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.

 

there must be something outside of the universe!!!

page: 5
25
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 12:14 AM
link   

netbound
I’ve gotta admit, I share NoRulesAllowed’s skepticism about the Big Bang. I believe a number of mainstream physicists are also skeptical about it.

I think the “logic” behind the BB is that, if the universe (space and everything within it) is expanding, then “logically” it must have at some time occupied a smaller volume. Well, yeah, that makes sense. “Logically”. But that it once occupied the volume of a softball (or smaller), might that be following our “logic” to such an extreme as to lead to an “illogical” conclusion? That’s what I wonder. This is just a feeling, however. I’m certainly no expert.


It didnt occupy a smaller volume the thing that confuses people about the big bang is they think of iit as an expansion it wasnt space itself was created.Easiest way to explain is a a chocolate chip cookie in the oven.Space between those chips is created as it cooks. So to points in the early universe didnt go anywhere the space between then simple grew.This is why when we use the Cosmic Background Radiation we can figure out the distribution of mass in our universe or should i say energy that converted to mass. Stuff stayed where it was the space between it got bigger. Now physicists are not really questioning the big bang occurred there simply looking again at what we think happened. Here is what i mean the big bang was based off relativity well theirs others who think Quantum mechanics should be used instead.Which changes things slightly for example then zero point energy becomes involved and the matter in the universe wasnt infinitely dense and no singularity.Instead as space expands it releases energy we call vacuum energy. And this is what created everything we see.



We Humans developed our brand of “logic” to make sense of our experiences and observations as Earthlings at our particular macro level. Then along came the 20th century and the development of relativity to explain events on the large scale and quantum mechanics/physics to describe observations at the atomic/subatomic level. So much for reason and intuitive “logic”.


Reason and logic are the basis of science really it is the fact we can search for answers and apply them to our world that makes us human.


I spent 4 years getting a B.S. in mathematics (not an advanced degree, so like I said, I’m no expert), have great respect for science and technology, and have worked in the computer industry for many years. BUT, unlike many others, I do not hold up OUR invention of mathematics as the last word, or as a universally accepted language amongst any sufficiently advanced technology or intelligence. It’s just the best thing we humans have come up with so far to express our human reasoning. It doesn’t mean it’s the ONLY method. If we were born in a black hole, for instance, maybe we would have developed a more adequate description of it’s workings and behavior by now. Since we weren’t, though, we’re still struggling to develop an adequate model using our current mathematics/physics. We just can’t get there from here - at least, not yet.

I guess what I’m getting at is, although I value scientific reasoning and protocol and support it’s advancement, I also have a skeptical side, and do not consider it a “religion”. At least, not in every case...


Good and you should be skeptical most scientists are there is lots of junk science out there.Science is a lot like math an equation is written then tested.




posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 01:05 AM
link   

ChaoticOrder
Forget what you learnt about the shape of the universe when you were back at school. The universe is most likely infinite according to the latest data and theories we have. What that means is that space-time is infinite and there is nothing outside of it because it encompasses everything. What that also means is that the big bang was probably not responsible for creating space-time along with it, infinite space-time has probably always existed.


Although the shape of the universe is still a matter of debate in physical cosmology, based on the recent Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) measurements "We now know that the universe is flat with only a 0.4% margin of error", according to NASA scientists.
--
The model most theorists currently use is the so-called Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker (FLRW) model. According to cosmologists, on this model the observational data best fit with the conclusion that the shape of the universe is infinite and flat.

en.wikipedia.org...

edit on 2/2/2014 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)





The shape of the universe is the local and global geometry of the universe, in terms of both curvature and topology (though, strictly speaking, it goes beyond both). Although the shape of the universe is still a matter of debate in physical cosmology, based on the recent Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) measurements "We now know that the universe is flat with only a 0.4% margin of error", according to NASA scientists. [1] Theorists have been trying to construct a formal mathematical model of the shape of the universe. In formal terms, this is a 3-manifold model corresponding to the spatial section (in comoving coordinates) of the 4-dimensional space-time of the universe. The model most theorists currently use is the so-called Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker (FLRW) model. According to cosmologists, on this model the observational data best fit with the conclusion that the shape of the universe is infinite and flat, [2] but the data are also consistent with other possible shapes, such as the so-called Poincaré dodecahedral space[3][4]and the Picard horn.[5]


en.wikipedia.org...

I disagree with this. I feel the universe is one big circle (or something with shape) and not flat. Just like back in the days when they thought the world was flat I believe we are at that state of understanding the universe (just past a cavemen understanding). If you look at the picture below you see 2 circles. If you were a spot on top of each circle one would look "flatter" than the other if you were the same size on both circles. Just like when you are at the ocean looking out to sea. It seems flat however the earth is round as we know. The universe seems to like circles from planets to stars so my bet is on a round universe (or again something with shape). I also believe there is something outside our universe and as another poster put we could be inside a living organism. I like to think the stars and planets are like our own cells and black holes would be for transporting energy (in our case blood) through other parts of its body. Then again we could just be a computer program for all I know (then we would just be energy with no true shape) which would fit as well. We are just living out our program and each upgrade of our existence is the programers just updating our world (from cavemen to aliens).



edit on 5-2-2014 by LightSource because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-2-2014 by LightSource because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-2-2014 by LightSource because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-2-2014 by LightSource because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-2-2014 by LightSource because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by LABTECH767
 


Schroedinger's cat".

The quantum theory of the observer altering the outcome.



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 01:27 AM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


Could you send me a link to this study? It sounds very interesting.

On another note, I'm not necessarily suggesting that it's all a digital simulation. But it could be that the universe has some sort of computational aspect, or that while not being digital in the traditional sense, it "calculates".



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by LightSource
 


Einstein's relativity proves the space time continuum is curved.



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 01:32 AM
link   

MADXENOBIOLOGIST
reply to post by LightSource
 


Einstein's relativity proves the space time continuum is curved.
it's not though. it is flatter than a pancake. we now know the curvature of the universe to within 1 percent.

www.space.com...


The new results, presented by Schlegel and his colleagues here today (Jan. 8) at the 223rd meeting of the American Astronomical Society, also provide one of the best-ever determinations of the curvature of space, researchers said. In short, the universe appears to be quite "flat," meaning that its shape can be described well by Euclidean geometry, in which straight lines are parallel and the angles in a triangle add up to 180 degrees.

"One of the reasons we care is that a flat universe has implications for whether the universe is infinite," Schlegel said. "That means — while we can't say with certainty that it will never come to an end — it's likely the universe extends forever in space and will go on forever in time. Our results are consistent with an infinite universe."


if you add that to the fact that expansion appears to be accelerating and you get infinite unbounded universe. well there is a boundary as someone pointed out that there are places that the light from us has not gotten to and the light from those places has not gotten to us which means effectively they are outside of an event horizon for all intents and purposes. though that event horizon is not static it moves at light speed. if however cosmic expansion ever out paces light there would be places we could never go or see ever.




edit on 5-2-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: added an entire additional data point



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by stormbringer1701
 


However, most mathematical models (quantum and string theory) involve parallel universes. Also, scientists have found some spacial anomalies that indicate another universe pushing on the limits of our own. www.messagetoeagle.com...



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 01:53 AM
link   
reply to post by netbound
 


According to scientific theory, when the universe stops expanding it will eventually "condense" in what is known as the "Big Crunch". Then, when it get's infinitely small, it will explode again into a second big bang, and so on and so fourth in a repeating cycle.

Some groups of Buddhists and Hindus have directly incorporated this modern science theory into their traditional religion. Because these two religions believe in reincarnation, they have used this scientific theory as further proof that reality is a cycle, and that as the universe recycles itself, so do our souls.*

*I don't necessarily believe this, but it's fun to speculate.



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by LightSource
 


Figure its easier to watch a video then have me tell you why we know the universe is flat to within 1 degree.




posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 02:05 AM
link   

MADXENOBIOLOGIST
reply to post by netbound
 


According to scientific theory, when the universe stops expanding it will eventually "condense" in what is known as the "Big Crunch". Then, when it get's infinitely small, it will explode again into a second big bang, and so on and so fourth in a repeating cycle.

Some groups of Buddhists and Hindus have directly incorporated this modern science theory into their traditional religion. Because these two religions believe in reincarnation, they have used this scientific theory as further proof that reality is a cycle, and that as the universe recycles itself, so do our souls.*

*I don't necessarily believe this, but it's fun to speculate.


Yeah thats already been ruled out insufficient mass to counter expansion. Our universe has one of two fates. Either it continues to expand pushing everything further and further away then goes cold as the lights go out. Or the very fabric of our universe is ripped apart because of instability in the higgs boson.



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 02:16 AM
link   

stormbringer1701

MADXENOBIOLOGIST
reply to post by LightSource
 


Einstein's relativity proves the space time continuum is curved.
it's not though. it is flatter than a pancake. we now know the curvature of the universe to within 1 percent.

www.space.com...


The new results, presented by Schlegel and his colleagues here today (Jan. 8) at the 223rd meeting of the American Astronomical Society, also provide one of the best-ever determinations of the curvature of space, researchers said. In short, the universe appears to be quite "flat," meaning that its shape can be described well by Euclidean geometry, in which straight lines are parallel and the angles in a triangle add up to 180 degrees.

"One of the reasons we care is that a flat universe has implications for whether the universe is infinite," Schlegel said. "That means — while we can't say with certainty that it will never come to an end — it's likely the universe extends forever in space and will go on forever in time. Our results are consistent with an infinite universe."


if you add that to the fact that expansion appears to be accelerating and you get infinite unbounded universe. well there is a boundary as someone pointed out that there are places that the light from us has not gotten to and the light from those places has not gotten to us which means effectively they are outside of an event horizon for all intents and purposes. though that event horizon is not static it moves at light speed. if however cosmic expansion ever out paces light there would be places we could never go or see ever.




edit on 5-2-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: added an entire additional data point


An "infinite" circle would appear to be flat however with 1 percent curvature it would eventually reach itself in a long long time. Maybe its "tube" shape and will come around. Or we could just be a hologram and there is no "shape" flat or circular. Either way i guess we can agree that we disagree.


edit on 5-2-2014 by LightSource because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 02:17 AM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


Indeed, the fact that expansion is speeding rather than slowing down seems to indicate that there is no stopping point.
There are supposedly 4 forces of nature (strong, weak, gravity, electromagnetic).

I think there may be a 5th force we don't know about: anti gravity.

Dark Energy may be in some way creating a force of anti gravity. If we could harness this dark energy, so much would be possible, including FTL drives straight out of science fiction.
edit on FebAMWedXE3-06003870-0600 by MADXENOBIOLOGIST because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 02:18 AM
link   
well another possibility is a collapse of the vacuum potential. the false vacuum falling into a true vacuum.

but even if the universe goes on forever it does not mean the universe dies in ice and darkness. no one can say. there might be periodic white hole like repopulation of the universe so that the universe continues on in pockets that themselves are subject to expansion. or the arrow of time could reverse to effectively re crunchify the universe absent a gravity cause. a flat universe does not rule out curled up extra dimensions or parallel worlds. relativity does rely on curved geometry though; and it is very accurate so far, it has never been contradicted, so there has to be some curvature somewhere for that to be the case.



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 02:21 AM
link   
reply to post by stormbringer1701
 


It's possible that when black holes spew out hawking radiation, it all collects in another dimension, and the build up of this radiation results in the birth of parallel universes and other realities.



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 02:38 AM
link   

MADXENOBIOLOGIST
reply to post by stormbringer1701
 


It's possible that when black holes spew out hawking radiation, it all collects in another dimension, and the build up of this radiation results in the birth of parallel universes and other realities.
that wouldn't be the Hawking radiation though. in Hawking radiation a virtual pair forms at the event horizon with one particle on the outside and one on the inside. the one on the outside is what we typically call Hawking radiation. the particle on the inside cannot get out through the event horizon there but may go through a an Einstein Podelski Rosen Bridge to come out of a white hole somewhere else if it does not hit the singularity. another possible source of hawking radiation is quantum tunneling particles that happen to tunnel through the even horizon.
edit on 5-2-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-2-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 12:58 PM
link   

LightSource

stormbringer1701

MADXENOBIOLOGIST
reply to post by LightSource
 


Einstein's relativity proves the space time continuum is curved.
it's not though. it is flatter than a pancake. we now know the curvature of the universe to within 1 percent.

www.space.com...


The new results, presented by Schlegel and his colleagues here today (Jan. 8) at the 223rd meeting of the American Astronomical Society, also provide one of the best-ever determinations of the curvature of space, researchers said. In short, the universe appears to be quite "flat," meaning that its shape can be described well by Euclidean geometry, in which straight lines are parallel and the angles in a triangle add up to 180 degrees.

"One of the reasons we care is that a flat universe has implications for whether the universe is infinite," Schlegel said. "That means — while we can't say with certainty that it will never come to an end — it's likely the universe extends forever in space and will go on forever in time. Our results are consistent with an infinite universe."


if you add that to the fact that expansion appears to be accelerating and you get infinite unbounded universe. well there is a boundary as someone pointed out that there are places that the light from us has not gotten to and the light from those places has not gotten to us which means effectively they are outside of an event horizon for all intents and purposes. though that event horizon is not static it moves at light speed. if however cosmic expansion ever out paces light there would be places we could never go or see ever.




edit on 5-2-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: added an entire additional data point


An "infinite" circle would appear to be flat however with 1 percent curvature it would eventually reach itself in a long long time. Maybe its "tube" shape and will come around. Or we could just be a hologram and there is no "shape" flat or circular. Either way i guess we can agree that we disagree.


edit on 5-2-2014 by LightSource because: (no reason given)



Your infinite circle can not be infinite in any way if it ends up as a circle "reaching its tail". I thought you People knew what you were talking about.

There is no existing matter or particle that is less than 3D. 2D can only exist on a surface of a matter that is a minimum 3D.



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 03:22 PM
link   

spy66

LightSource

stormbringer1701

MADXENOBIOLOGIST
reply to post by LightSource
 


Einstein's relativity proves the space time continuum is curved.
it's not though. it is flatter than a pancake. we now know the curvature of the universe to within 1 percent.

www.space.com...


The new results, presented by Schlegel and his colleagues here today (Jan. 8) at the 223rd meeting of the American Astronomical Society, also provide one of the best-ever determinations of the curvature of space, researchers said. In short, the universe appears to be quite "flat," meaning that its shape can be described well by Euclidean geometry, in which straight lines are parallel and the angles in a triangle add up to 180 degrees.

"One of the reasons we care is that a flat universe has implications for whether the universe is infinite," Schlegel said. "That means — while we can't say with certainty that it will never come to an end — it's likely the universe extends forever in space and will go on forever in time. Our results are consistent with an infinite universe."


if you add that to the fact that expansion appears to be accelerating and you get infinite unbounded universe. well there is a boundary as someone pointed out that there are places that the light from us has not gotten to and the light from those places has not gotten to us which means effectively they are outside of an event horizon for all intents and purposes. though that event horizon is not static it moves at light speed. if however cosmic expansion ever out paces light there would be places we could never go or see ever.




edit on 5-2-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: added an entire additional data point


An "infinite" circle would appear to be flat however with 1 percent curvature it would eventually reach itself in a long long time. Maybe its "tube" shape and will come around. Or we could just be a hologram and there is no "shape" flat or circular. Either way i guess we can agree that we disagree.


edit on 5-2-2014 by LightSource because: (no reason given)



Your infinite circle can not be infinite in any way if it ends up as a circle "reaching its tail". I thought you People knew what you were talking about.

There is no existing matter or particle that is less than 3D. 2D can only exist on a surface of a matter that is a minimum 3D.



Yeah im not sure why hes stuck on the idea of the universe being curved i showed him how we know its flat. If you think about it curved space doesnt make much sense really.



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 03:28 PM
link   
I'm still thinking that the universe curves in on itself in multiple dimensions, kind of like this:


And the only way for there to be something "outside" the universe is for there to be somebody or something observing it from the outside, kind of like we're doing with the illustration above. But there's the rub. Any observer is going to be stuck inside the universe, and wouldn't be able to get outside it.

It doesn't bug me. The universe is enough for me.



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Blue Shift
 


As i said no way watch the video the CMB only confirmed it space is expanding its not looping its not a balloon. For your theory to be correct there would have to be expansion from only one point but its everywhere we look.



posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 04:49 PM
link   

dragonridr
As i said no way watch the video the CMB only confirmed it space is expanding its not looping its not a balloon. For your theory to be correct there would have to be expansion from only one point but its everywhere we look.

The illustration is a bad one, of course, as it would be being only a two-dimensional representation of a multi-dimensional existence. You have to imagine the same process going on at every single "point" in the universe, and in several additional dimensions. And yes, expanding while it's happening.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join