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.

 

Universe boundry - does make assumptions

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 15 2005 @ 06:41 PM
link   
ok so according to einstien we cant go faster than light, but assume for a moment we could.

it dosent really matter what speed past light, just that we can travel in a ship, faster than light. lets just assume for the sake of easyness that we have a ship that can go 1billion times the speed of light

now the universe has been expanding since the big bang 14+ billion years ago, so it has been travelling at the speed of light outwards/around for 14+ billion years.

if we were to point this ship in any direction, accelerate to 1billion times the speed of light, in 15 years we would have caught up with the orignial expanding space.

in the next year we would pass it, and go into what exactly? theres no space, and as 5th dimentional theroy is really only a theory at his stage....what would the people on this ship see? feel? obvioulsy they cant go outside of space it self but then in 15 they would have reached how far the universe has expanded..

thoughts, ideas, comments?




posted on Aug, 15 2005 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Think of space as being the surface of a balloon. You can go around and around, but you can't get off of it or reach the edge, as opposed to the inside of a balloon, where you could reach the edge. So there's really not an answer.



posted on Aug, 15 2005 @ 07:25 PM
link   
this topic has been disscussed many a time. do a quick search through the space exploration forum or use the search for "End of universe" or soemthing..

the simplest answer is no one knows. Science is at its best just best guesses.

Even astronomers don't know. Most believe that the univers has no definite shape and has no definite end just like you cant walk to space.... you would jsut walk in circles around the world.... space has no shape. and to even say it is expanding is a miss understaning we don't even know for sure that even is happening. That too is still theory. And the Big BAng it to is theory. In other words We dont know and all it is is.. Ahem best guesses.



posted on Aug, 15 2005 @ 07:27 PM
link   
Your assuming there is a limit to the size of the universe, and since the universe is thought to be infinately large, than there is no limit, so therefore, you would never reach the edge of the universe, you however might enter an area of the universe with very little matter, or perhaps a part of the universe that acts differently than the rest of it.



posted on Aug, 15 2005 @ 07:32 PM
link   
ShreddedIce YOU ARE 100% correct.

Space is a continual sphere (but the "surface" is also a complex multi directional wave that folds and bends). You can travel in any direction and if you travel long enough could return to your point of origin. As long as you can travel faster then the rate of expansion of the surface of the balloon.

So if the universe is expanding at the speed of light in every direction you would have to find a way to go faster then the speed of light just to overtake the amount of space the expanding universe is adding between you and your point of origin every second.

Its hard to explain but the entire universe is the same as an atom. And is the connected to every atom, meaning while an atom can appear to be finite in nature it is actually infinite in depth. Just as the universe is infinite in nature can also be finite in depth. Its just understanding that there is a grand unifying link between the two where "man" fails to understand what the universe really is.



[edit on 15-8-2005 by robertfenix]



posted on Aug, 15 2005 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShreddedIce
as opposed to the inside of a balloon, where you could reach the edge.


If the balloon is spherical, then the inside of the balloon would be as well. So where would the edge be?



posted on Aug, 15 2005 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid
If the balloon is spherical, then the inside of the balloon would be as well. So where would the edge be?


Well, I'm assuming that you can't wrap around the inside edge. Otherwise you're right, the analogy doesn't work.



posted on Aug, 15 2005 @ 08:02 PM
link   
Well I tend to see things in my own simplistic way. What I'd imagine there would be outside of the rapidly expanding universe is just more space. Except with nothing at all in it. No dark matter, no dust, no stars, no asteroids or rocks or photons or electrons or anything at all. Just more space with no positive or negative charge.

Afterall, what was the "Big Bang" if not the introduction of huge amounts of matter into what was previously just a vast nothing capable only of some potential outburst?

The universe which expands into the infinte emptiness brings a whole plethora of matter where before there was simply an absence of any matter at all. A vast black ether just waiting for something to come along and give it purpose, or the laws that govern all matter in the universe, if you prefer.



posted on Aug, 16 2005 @ 01:54 AM
link   
So the Universe basically has no edge or wall, and by definition the edge would just be where light has reached so far ?



posted on Aug, 16 2005 @ 10:43 PM
link   
Would a black hole be an edge in our universe.

Think outside the box, the edge of the universe is a point where gravity becomes infinite. A blackhole is an edge or better described -- an exit to some other state or place. Another universe which is storing matter for it big bang.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 05:23 AM
link   
Surely though the Universe can't go on forever. If it's still expanding, then surely it's expanding through something where there is room to expand. Like you're blowing a balloon up, you need room for it to expand, like a big room. Surely the universe will have an edge, but for now we just can't get our simple basic minds to comprehend such an idea.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 07:44 AM
link   
sub-atomic particles CAN travel much faster than the speed of light.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 11:34 AM
link   
Although current thought is that the universe is expanding, i dont think thats necessarily the case. What I mean is that since we havent viewed, only pondered about there being an edge to the universe maybe what we see is just stars and galaxys moving do to a number of things there attraction to one another or repulsion, other gravitational forces or the dark energy thats thought to exist. It really wouldnt make sense for the universe to be expanding per se, I mean for there to be anything i.e. me or you or this earth wouldnt it all have had to have always been, and no I dont mean my prior examples. Im just saying for anything to exist wouldnt the universe have to be infinite in both size and age. I am fully aware that what I am saying goes completely against the big bang theory, but what a crock theory it is when you think about it all. Ready to defend my thoughts.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 03:14 PM
link   
How can the Universe go on forever though? Surely it will have an edge with something outside, and is just REALLY big.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 03:32 PM
link   


Space is a continual sphere (but the "surface" is also a complex multi directional wave that folds and bends). You can travel in any direction and if you travel long enough could return to your point of origin. As long as you can travel faster then the rate of expansion of the surface of the balloon.

So if the universe is expanding at the speed of light in every direction you would have to find a way to go faster then the speed of light just to overtake the amount of space the expanding universe is adding between you and your point of origin every second.

Its hard to explain but the entire universe is the same as an atom. And is the connected to every atom, meaning while an atom can appear to be finite in nature it is actually infinite in depth. Just as the universe is infinite in nature can also be finite in depth. Its just understanding that there is a grand unifying link between the two where "man" fails to understand what the universe really is


Very well said...

As to the expanding Universe, I find it extremely arrogant that we feel we've seen the "edge" of the Universe. I'd wager we're dead wrong. Nature repeats it's form, from the atom, to the universe. One thing we see in this form, is various orbital shells. There are VAST differences (comparatively) between the nucleus and the electrons. Likewise, there are vast differences between the inner and outer planets.

So, what if our "edge" of the universe is simply the end of that "inner" ring...????



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 04:15 PM
link   


How can the Universe go on forever though?

It just can.




Surely it will have an edge with something outside, and is just REALLY big.

Why would it have one?
Why cant the universe be infinaely large?


I figure that thesely large place with a finite shape. if you were looking at it from the outside.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 07:25 PM
link   
I think people confuse the universe with what we can see or the known matter.

Our universe is supposedly expanding... that means the known galaxies, gas dust etc.. are expanding. Then you have space or emptyness or what ever our matter is expanding into.

I actually get breathless when I try to imagine (wrap my limited brain around) endless nothingness. Its a weird sensation that nothing else really causes me to feel.

If our big bang is real and that big bang created the matter we see, feel and live withen..that does not mean that there are not multitudes of other big bangs in the (endless univerese) with even more galaxies and matter that we cannot yet or ever detect.

The exisitance of infinate nothingness is as hard to prove or disprove as god is to prove or disprove. For now its just a feeling we get along with deductive reasoning, faith and chosen beleifs, that prove or disprove the exisitance of either.

Our entire univerese could be nothing more than the edge of a monolithic black hole in an even larger than expected universe of even greater proportion.

What we do know with fair certainty is that everything known came from and started with gas.

What caused that Gas? Big Bang? I think empty space itself makes the gas with some quantum process we have yet to discover however that is just wild guessing. I am not a believer in a big bang. I am however open to it if they can prove it.


We could just be the result of some larger being passing wind... haha



X


[edit on 17-8-2005 by Xeven]



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 07:31 AM
link   
I suppose this expanding universe does rely on the Big Bang, so really it might not even be true.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 07:43 AM
link   
All of these models, although intriguing, make allowances for the fact that our brains can only think in 3 spatial dimensions. This isn't due to lack of intelligence, and may just be a consequence of our brain size at this moment in evolution. Talking about things like the 3-d edge of what may be an 11-d object can make these ideas come to life, but at the end of the day, any conclusions you draw from your model will always be over-simplified due to the nature of the model you are using. Of course, mathematics provides a less visual way of describing these things, and we all know how clear those explanations are!



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xeven
...Our universe is supposedly expanding... that means the known galaxies, gas dust etc.. are expanding. Then you have space or emptyness or what ever our matter is expanding into.

I actually get breathless when I try to imagine (wrap my limited brain around) endless nothingness. Its a weird sensation that nothing else really causes me to feel...


Xeven,
Then you better prepare yourself for even more breathlessness, because as has been said many times here, there is no "space or emptyness or whatever" for the universe to expand into. That's right, the space and emptyness is what's doing the expanding. The matter we see is just going along for the ride.

Harte

[edit on 8/18/2005 by Harte]







 
0

log in

join