Is our universe round?

Well....regardless of what we may think, I believe there's a misunderstanding....

As far as I can tell, when they say that "the universe is flat" what they really mean is that "space is flat" (3D) because "spacetime"(4D) simply cannot be flat unless the general theory of relativity(matter and energy curve spacetime) is WRONG.

(I 'gravitate' towards an everexpanding hypersphere)

A2D

As I understand it- there are no edges and no center to space. It makes sense that it would be round, but I think the problem with a round universe would be that it is a technically a 'closed universe', meaning eventual collapse in on itself. (Not fun)
The expanding sphere idea is interesting though. I don't think mankind can truly comprehend complexities of this nature, but I still want to try!

reply to post by Starcrossd


Problem is the concept of round 4D universe and generally flat 3D space....but you really have to zoom out and in and take it all in on different scales....If you look at the 3D universe on a cosmic-scale, then it's generally flat, but if you zoom in a bit on say...our specific solar system then it's relatively obvious that it ISN'T flat...(Check Gravity Probe B)

However, the curvatures created by matter and energy within the incomprehensible volume of space makes the overall "shape" of the Universe "flat" for lack of a better term....

So we have this: spacetime is curved and therefore space is also curved, but on the largest of large scales, space is flat because there simply isn't enough matter or energy to make it "appear" curved.....

I also would quickly like to add that any time I use the term "Universe", for all intents and purposes, it should be interpreted as our "observable" Universe....

A2D

Most major quantum physicists say the universe is a spherical bubble, I would agree, but you'll never see the edges, there's an infinity of space on all directions, and I doubt the source for the previous bubble will ever be found, God created this universe from another universe, that's one opinion.

reply to post by Agree2Disagree


Thanks for helping my mind around the indoctrinated perception of "Flat".

I also struggle with Time being considered as something, let alone it being tied with Space to make our perceptions of Time into something we can accept in our mind. I know we perceive things happening along a Timeline, but my perception is that Time does not exist without an Observer. I know, it sounds crazy.

And, I do think our observable 'universe' is a bubble, one of trillions in a sea of foam. And that when one bubble touched another they release energy in the form of a Big Bang, thus birthing a new and growing bubble-universe with it's own set of physics and rules.. if any have to apply.

reply to post by Oldie


Granted it's not easy to understand time and space as united but....maybe...

Just as an example, and probably a very poor one, but if you were going to specify "where" an object is....You could use latitude, longitude, height above sea level....that would be 3 dimensions of coordinates...but if you're telling me where your car is parked and I end up going there a week later, it's unlikely that your car is still going to be there....So time as a 4th dimension is absolutely necessary for an accurate description....

Granted, very poor example, but it's the best I can muster in layman's terms.....It helped me a lot when I realised that looking out into space didn't just mean I was looking into 3 dimensional space...but I was looking back in time as well....something just clicked at that moment....

A2D

Edit to add: it's not that time "does not exist" without an observer....but it is relative to the observer....

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder

The recent Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) measurements have led NASA to state, "We now know that the universe is flat with only a 0.4% margin of error."[1] Within the Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker (FLRW) model, the presently most popular shape of the Universe found to fit observational data according to cosmologists is the infinite flat model

en.wikipedia.org...

You know what I find funny about this is that the big bang was meant to speed off in all directions. I mean cmon! A huge explosion creates the universe. It should go out like a big explosive. But no... It basically is flat ahah

reply to post by DaRAGE


To fit into a generally accepted model....the big bang WOULD have exploded in all directions with enough mass and energy to warp spacetime enough that it would appear to be a sphere, although throughout the expansion process and still continuing, it would "flatten"....So it's not exactly "flat", nor do I think it ever really will be, but that's the general picture that is observable.

A2D

Originally posted by WesternIowaParanormal

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by WesternIowaParanormal

 

The recent Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) measurements have led NASA to state, "We now know that the universe is flat with only a 0.4% margin of error."[1] Within the Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker (FLRW) model, the presently most popular shape of the Universe found to fit observational data according to cosmologists is the infinite flat model

en.wikipedia.org...

Yes and not that long ago scientist where certain the earth was flat. Round seems to be the universal norm.

False. Flat earth was never a scientific theory. It was a religious one.

My theory is that yes, our universe is round but not self contained. I believe that it is possible that our universe was created within space from a single point and has expanded outwards in all directions. Other universes exist within the same space outside of the outer edge of our universe.

Imagine this... A universe starts as a single mass with a huge gravitational pull. it sucks in anything within range until it gets to it's critical mass and self ignites causing the mother of all explosions. The big bang! This single mass then expands outwards. Eventually, particles (galaxies) from this explosion reach a region of space where they are then influenced by other energy masses and drawn towards them. These energy masses exist throughout the infinite multiverse and continually explode and eventually interact with other universes in an infinite cycle of explosions and energy gathering. because of the vast distances between the universes, it is impossible for us to observe them as the time it would take for light to travel from them to us is greater than the time any given universe exists.

Our destiny is this... once every star in the milky way has burnt itself out, the galaxy will be a cold dense mass of dead energy travelling through space collecting more 'debris' as it goes until eventually it may be pulled towards a large cluster of dead galaxies which will build and build until the gravitational force and density reaches that point... Remember "Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only be changed from one form to another." - Albert Einstein

Disclaimer... if this theory is ever proven... you heard it here first and I want credit for it

When I saw the title I was tempted to say, "yes the world is round and I am it's center". Who know's really?

Does it really matter what shape the universe is I'm more interested in knowing the shape of a carrot and how to recognize real food.

Well, if my opinion is worth anything, I believe tha the universe is like a sheet, with other sheets on top and below it. Little tears in the sheets make it possible to go between the sheets. (a.k.a. black holes).

Then again, I agree with the above post: Who actually cares about what shape the universe is in? What purpose is there in knowing? If we do know, kudos to the guy who found it. It doesn't matter as of now, because we are just starting to look up there...
SH

reply to post by SHolmes


Sounds like the theory of branes to me - you would just have to exchange black holes with strings.

reply to post by Agree2Disagree

Thanks again

I understand why Time is necessary for our description of the observable universe, and you explained that nicely to a layman like myself.

Time being relative to the observer makes sense also.

Another question if you don't mind. If humans did not exist (no observer), would Time or any concept of it exist despite having nothing to be relative to. Would the universe then still behave the same way without humans to observe, interact and label it ?

I suppose people still think the earth is flat too???
I always thought it was like the shape of a soccer ball

reply to post by ChaoticOrder


How is this true if you can't see far enough to where light bends back on itself? What if it is a 500 gazillion trillion billion miles in diameter? We have no technology to see that far

reply to post by WesternIowaParanormal

Yes and not that long ago scientist where certain the earth was flat. Round seems to be the universal norm.

Scientists knew that Earth is a globe for millenia.

I have read that the shape of our universe is a torus. In geometry it is considered a perfect shape.

Observations point towards flat and thus infinite universe. This does not sit well with me, because if the universe is infinite, then it had to be infinite even at the moment of big bang. Sure, space can expand, but I cant see how it would expand from finite to infinite shape. Then how did space began to exist, infinite and all at once?

String theory posits the existence of six or seven compact dimensions with very small radii. It makes sense that our familiar three dimensions started the same way and then were stretched by inflation, yet again I cant see how could this ultimately change their circular topology, no matter how much are they expanded.

There is still a possibility of a round universe because the measurement of curvature is not precise enough to exclude it completely, it only has to have a high enough radius. Thats what I choose to believe, mainly because thinking about an infinite universe makes my head hurt..