Thread: The "Edge" of the Universe?

Originally posted by L0s7 4 Lyf3
You all should research the various theories about the universe (ie string, super string, quantum, and so on). *

I saw a pbs (nova) special on string theory... pretty fascinating stuff once it's condensed and simplified to a level understandable by a layman like myself.

I agree with simisu that the universe is infinite or at least that it is possibly infinite. But I don't think there is an "edge" at least not in any way that we can comprehend it.

I once had a dream that I was flying through outer space at light speed (or thereabouts), galaxies and nebulae and other planetary bodies streaming by me, and flew for such a long time that I came to the edge of the "known" universe and out into an extreme blackness. I came to the to the point where when I looked back, our universe was only a smattering of light about the size of a dime and slowly diminishing. I looked back again into the blackness in the direction I was flying/floating (at this point I could not tell if I was moving, except for the slight sensation of sliding quickly through deep cold fluid) and I saw another universe like ours come into view. I was curious to see this new universe, but I felt so cold and encroached upon, fearful of the intense freezing nothingness around me that I couldn't continue on and so I woke myself... Navigating the universe in dreams is fun...

I was thinking that in this void, exploding an atomic weapon would do nothing. But then again it is impossible to send something inside of.

Not that this couldn't be for any of you but I was thinking of Evangel not allowing us to know the answer to this question? For I think of things more in a scientific such as quintum physics and string theories and such, but there is no real answer to this question. Regardless of what you call tha space on the other side there is still "somthing"!

Originally posted by I Bleed Blue
So I'll just give you my idea now so hopefully some people catch on. *There are a couple of understood \"facts\" involved with this.
-The Universe is made up of matter and energy
-The Universe takes up a volume
-There is a fixed amount of matter and energy
-The Universe is expanding

Ok, here it goes, I'll try to make it as clear as possible.....

Everything in the universe is \"held\" together by bonds, gravitational, eloctro-magnetic variety, chemical, nuclear, etc. I'm going on the \"Big Bang\" theory here. Saying that ALL matter and energy originated in one focal point in the \"center\" of everything. It explodes (thus the large \"bang\"), and proceeds to expand outward. Now, these bonds are going to be MUCH stronger near the original \"center\" due to the amount of mass and energy present there. The weakest, of course, would be at the \"edge\". I believe that as the edge of the universe expands, matter and energy sort of.....whisp out in a manner of speaking. There just isn't enough energy PRESENT to hold things together anymore, not matter, not light, nothing. Almost like the edge of a whispy cloud. So, this universe of matter and energy, occupies this ever-expanding volume. So whats on the other side of the \"edge\". A void--to put it simply. NOTHING exists there, there is no matter, no energy(thus no light), no volume (volume implies matter). Now, thats about the best I can explain without using metaphors......so on to the metaphors!

Imagine a tub full of water.....(infinately large tub). This tub represents the Void. Now take a drop of dye...this drop represents the universe, its matter, energy etc. The drop of dye starts in the middle of the tub, and diffuses outward (like dye does in water). And spreads away from the center, thinning itself out more and more and more. Eventually there just ISNT enough dye left to expand any more. Thus, the universe stops expanding.

I don't believe in other \"dimensions\" or the pac-man theory of the universe. And after spending sooooo much time thinking about this subject, this is my own best explanation to myself. After reading this over, it sounds a lot better when I explain it verbally, but hey, I tried.
I'm open to comments/criticism/insight, thats what this thread is for!

This is scary - 5 seconds before I read this post I came upon the exact same conclusion myself, in a matter of seconds, after many many many years of thinking about it. I (now) believe the same thing. We are on a 'plane' of some type, in which matter exists. The plane is not quantifiable - it is a void. Energy fills this void exactly how you describe, in a diffusion method (Big Bang theory). I believe that if humans were to venture out into space in a ship, we could get to a point where eventually matter would not have enough energy to be stable enough to exist in a solid form, and would kind of just...fall apart. The only reason the concept of an infinite void is so difficult to understand is because people can't comprehend a space with no energy - we cannot replicate it! It's like the blind-from-birth man trying to comprehend colour.

However, one theory I would care to dispute is that the Universe expands infinitely. Perhaps the Universe will diffuse to a point where it loses its inertia and begins condensing again. (Is this a property of energy or am I just making stuff up? ). Perhaps there have been many Big Bangs because of this...

Ok, now these are the kinda posts I was looking for . I find all this stuff very interesting. And yes, trying to comprehend the "edge" and what is "beyond" it IS great brain work, I do it all the time. A lot of this stuff is new to me, but thats why I made this post, so I could see what else was out there. I've been looking up and reading these other ideas, very interesting. Keep the posts comin'!

Say I detonated a weapon that had the intensity of the big bang, and I detonated it at the "center" of the universe. What would happen?

I don't think the big bang had to be all that strong. Since there is nothing to stop stuff from going out forever into space, all it would take is a push to get it started. The thing it really needed is a lot of stuff inside of it. Assuming nothing is created in the universe and all came from the big bang, thats a lot of stuff. To answer the question though, I think it depends on if it was just a weapon that made a big boom, or if you stuff half the universe inside of it.

If it just blows up it would take out the center and everything else would just stay floating there. If it had all the same stuff, well you would make a really big mess heh.

[quote]Not that this couldn't be for any of you but I was thinking of Evangel

I think of God as both the ultimate scientist and the ultimate artist. He is in control of every particle and piece of reality (ies) past present and future. I believe that everything we know and CAN know is still FAR beneath and below His knowledge, but that He does not restrict us except when we willfully seek His demise. In other words, I don't believe there is ever a need to "not allow" or "restrict," any knowledge -except perhaps where such restrictions serve his plan and purpose.

It is also interesting to think that the universe may be infinitely bigger than we imagine and also infinitely smaller than we imagine.

I think if you find out whats past the edge you will run into another problem, whats on the edge of that? Then you can go on forever, something past that, then past that, on and on. I think it will take forever to find out everything, assuming after you die your still "alive" in soul or whatever, and you can still try and search out farther and farther.

Originally posted by evangel

It's like the blind-from-birth man trying to comprehend colour.

Good analogy... Reminds me of a really good film I saw called The Color of Paradise http://www.sonyclassics.com/colorofparadise/
Check it out when you guys get a chance.
[/b]

I got chills reading the synopsis! I wanna see this...

Originally posted by Howetzer+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Howetzer)</div>

Not that this couldn't be for any of you but I was thinking of Evangel in particular. What do you think of God not allowing us to know the answer to this question? *[/b]

<!--QuoteBegin-evangel
I think of God as both the ultimate scientist and the ultimate artist. He is in control of every particle and piece of reality (ies) past present and future. I believe that everything we know and CAN know is still FAR beneath and below His knowledge, but that He does not restrict us except when we willfully seek His demise. In other words, I don't believe there is ever a need to \"not allow\" or \"restrict,\" any knowledge -except perhaps where such restrictions serve his plan and purpose. *

It is also interesting to think that the universe may be infinitely bigger than we imagine and also infinitely smaller than we imagine.

I was thinking more in the lines of God reserving this knowledge for us to percieve after our death. Not necassarely restricting us. But yes, I guess it would be part of his plan

Here is what I think about the universe, and also about ht "Beginning". I believe that space is infinite. Our universe is one of many. one of an infinite universes.

When things are infinite, size obviously makes no difference. Maybe there is something bigger than a universe. Maybe there is something bigger than that.

And, as the universe is infinite, time is likewise. Space has no beginning. Space has no end. Neither does time. Don't worry about where this stuff came from. It was always here. There are stages in time. Our earth is a stage. It was made. It will go somehow. Space also has stages, and they are intertwined. Earth, the solar system, the galaxy, the universe... More?

I see this discussion may leads in a religious discussion,- if it is right or wrong to find out how the Universe is.
I has got a impression that many scientists and astro- physicists has a Christian viewpoint, even when they do research.

Of them is Isaac Newton and Stephen Hawking.
(In the book "The Universe in a Nutshell", Hawking is mentioning God several places, hence I believe he has faith in God .)

I don't say that scientifical research about the Universe, etc. is right or wrong, but I do believe many scientists is Christians.
Maybe I have misunderstood, hence I will gladly hear comments and viewpoints about this.

Regards,
-Human

Difficult to say...

I know that there are many scientists who often refer to God, but only in a hypothetical way, not in a way that means they believe in Him (such as Hawking).

There are scientists within the private realm (business, for profit, non-profit etc.), there are scientists in the "public" realm (funded by government) and there are many others in-between. There are also many self-proclaimed "scientists" who have prominent degrees or social group status but do not practice good or true science and therefore are usually looked down upon by the academic or "true" scientists. There are some who believe that one cannot be religious and a scientist at the same time because science and religion or "faith" are somehow antagonistic to one another. I believe the opposite - that science would not exist if there were no God. NO SCIENTIST is "unbiased" or unaffected by their own biases, inherent (internalized) or otherwise... sorry for the rant.

Unless there are some good statistics available, I think it's hard to say whether there are more Christian or religious scientists than there are non-religious/agnostic/humanistic, etc. It would be interesting to find out though.

I thought Hawking was a firm non-believer of god? Anywho, there are scientists that practice science that is unbiased (studying animals for example). Unless they say "The horrors of men are plaguing these innocent animals", the scientists are unbiased. They report factual information pertaining specifically to the topic (without straying away and talking about cutting down trees, still with my example), not opinions.

Yes, I think you're right about Hawking. Why do they choose to study animals instead of say physics or psychology? The fact that these scientists specifically choose to study specified topics (and thus to ignore other ones) is evidence of an inherent bias. They choose these areas of study primarily because they are personally interested in them. I'm not saying their method is bad. They may be praticing good "sound" scientific methods, but no one can escape bias completely. Computers can, I suppose... but I think that science is inherently flawed because it obtains "conclusive proof" and "fact" through limited temporal means. The facts reached after say 200 trials in a lab may seem conclusive, but what about after 50 or 100 years when the conditions used in that experiment changes. And lab science often falls short since it is too "micro" in scope. At the other end of the spectrum, the "macro" end is often highly theoretical. Science is good for teaching us about temporal reality and knowledge as it serves us for our temporal lives. I'm more concerned about seeking truth in the absolute and eternal sense, I guess. Again sorry for the ranting. I'm not saying my view is the absolute... just trying to shed lightmaybe where it has not been shed before and let loose some stray thoughts.

I used to think about this when i was a kid and not be able to sleep.
(Guess why i like my av/siggie so much)

According to the big bang theory there will be a 'edge' of where there's stuff, because it is expanding, it has a certain size, so it has limits (the stuff). But, there's always room to expand, so there's no end to "space" ...

I think that when these scientists refer to "God", they arent referring to him in a religious sense. I think they just mean a "greater being", someone that transcends time and matter.

The movie Waking Life explains God to me in a very clear sense...The whole universe as one consciousness, one Universal Mind. I believe when humans let go of their ego and narcissism, we have the power to comprehend God in a much more real way.

Ok look if it were even possible for you to reach the 'edge' of the universe you would come back to where you started because, space curves in a way that most people can't understand so once you came to the 'edge' of the universe you wouldn't see something solid but you would see another spot in the universe that wasn't at the edge.

Also, when people say about the edge of the universe and thinking of the universe expanding they think of it opening into another space like a circle getting bigger but it's inside another space. This does not happen the universe creates it's own space so there is no limit to where the universe can end.

Originally posted by CT
But, there's always room to expand, so there's no end to \"space\" ...

(sorry about the double post) there is an end to space and in a sense what you said about there being no end to space is correct but the universe creates it's own space it doesn't pull in space from 'outside'

I guess you are referring to what I called the "void". No matter, energy, and therefor no volume (an area consisting of matter). And the universe expands into it making what we call "space".

No what you are saying is it is opening onto something which it is not doing, in fact the universe creates the space it doesn't expand into something that's already there.

I think what Blue is trying to get at is that the creation of 'space' is purely based on physical law. The 'space' outside this physical plane cannot be described by physical law, but it is there, nonetheless, even if it can be considered 'nothing'. It's a void waiting for occupancy.

Yep, Awaken nailed it. Reread how I described the void if you want. It is a total absence of matter and energy and thus, cannot even have a volume. So the universe ,in a sense, does create "space" in my theory.