It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


does the universe have boundries???

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 18 2004 @ 09:00 PM
knightmare (canada girls do kick ass)
ok i think it has an end because if the big bang were true then as it expands it creates more space but when it runs out of space where does it go so it has to stop somewhere...also i am avoding the whole theological aspect on this because i think the answer is theological but i want scientific reasons:

posted on Jan, 18 2004 @ 11:26 PM
Russian, my fellow soviet comrad, gave the best answer!

nobody knows! those scientists are HUMAN! maybe they are more clever than you and me(no actually it's only you) but they cannot know it! there is absolutely NO WAY they can know it, nor they know how old is our universe or planet and how did it all start, the big bang is like peter pan, a tale!

everything has an end! but when try to think about universe i can't can't imagine!

maybe our universe is the smallest part of some other universe or human in the universe who in return is something small of something other

the only thing is just to let it go, there is no way, absolutely no way! somebody can give the correct answer, someday yea, don't even think that we won't get an answer, but that is not happening anytime soon, and like once the world's smartest scientists believed the world was flat, someday little children will laugh at our's saying the universe was football shaped

posted on Jan, 18 2004 @ 11:44 PM
you know what's the most interesting? the structure! atoms, molecules

posted on Jan, 19 2004 @ 12:23 AM

Originally posted by CyberGhost
nobody knows! those scientists are HUMAN! maybe they are more clever than you and me(no actually it's only you) but they cannot know it! there is absolutely NO WAY they can know it, nor they know how old is our universe or planet and how did it all start, the big bang is like peter pan, a tale!

There no way to be absolutely sure, but when all the evidence points in the direction of one theory I think the theory is worth considering. The age of the universe can be determined with at least 3 different techniques.

posted on Jan, 27 2004 @ 08:03 AM
infinity is just a word to confuse us. if somthing has no beggining and therefore no end, then it doesnt exist. if it had no beggining in the first place then it wouldnt have been created. therefore the universe it finite because it has a begginning and therefore a end. it may be infinite in a matter of speaking. if it is expanding (generaly explained by many theories including the interestig string theory i think) then it is like someone or a computer listing down all the numbers in both directions -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 it is only as big as it is at the exact moment you decide to measure it, but by that time is has passed and ur info is invalid. 0 could be the center of the universe just as much as -523,534,363 could be because it is infinitely spreading in each direction. but everything is there in frames kinda like a movie. everthing is measured in say point blank units the smallest there is. so take any one of these and the universe would be finite at that given point. but infinite in the space time level. technically there is no one point in the universe. every point in the universe is its exact center, saying this because everything was once squashed down into one single entity. if thats so then time doesnt exist outside the universe. so time is reliant on gravity and gravity is reliant on mass so photons dont pass anytime at all, thats how they travel at light speed, because no mass = no gravity = no time.

ps. i am just a 14 yr old and probably most of what i said will be considered absolute garbage to most people.

posted on Jan, 27 2004 @ 12:14 PM
well apparently the universe does have boundaries, thats if you mean looking out into space and wondering how long it goes on for

its called the 'red shift'

saw it on a TV program about space im sure googling it will come up with lots of answers

posted on Jan, 27 2004 @ 02:22 PM
How about this for an interesting theory. Personally I find it just as possible when playing around with "Infinity/Nothingness" theories and quantum/cosmic ideas.

The universe evolves to zero, the body of all states, in reference to the present, moves from the future to the past. Although zero has not previously played a major role in cosmological theories, it is commonly known that absolute zero is a boundary in physics and for the future of an expanding and cooling universe.

In the past there is a place where the universe would condense into a singularity, a point of unimaginable density, which many scientists consider to be the most ordered state possible in nature. Sometimes referred to as the Alpha State, this initial state of the universe is also a boundary in the realm of possible universes.

If we imagine both the alpha state and the omega state existing timelessly, we can imagine them like the front and back cover of a book, a book of all times, which tells the story of the universe. We can also imagine alpha and omega like the north pole and south pole of reality. Together alpha and omega are boundaries that we can visualize when we imagine all possibilities.

So in terms of "Basic" theory, let us use an example starting with a singularity in the Alpha state.
A Singularity with Infinite Mass and at this point niether Size or Space/Time matters or at best is Relative and just an abstract unmeasurable concept. Now lets Fast Forward through Time starting with a "Big Bang" or Exploding "White Cone" of Light Wave Energy which Expands, including colapsing Probability Waves into Particals and Matter. As it goes from the most ordered state of 1 to a chaotic variety of choices and now allows for some kind of measurement of size and boundary where "Empty Space" equals "Expanding Cosmic Radiation and Matter" with symmetcrical boundless flux in opposing harmony.

Now, let's reverse it and for the sake of this example let's continue past the Singularity in terms of imagining the same process above, just in the opposite direction or opposite charge in a sense. Once again from the point of the Singularity it's all the same expanding, colapsing waves etc. Now, while we are in reverse, relatively speaking, try and see how when given Control and Freedom to manipulate Relative Time/Space properties, the perspective of "singularity into expanding Universe" can also be seen as (expanded universe into singularity). As the waves flatten out and approach absolute zero cold space on both sides opposite the singularity. Also in terms of Time, you can see it as the Past(Ordered/Singular) expanding out to future(chaotic, Many) then eventually approaching (ordered, Singular) once again.

Since it's all Relative states of Energy and measurable only in comparison to itsef, simply put the ends together. In other words, Infinite Opposites of Time/Space/etc. at all points. Sing. to Universe to Sing. forever. A perceptable Begining and End(Alpha to Omega) yet still cycled at it's extremes making either start or end just as relative as Infinitely cyclic." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

I hope I explained that ok. Atleast well enough so most can patch in the rough spots with their theory of choice or whatever. I'm posting it as is for now anyway.


posted on Feb, 4 2004 @ 11:21 AM
wow thats an interestin way of putting it and it makes sence but i wonder if it does end/begin at one point do u think that that point would be the center of the universe or would it be the beggining of the universe??

posted on Feb, 4 2004 @ 01:05 PM

Originally posted by chimpchimp
wow thats an interestin way of putting it and it makes sence but i wonder if it does end/begin at one point do u think that that point would be the center of the universe or would it be the beggining of the universe??

Well, that is where it gets really fun. Or should I say fun for anyone who isn't being pressured for some concrete answer with full proof, verifiable evidence.

Take your question for example, "Is the Singularity at the Universal Center or Universal Begining?" First of all we need to be clear on what it is we're looking for, "Center" would be a measurement of Spacial Area & Distance. So in 3D I suppose we could make "Center of Space" x=0 y=0 z=0. From there, movement on any 1 or more axis would therefore be a specific measurement from our "Center".

But where is the Actual Center? Everywhere. Or perhaps I should say, Anywhere when comparing that chosen spot to Everywhere else. In other words, to have an Actual Center, you must also have Edges from which that Center is Equally Spaced. We have neither Universal Edges nor a Universal Center because everything is apparently moving away from everything else. It is all a matter of Relativity. Imagine a Sphere that has an undetermined size. How then would you find the center? Once again we are stuck with a paradox of infinities. How do you find the Center of a Hole if the Edges of the Hole can not be found?

Now let's move to a "Universal Begining". "Begining" is a measurement of Time. When considering Space-Time as being linked in Relativity Physics, we once again have the similar type of problem which is presented above.

Now consider what this could mean, or how many screwy ways we can twist our minds in knots with possible Theoretical ideas.

New Theory: Universe Born in a Black Hole
By Robert Roy Britt
Senior Science Writer
posted: 09:45 am ET
17 September 2003

If black holes and the Big Bang befuddle you, try wrapping your brain around this one: The entire universe may have been created in an explosion inside a black hole. The standard model holds that the universe began about 13.7 billion years ago. The Big Bang is described not as an explosion so much as a rapid outflow of material from a point of nearly infinite density. In the proposed modification to the standard model, the Big Bang is an actual explosion, Temple explained today in a statement, and it occurs within a black hole in an existing space. The shock wave of the explosion is expanding into an infinite space. Temple also describes the whole scenario as a white hole, the theoretical opposite of a black hole because it tosses matter outward instead of pulling it in.
Full Article here:

You may also want to check out another post dealing with this same idea here:

Harvard M.D.Challenges Big Bang Theory
By Erik Baard
Special to
posted: 04:13 pm ET
23 May 2000
Banging on the Big Bang

Hydrinos also play a central role in Mills' alternative theory to the Big Bang, which he dismisses as "an academic fiction."
He instead characterizes the universe as endlessly oscillating between matter and energy over thousand-billion-year cycles, with finite set points. At only 13 billion or so years into the current cycle, "We're just at the beginning. The universe doesn't get much smaller than this," he said.

The conversion of matter into energy is the engine of space-time expansion, he posits.
Albert Einstein and others have shown that a mass creates a dimple in space-time. As that mass burns itself out, throwing off energy, that dimple formed by gravity is smoothed, causing the universe to expand, Mills explained.
"Matter, energy and space-time are conserved. They're interchangeable," Mills said.

I'll stop there and allow you to soak that up and hopefully you'll also come upon a handfull of your own theories. Most likely those theories above, and your own included will start to expand into many other Cosmological, Theological and Philosophical Concepts which will begin to undo the fabric that once was a nice warm blanket of certainty in your life. My advice is to embrace it in a Buddhist/Taoist Way, realizing that

"To the mind that is still the whole universe surrenders" - Lao Tzu

"The no-mind not-thinks no-thoughts about no-things" - The Buddah

posted on Feb, 4 2004 @ 06:23 PM
I think it was a recent, 7 months?, Scientific American that had an article about boundaries and the nature of the universe. One of the more interesting points is that we live in a mulitverse and with a powerful enough telescope we could see ourselves in these parallel universes. Not to be confused with the quantum theory of parallel dimensions that can be as close as millimeters away from us but may as well be infinitely far away. Whose most interesting point is that the only things that can leave our dimension are gravitons.

posted on Feb, 4 2004 @ 06:46 PM
What does it matter? None of us will live long enough to know the truth anyway. It's fun to ponder but noone will ever have any concrete proof one way or another. The Big Bang is still a theory - just the mostly widely approved theory. Everything involving the universe is still just theory. The fact is, we don't know. We will never truly know, everything is hearsay. Maybe when we die we find out the truth, maybe we don't. But the fact is, we sure as hell don't remember it when we are reincarnated, if reincarnation truly exist. If you want the truth about the universe, just view it as one giant mass of living creatures. Stars are born, Stars appear to "die". After a star "dies" it might become something else. It may become a black hole, it may become a nebula for the creation of new stars, it may become a smaller star, it could become anything! All I know is that from that viewpoint, life does indeed go on after it's so called "death." Maybe nothing ever truly dies - it just evolves. I view the universe as an ever evolving living creature that can never truly die. It's resources will never become vanquished as most scientists will have you believe - they will never be able to know how vast this place really is. People want information so that it will make them feel all good inside, so, we turn to the scientist. Most scientist will make anything up to make a person feel comfortable and to make the scientist themselves feel comfortable - nobody likes to be told, "I don't know." Anyway's pondering is what makes us human. Still, take all information about the Universe with a grain of salt. Nothing is EVER concrete. I best be stopping now, I'm starting to become a rambler on ATS. But I have nothing better to do at the moment!

posted on Feb, 4 2004 @ 07:01 PM
There are no boundries to the univerese it jst keeps on growing and growing.

posted on Feb, 4 2004 @ 07:45 PM
ok heres an idea...

maybe the light from the big bang is the end of the universe. For instance, when all the matter in the universe was all in a point smaller then a period at the end of a sentance, it exploaded outward. The light from this would form the boundries because nothing can move faster then the speed of light (at least that we know of). so this expanding orb of light has traveled 13.whatever billion lightyears outward. this would compose the end of our universe that we will ever be able to know.

Also, if you believe that the big bang works in cycles, and that eventually all the matter in the universe comes back together only to have another big bang, it could be relevent. If we find that our universe has been around forever (i do mean infinity) then no, our universe would have no end, because time had no beggining, there for, once you reached the light from one big bang, you could proceed to the next an infinite amount of times.

If you think that there was a starting point to the big bangs, then the light traveling outward from this one would be the end.

Does this make sense to anyone else?
i'd like some feedback.

posted on Feb, 4 2004 @ 08:21 PM
Using the universal enthalpy rules (all things evolve to a more complex state and to lower energy) I would say that the universe is doing the same. When (if) the big bang occured the explosion would have happened simultaneosly, and since technically there was nothing( if such a thing can be imagined or possible) it would have expanded at an infinite speed and power which means the instant the big bang happened it was over and infinite was reached.

speed = distance/time. now substitute...

Such a thing contradicts itself something can't begin and end at the same time(if such a thing exists). If there is even a fraction of a smidgen of friction, than an object is slowed down to a stop over time. If there was friction when the universe was created and the expanding outer edges do stop, then space and gravity will experience a ripple as the slower parts catch up and experience a rebound effect similar in rubber bands and waves causing an rebound effect (hence the evidence the universe is expanding and shrinking).

If the universe does have boundaries, it surely would have collapsed by the time any sentient being could ever reach it.

posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 12:29 AM
Sorry - haven't had time to read all the posts since this a fairly long topic, so sorry if this has been said before - just my oppinion.

Many people cannot comprehend the universe being an inhumane size, such as infinite. I, however, cannot comprehend it being finite. The universe is everything. How can everything have a boundary? Also, scientists explain that the universe is expanding. Into what? The universe is everything, and then anything outside just isn't anything. So how can the universe expand into nothing? Dunno if any of you have read it, but it sounds kinda like the book Mr. Monday...

I just don't think that everything can expand into nothing since it is a plain and simple contradiction. Also, Newton explains that energy cannot be created or destroyed, and it therefore infinite. Where was the energy (or in what form) before the universe? The universe cannot have created energy, it needed it to be 'created', but the energy was not anywhere since there was nowhere for it to be.

I'm aware of the string theory, but I personally think that it is crap (no offense to anyone who believes it). I just don't think that there are 11 dimensions like that. I think that trying to comprehend another dimension is futile - kind of like trying to imagine what another sense would be like, or what an undiscovered colour would look like. You can't. We're limited to preceive what we understand and witness.

posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 04:11 AM
i can believe that the universe is expanding into nothingness quite easily. its simple. why cant it?? and oo by the way, every single theory/law EVER made would probably be rendered USELESS anywhere else than inside the universe. the universe does have boundaries, to keep it inclosed, because if it didnt have a physical boundarie of some sort, then matter is all just wanding pieces of nothing, still in a void.

I say this because the singularity as some say in the big bang theory, must have a boundary, otherwise it couldnt be infinitely dense.If it didnt have a boundary, then the infinite density would continue on for infinity, and the objects around us are sure not infinite density are they?

I also say this because that would mean that the vacuume that we know is actually the void.(my definition of vacuume and void/ void = nothing enclosed my nothing, vacuume = nothing enclosed my somthing.)

Im pretty sure that you wouldnt be able to travel outside the universe, and that u couldnt see outside the universe, because there would be no light for us to see would there? and if we did see some other universe out there then that would mean that the other universes and partially merged with ours so we can see them (nothing can trvel faster than the speed of light, but then again this might be absolutely useless outside the universe.)

Where did the original energy/matter come from in the beggining to ignite the start of the universe? i believe there is something other than energy / matter. possibly the higher dimensions(again string theory) have higher levels of stuff. (dimensions 2 me= not a universe but a level, much like energy levels that electrons take in a orbital as such.)

Possibly an event happened in one of the dimensions, that let 'unknown force'(thing thats neither matter or energy, its almost an equivilent of matter and energy to the other dimension(s), I mean u cant take a 3d object and put it on a 2d plane. its requires less to change the 3d object than to change the plane [ just like elements will rather lose an electron if it only has 1 valence electron]. ) slip through, a dimensional weave(its not physical just a kind of blocking thing e.g u cant turn a atom of hydrogen into an atom of uranium without adding to it in any way) and so instead of changing our entire 3d world(energy matter wise) it simply changed the 'unknown force' into a 3d thing which its equivilent would be matter and energy. since the other dimensions are of higher 'energy levels' as i explained earlier, it has great energy/mass and it then expanded, under the influence of the recent conversion to 3d(it now has a size to expand into, as it may have not in the previous dimension). and yeah thats my wack theory of the universe. Hu knows maybe alot of what i said is true!!! and it very well maybe false aswell!!

[Edited on 8-2-2004 by quiksilver]

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in