Is our universe round?

page: 3
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 30 2013 @ 09:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Oldie
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 ?


Interesting question but unfortunately I can only speculate and have no solid answers....

.Although I'm sure there are physicists more educated than myself that might be able to answer this, I cannot. When we talk about the "behavior" of the Universe, we're directly referring to our observations....

HOWEVER, I will put my speculative shoes on for just a brief second...Generally speaking, when we make observations we alter the current condition of that which is being observed...This is especially true at the subatomic level. This is known as the observer effect.

Now, the most basic implication extracted from the observer effect would be that the physical Universe is the direct result of consciousness(observation). BUT, if we believe that conciousness is solely a working of the physical brain...then we run into a pretty big wall....

If conciousness is solely a working of the physical brain and all matter (the physical universe) could not exist without conciousness....WTFRight? If the observer effect truly exists, then our physical brains couldn't exist without first being "observed" somehow by some "conciousness"

So we have (speculatively of course)2 stances we can take on whether or not the Universe would behave generally the same without observers as it does with it.
1) Yes, because the only prerequisites for the Universe to exist are Mass and Energy, neither of which are dependant upon observation to exist.
or
2) No, simply because the observer effect..."our observation 'creates' the Universe"....

(I presume it would be the same situation with time)

A2D
edit on 30-5-2013 by Agree2Disagree because: typographical error




posted on May, 30 2013 @ 10:30 PM
link   
Honestly though, with concerns to the OP, we can't possibly know the answer....

We only have a certain volume of space that we can measure....we can get clues as to what shape the Universe in its entirety MAY be...but we won't know for certain unless we know what we can't possibly know....1) the absolute volume and 2) the absolute density

A2D



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Agree2Disagree
 





Now, the most basic implication extracted from the observer effect would be that the physical Universe is the direct result of consciousness(observation).



An important aspect of the concept of measurement has been clarified in some QM experiments where a single electron proved sufficient as an "observer" — there is no need for a conscious "observer".


en.wikipedia.org...(physics)

There is no reason to believe this is tied to consciousness.



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Oldie
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 it like asking what came first the chicken or the egg. Cant have one with out the other. I find it easier to have a little faith when I think too deep about this question.



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 02:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Agree2Disagree
 

Thank you for slipping on the speculative shoes for a minute to offer some insights, I do appreciate it, as well as the link you provided for later reading.

My mind loves the concept of "the physical Universe is the direct result of consciousness(observation)".

I know it makes no sense given our indoctrinated perceptions on reality, where logic would dictate that the universe exists and acts as we observe it to, even if we were not here to observe it.

So I tend to think the next 20 or more years where we delve further into the relationship between awareness and reality, to discover whether awareness is a causal factor (I think yes) and how it shapes our reality, to be a most exciting time to be alive.

My speculation is that the brain is simply a bio-computer, running software called Life as a Human Being. The user would then be a separated consciousness, as in separated from the whole in order to gain individual experience.

Or, everything is exactly as we are told in our social indoctrination and I am a weird old guy asking a few stupid questions. You know, it may turn out the latter is more correct


Thanks
edit on 31-5-2013 by Oldie because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 02:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo


An important aspect of the concept of measurement has been clarified in some QM experiments where a single electron proved sufficient as an "observer" — there is no need for a conscious "observer".


en.wikipedia.org...(physics)

There is no reason to believe this is tied to consciousness.


This is why I put (observation). The observation effect is theoretically linked to conciousness, but not absolutely. However, the observation effect is absolutely tied to observation.

What that statement is actually referring to is quantum interference, which IMO is one of the more challenging principles of quantum theory. But what they did was use a "quantum observer" which was less than 1 micron in size to observe the behavior of electrons...because oddly enough, electrons are "forced" to behave like particles rather than waves while observed....by anything other than a quantum observer that is... The experiment demonstrated the observation effect pretty efficiently in that even the quantum observer had an effect on the data....(when observation increased, interference weakened; vice versa)

Like I said previously though...it's all very speculative....I don't know enough about quantum physics to even begin to act like I know what the hell is going on....I get the basics but beyond that, your guess is as good as mine.

A2D



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 02:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by Jukiodone
 



In the Euclidian Geometry universe, the earth is a 3d spherical body rolling around a depression in flat space time ( we have all seen the gravity graphic).

That graphic is highly misleading, but it is the best way to get the idea across without confusing people. In reality the depression that a mass creates in space-time also happens in a 3D sense, but it's much easier to just graphically depict it as a concave depression in a 2D surface.


Maybe it would be better to say that gravitational bodies cause space to pucker?



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 02:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Oldie
 


Well the brain is basically just a web of electrical currents (as I understand it)....

But consciousness....well that opens a whole new can of worms....
(The one and only time I have contemplated consciousness, I compared it to infinite space....I came to the conclusion that consciousness may simply be a property of matter and our absolutely-amazing-brains are what allow us to experience it...)

A2D





top topics
 
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join