small that the density of that mass is beyond all current mathematical measurement. At some point in the past,
approximately five to ten billion years ago that matter reached critical mass and exploded, propelling everything in all directions. Eventually all of that matter became stars and galaxies etc and continued to expand and are still expanding and may continue to expand forever.

There is no edge to the known universe; space is curved so that if you travel far enough you end up back where you begin; this of course would take eons at the speed of light but there you are. There is also no difference in the density of one galaxy from another or from the center of the known universe to the end or edge(if you posit an edge).

Any astronomer or astrophysisist who is being honest will tell you that they don't know whether the universe will stop expanding and if it does
whether it will stay in that position or whether it will start to contract
back to where it began. But I don't think any of us need to worry about it.
We and our great grandchildren will be dust before we know the answers to the universe.

Here is a very helpfull link for any of you who are interested and explains
in more detail some of what I've posted here:

www.ncsu.edu...

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the subject for what there worth.






posted on May, 23 2005 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by lightseeker
There is no edge to the known universe; space is curved so that if you travel far enough you end up back where you begin; this of course would take eons at the speed of light but there you are.


Not to nit-pick, but it would take less than a nanosecond.



The basic idea is right, although the specifics are sloppy. There is a growing belief, however, that the universe might be exactly the critical density ie it will expand and expand, eventually stopping at infinity.



posted on May, 23 2005 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
Humor, darling, humor.



Sorry I really though that you were serious about that, he, he,


Well another theory that will fill the view of the universe and the possibility of a beginning of the end.

The way the universe move cannot be measure by our own methods, bringing the fact that if we are not moving with the expansion, we are the center, while everything else expands in all directions around us.

We have been though to think linearly because our brains understand that way of thinking better, so when I picture the universe expanding I picture as a time line.

Now we have theory that brings the fact that time travel can be possible because as the universe expands we are the future of the galaxies that were born before us but already the past of the ones that are being created.

Taking that in consideration we are living the future, the present and the past in that order.

So is all in one, perhaps making time travel possible if the theory was true.

Now I agree with the poster that pointed out that maybe at the end of our universe if we have one and is not expanding we may have the beginning of another dimension or universe.

That also as a theory can be truth.

When it comes to understanding our place in space, it can go any way.

Sorry if I am ranting here but I am trying to make sense of everything in my own way



posted on May, 24 2005 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Not to nit-pick, but it would take less than a nanosecond.


Please explain your thoughts here; how can you travel to the end of the universe and arrive back to where you began in less than a a nosecond?


The basic idea is right, although the specifics are sloppy. There is a growing belief, however, that the universe might be exactly the critical density ie it will expand and expand, eventually stopping at infinity.


Well, I did preface my remarks with the caviat that I am not a professional and my comments were not meant for publication in a scientific journal



posted on May, 24 2005 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by lightseeker
Please explain your thoughts here; how can you travel to the end of the universe and arrive back to where you began in less than a a nosecond?


You mentioned moving at the speed of light. Well, in light's reference frame, the time it takes to travel to any distance anywhere is 0. It takes no time. In the reference frame of c, everything happening is one, single event.

I told you it was nit-picking.



posted on May, 24 2005 @ 08:01 PM
link   
Some of you are saying that space towards the end of the universe becomes thick or even thinner? How? I've always thought of space as x and y, not a tangible and touchable sustence. Space in our universe must end at some point in time, unless you believe that at some point there will be a chance that a photon traveling unimpeded will eventually continue to travel until...it reaches nothing and or hits apoint where the big bang has not yet conquered.



posted on May, 24 2005 @ 08:09 PM
link   
I don't think the universe has an end, space expands and as said before, it expands faster than light. So space continues to expand. It's not filling up room, think of it as "making room."



posted on May, 24 2005 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frosty
Space in our universe must end at some point in time, unless you believe that at some point there will be a chance that a photon traveling unimpeded will eventually continue to travel until...it reaches nothing and or hits apoint where the big bang has not yet conquered.


Oh, really?

external image

The Mobius strip. Doesn't end (ignoring the edges). Space could be twisted, could be a donut-shape, then there's really no end.

The really good analogy is, as always, the balloon. The universe is the entire surface of the balloon. Where's the end? Where's the center?

(hint: ain't got one)



posted on May, 25 2005 @ 04:39 PM
link   
Actually Amory I was talking about the time it would take subjectively; I sure have no wish to take that long strange trip!


If you look at the time spent from the view point of the one waiting for the answer to the big ? it would take eons; but what's a few milennia(sp) between friends, right?



posted on May, 25 2005 @ 06:18 PM
link   
www.astronomycafe.net...


10^10^26 All iron nuclei collapse into black holes


According to this everything will be sucked into a huge black hole.



posted on May, 25 2005 @ 09:02 PM
link   
Amory, is that version compatable with the Big Bang?


jhh

posted on May, 25 2005 @ 10:23 PM
link   
Isn't the theory as the universe expands, everything gets pulled apart to the point electrons, etc no longer exist.



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 07:46 AM
link   
I picture space via the big bang like a drop of dish soap in greasy water.
The drop instantly expands to the edge of the sink.
In a large enough pool, the drop would only expand so far, and beyond it there would be the original state of things.

So this universe and everything in it would be in the dish soap part, and beyond that we would not be able to survive. Naturally this is based on two physical conditions and is flawed because of that.

The Big bang is considered a fininte dot that exploded. If it was forever expanding then there would still be a torrent coming from the center of the universe.
I believe the theory goes on to say that eventually everything will collaps on itself.

The original condition would be void...emptyness...nothingness.
Space would be dark matter. The base for all else. The platform on which the stars and planets exist.

So if we could get to the edge, and tried to go past it, it would be like fish trying to get out of the edge of the ocean. (another flawed analogy. Im full of em)



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by jake1997
So if we could get to the edge,...


If you're standing on the ground and not levitating, you're there.



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by jake1997
Amory, is that version compatable with the Big Bang?


The balloon? Yes, completely. It's the best way to portray a lot of the properties of space, most of em actually, except for 11 dimensions.


Plumbo: What?!



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
Plumbo: What?!


If you trace back to my past posts, you'll eventually get to where I'm coming from....that is, if you care to bother.

God Bless You too, buddy.



posted on May, 27 2005 @ 02:12 AM
link   
i say the universe is finite but with no boundries...



posted on May, 27 2005 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
The really good analogy is, as always, the balloon. The universe is the entire surface of the balloon. Where's the end? Where's the center?
(hint: ain't got one)


Well I differ. It's got a center.

But you're right 'bout the balloon analogy, this is how we are held to the ground, i.e. eliminating fictitious gravity. Uneven distribution of air pressure keeps heavier objects to the inner surface. The center is relatively low compared to the inside edge, kinda like sufrace tension inreverse.

Our Inverted Universe


So the Edge is the ground beneath us.



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Plumbo
Well I differ. It's got a center.


Where? From every vantage point in the universe, the rest of the universe is moving away from it. With the balloon, this correlates to being blown up. At t=0, it's nothing. That's the center. But when it gets blown up, it grows out. The surface of the balloon is space. The "center" is in the middle of the balloon, NOT on the surface - it doesn't exist.


But you're right 'bout the balloon analogy, this is how we are held to the ground, i.e. eliminating fictitious gravity. Uneven distribution of air pressure keeps heavier objects to the inner surface. The center is relatively low compared to the inside edge, kinda like sufrace tension inreverse.


WHAT are you talking about? You've got a geocentric model here, totally unexplained (wonder why?) as well as a nonsensical post. Please either clearly state what you're trying to say, or find another way to say it.

[edit on 5/28/2005 by Amorymeltzer]



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 11:13 AM
link   


wow

I have to state for the record right now, for all of you who are not religious in nature,
This crazy cartoon you are witnessing is in no way supported by the christian bible , nor even is it heard of in christian theory.
It is so far outside the bible that it may as well be evolution



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join