what is beyond the known universe?

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by utopian knight, Oct 6, 2006.

  1. Considering the sum extent of what we can actually claim to have a fairly good handle on accounts for a whole 4% of the so-called "known" Universe, frankly we actually know virtually dick about the wherever the hell it is we actually are, let alone what's beyond the next horizon.

    Granted, 4% of what may conceivably amount to infinity itself counts as a very great deal of dick to be intimately acquainted with by anyones standards - certainly, you wouldn't want it all turning up on your doorstep late at night ringing your doorbell and demanding to know you if you really do know the way to San Hosé at 3 o'clock in the morning - but still, 4% doesn't count towards knowing particularly much.

    That's possibly what makes it all so very interesting to begin with...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    Is "believed" in this sense a normal scientific hunch or does it border on the spiritual? As a layman I can't quite tell from your presentation what evidence supports this belief.
    This sounds like it goes beyond the Big Bang theory. If the universe stretches to infinity then obviously it cannot all have been created at once. It appears to be closer to the Continuous Creation model.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. jumpercable 6EQUJ5 'WOW' Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    305
    Guessing what's beyond the known universe? Does it really matter? If so, in what way will it affect us?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Walter L. Wagner Cosmic Truth Seeker Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,559
    Fraggle:

    Perhaps a better choice of word is "theorized" rather than "believed". In any event, it is not 'testable' in the usual sense, so one can only deduce what exists beyond the "brehmstrahlung opacity wall" as I've read of it referred to by astronomers.

    What is testable, however, is that over time the cosmic microwave background radiation should become increasingly more redshifted, as we detect that type of matter at an increasingly greater distance. Whether that slight change would be measurable over the course of a few decades, or whether it might require millions of years before we could measure a difference between the background as we detect it today, compared to what the background would be one million years in the future, is debatable. Certainly, it would take better instrumentation than used thus far. Of course, you and I won't be around to do the measurements, either!

    And no, this does not go beyond the Big Bang theory. Rather, it explains it more clearly. It still leaves unaswered the basic question as to what started the process that led to the ability for a four-dimensional 'finite bubble' to emerge in a sea of infinite energy, which is essentially what the Universe can be described as, as well. That 'finite bubble' of space-time in which we exist reflects the basic properties of physics that are operable throughout the Universe, and some writers have referred to it as being on the inside of a singularity.

    We can also deduce that the mass/energy beyond the brehmstrahlung opacity wall has, within its own separate reference frame, evolved into galaxies much like our own, just as we can deduce that galaxies some 10 billion lights years away (which we see as they were 10 billion years ago) have evolved into more aged systems with 3rd or 4th generation stars such as our Sun, etc., and indeed possibly capable of having evolved life. Whether such life has evolved in the finite portion of the Universe we can detect via telescopes is debatable. Whether such life has evolved more than once in an infinite Universe is also debatable, but I believe it almost certainly has. Since those are questions we cannot answer directly with physics, they only remain 'answerable' in the realm of religion and philosophy (unless ET decides to pay a visit to you at your house).
     
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2006
  8. superluminal I am MalcomR Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,876
    Well, I thought physicists looked at it this way:

    Imagine yourself in a wireframe cube. This cube represents what we will call one "unit" of spacetime (1 stu). There are cubes adjacent to every face of your cube. There are an infinite number of these cubes, making up an infinite three-dimensional grid. This is the universe.

    The current time is T = 0. The infinite universe consists of what amounts to a sea of energy. Unimaginably hot and dense.

    Something happens (the big ?) and what was 1 stu begins expanding. Rediculously fast by current standards. Faster than 'c' in vacuo. This is "inflation". Every cube - the infinity of "cubes" that is the universe - is changing its metric.

    Now each of these arbitrary "cubes" can be subdivided into any number of cubes you would like. From the perspective of any given cube, the matter and energy in all other cubes is moving away from you.

    Currently T = +13.5by or thereabouts. From the perspective of our "cube" all non-local matter is moving away from us. We can only see as far as light has had the chance to travel in this time. This is called our "Hubble Horizon" and defines our "Hubble Volume".

    The major point here is that there is an arbitrary "cube" at every point in the infinity of "cubes" (the infinite universe). There is a "Hubble Volume" centered on every one of these arbitrary cubes. Thus, if you think of the universe as all that there is or ever was, and that the "Big Bang" was equivalent to the actual metric of space and time "expanding" everywhere, all at once, I think you'll have a pretty good idea of the current state of affairs.
     
  9. jumpercable 6EQUJ5 'WOW' Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    305
    Now they (CNN) say's the universe is 'Oval' or 'Pill' shaped. Cubes anyone?
     
  10. superluminal I am MalcomR Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,876
    Is that all you have to say about my post? I didn't say anything about the curvature of spacetime (shape of the universe). I was just using a cube as a representative of an arbitrary volume.
     
  11. jumpercable 6EQUJ5 'WOW' Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    305
    Sounds good to me. I'll put a couple in my glass of orange juice just to be sure.
     
  12. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    Beyond known universe in unknown universe.
     
  13. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    Beyond known universe is nothingness. empty vacuum. no other worlds.
     
  14. CANGAS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,612

    Yes but.

    I have serious personal opinions adverse to the standard model big bang theory, but will not go any further on that tack here and now.

    In terms of the BB, at any very early moment, ALL that existed was a relatively small sphere of vacuum, false vacuum and mass/energy. Nothing else. At one moment the entire known and knowable universe was the size of a bb. (Pun unintentional but welcomed when I noticed it ).

    I think that I am agreeing with you, at least, I am not intending to disagree with you. It just seems to me that at a certain point we run out of science moxie and then must turn to religion and philosophy to acquire further understanding. I believe that this thread is a venture into a field that we cannot explore with pure science. However, I believe that it is a VERY important thing that this question should be contemplated in a science context.
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2006
  15. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    Can there ever truely be nothing?
     
  16. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    Can there ever truely be nothing?
     
  17. CANGAS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,612
    In my humble opinion ( I have one? ), If there ever was absolutely nothing, then there never could be, coming from absolutely nothing, anything. Yet, here we are. At least, I know that I am here.
     
  18. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    I say that the problem is with the way we measure time rather than with the model. Here we sit at t=10^10 years and we graph the universe on a chart with time measured as a linear dimension because it works fine here. It does not work out so well as t, the way we measure it, approaches zero. I say the very reason that it doesn't work out so well is that on our chart t can approach zero. If we change the chart so that time is measured on a log scale, that doesn't happen. The point that we have been defining as t=0 is off at minus infinity.

    We can't observe or measure or even barely wonder about the differences between our chart and this chart because at the point we occupy the differences are too small. But clearly there is a major difference way over at the left-hand end. All of these processes that challenge our physics by occuring in a fraction of a femtosecond become more languid. And the singularity that challenges our philosophy, by defining a boundary beyond which nothing existed, vanishes. "Absolute zero" time becomes as meaningless as "absolute zero" temperature. We have the language to say the words but they don't represent anything real.

    Perhaps we are enslaved by our perception of linear time.
     
  19. Jaster Mereel Hostis Humani Generis Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    649
    That implies that the Universe has a spherical geometry. I've heard that most astronomers and physicists now work on the assumption that the Universe has a hyperbolic geometry, wherein the Universe is finite, but if you continue to travel you will travel forever. There is an infinite amount of space within the Universe, but the Universe isn't infinite.

    Very simply, anything which is beyond the known Universe is unknown. How can you expect anyone here to know what is beyond the known Universe? If they could answer that question, then it wouldn't be beyond the known Universe, would it?
     
  20. jumpercable 6EQUJ5 'WOW' Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    305
    I don't think we have even glimpsed the edge of the known universe yet, let alone knowing or even guessing what's beyond it.
     
  21. superluminal I am MalcomR Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,876
    I think I'll post some inane ramblings about my ideas on what's beyond the universe.

    I think there's a land of giant popsicle fairies who fling fairy dung at each other all day long.
     
  22. superluminal I am MalcomR Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,876
    Listen. There is nothing "beyond" the "known" universe because the universe is infinite in extent and all that there is. There is no "within" the universe or "outside" the universe.
     
  23. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    OMG! I got it. Beyond the known universe there is nothing if we look currently (through telescope) beyond the known the universe. However if we were right now beyond the known universe, then we would be in that unknown universe. Why? Because universe is expanding so it will fill up that unknown space in the universe. And we dont see that unknown universe which will later become known because light takes time to travel, so what we actually see is the past of current at that space.
     

Share This Page