quote:

Originally posted by Tranex02 Yea, it's kinda hard not to think in 3-D. This theory makes sense. But. When i imagine something (the universe) as being finite, i feel that it must be enclosed in a larger finite object or maybe something else thats infinite... does that make sense..?

yeah it does.. I mean.. whats outside the univers.. or is there No Outside?

___________________
Upcoming:

Michael Andrews Feat. Gary Jules - Mad World (Grayed Out Mix)

quote:

Originally posted by LiquidX yeah it does.. I mean.. whats outside the univers.. or is there No Outside?

I would lean towards this answer ... that there is no outside.

I think the most widely accepted model for the cosmos, is that of a hypersphere, the three-dimensional surface of a four-dimensional ball, sort of similar to how an ordinary sphere is the two-dimensional surface of a three-dimensional ball. Thus we have an example of a space that is finite yet has no problematic boundary.

With respects to what is outside the universe ... well I'll paraphrase from a Scientific American Article: this question supposes that the ultimate physical reality must be a Euclidean space of some dimension. That is, it presumes that if space is a hypersphere, then that hypersphere must sit in a four-dimensional Euclidean space, allowing us to view it from the outside. Nature, however, need not cling to this notion. It would be perfectly acceptable for the universe to be a hypersphere and not be embedded in any higher-dimensional space. Therefore there is nothing necessarily outside the box. The reason why there is this illusion of infinity is because light can be wrapped all the way around space, perhaps more than once--creating multiple images of each galaxy. Kind of similar to how in a fun house, you gain the perception of endless corridors through all the reflected mirrors.

Hope that made some sort of sense ... needless to say, this is all hypothetical, but that's what the evidence seems to suggest.

___________________
Retro ...

What makes people so sure that there is nothing outside of the big bang. The posibility that the big bang occured inside a cluster of existing universe is not discussed is it?

I mean the way I see it is that we are making the same age old mistake all over again. During Keplers time it was thought that the solar system was the entire universe. Then we thought the Milkey way was the Entire universe. Now we're saying no the universe is everything within the big band and it's surounding radiation.

One thing that I disklike about the Big Bang Theory is that it's a good weapon in the hands of religion, wherby stating that since the universe has had a birth it therefore must have an end too, as staed in Genesis. There you have it folks. Scientific proof.

We're playing with fire here. gotta be more careful with this whole thing.

___________________
Courageous, untroubled, mocking and violent; that is what Wisdom wants us to be. Wisdom is a woman, and loves only a warrior.
--Friedrich Nietzsche

quote:

Originally posted by Illusion What makes people so sure that there is nothing outside of the big bang. The posibility that the big bang occured inside a cluster of existing universe is not discussed is it? I mean the way I see it is that we are making the same age old mistake all over again. During Keplers time it was thought that the solar system was the entire universe. Then we thought the Milkey way was the Entire universe. Now we're saying no the universe is everything within the big band and it's surounding radiation. One thing that I disklike about the Big Bang Theory is that it's a good weapon in the hands of religion, wherby stating that since the universe has had a birth it therefore must have an end too, as staed in Genesis. There you have it folks. Scientific proof. We're playing with fire here. gotta be more careful with this whole thing.

Who's playing with fire and limiting ourselves to anything? Science can only utilize the tools with which we have to come up with theories to describe the universe. There is no such thing as an infallible theory and there is never any presumption as such. The copernican model was initially incorrect as well until Keplar revised it ... does that mean that we shouldn't adopt theories because they could be wrong? No, we adopt theories until they are proven wrong. Therefore, it is not incorrect to believe that we live in a closed, finite universe because so far, that is what the evidence seems to indicate. It's what we have observed so far, and that is what logic seems to indicate.

___________________
Retro ...

The big bang happened once, so who says it has not happened before?? We thort that we was special and life could only happen on this planet, but now we know we are not and the chances of life being on other planets are probley the same chance as the sun rising tomorrow morning, which also makes all religions Wrong, God did not make us, its just what happens when the coonditions are right for life to grow.