Can Someone Handcuff The Strictly...
Film, Media & TV2 mins ago
Infinite Or Closed Universe
Can any of the scientific minds here please tell me what the current scientific understanding of the universe is at the present? (or at least the general consensus). Is it closed or infinite?
I have trouble wrapping my head around either model. Is there another one that I havnt heard about.
Thanks.
I have trouble wrapping my head around either model. Is there another one that I havnt heard about.
Thanks.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by nailit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Many thanks for your support Kidas. It's an interesting challenge to try and communicate science of any kind because ultimately the aim is to encourage people to be interested enough to want to contribute themselves. It's always seemed to me that this is better served by explaining the basic concepts but also hinting that "there is more to the story".
Maybe that's just the way I look at things, but on the face of it I seem to have had some measure of success in my approach. Alongside my own research I've done a lot of teaching, mainly of undergraduates, and they don't seem to have complained much about my way of explaining things (nor did High School students on the occasions I've helped out there, if it comes to that). At any rate, to the best of my knowledge I've only had one person complain about the way I explain things, and I'd say that's a reasonably good success rate for a budding teacher.
This stuff is hard. But then it kind of has to be hard, otherwise we would have understood it all properly centuries ago. I prefer to take encouragement in that fact. But I'll always do my best to try and demystify it as far as I am able.
Maybe that's just the way I look at things, but on the face of it I seem to have had some measure of success in my approach. Alongside my own research I've done a lot of teaching, mainly of undergraduates, and they don't seem to have complained much about my way of explaining things (nor did High School students on the occasions I've helped out there, if it comes to that). At any rate, to the best of my knowledge I've only had one person complain about the way I explain things, and I'd say that's a reasonably good success rate for a budding teacher.
This stuff is hard. But then it kind of has to be hard, otherwise we would have understood it all properly centuries ago. I prefer to take encouragement in that fact. But I'll always do my best to try and demystify it as far as I am able.
Hi Jim
I think you do a great job - far better than me. you remain calm, argue well and keep to the point - well done.
Wish I could do that.
But I do think that the current batch of politicians simply ride roughshod over 'incovenient' advice.
I'm sure it's getting worse, and I am equally sure that it is down to people seeking 'sound bite' answers to difficult, complex and far-reaching problems.
Twitter, 24-hour news cycles and reduced resources for research and fact-checking mean that the skilled speakers can run rings round the news anchors and tell lies and half-truths that sometimes do not get challenged sufficiently robustly.
But that's maybe another topic - I think this one is more or less exhausted now.
Thank you for your kind words.
D
I think you do a great job - far better than me. you remain calm, argue well and keep to the point - well done.
Wish I could do that.
But I do think that the current batch of politicians simply ride roughshod over 'incovenient' advice.
I'm sure it's getting worse, and I am equally sure that it is down to people seeking 'sound bite' answers to difficult, complex and far-reaching problems.
Twitter, 24-hour news cycles and reduced resources for research and fact-checking mean that the skilled speakers can run rings round the news anchors and tell lies and half-truths that sometimes do not get challenged sufficiently robustly.
But that's maybe another topic - I think this one is more or less exhausted now.
Thank you for your kind words.
D
'Infinity' and 'universe' are both meaningless (undefined) terms until one specifies the conceptual limits one choses to place on a given use of the terms. For example, what does it mean to say the universe is everything that exists, has ever or will ever exist? Anyone who says they know is not worthy of the ear of the least astute listener. Likewise infinity can not be realised, or even approached as it specifies a sum that in principle does, never has nor never will exist in reality. A complete lack of understanding is not a license to use arbitrary terms arbitrarily . . . unless maintaining a complete lack of understanding is the intent.
“…if one takes the Big Bang theory at face value, then the Universe is (effectively) finite in time”
Why? AIUI the “Big Bang” describes an event that happened to the matter within the Universe, not the space in which it happened. In an infinite universe there could be any number of “big bangs” going off all over the place. The one we see evidence of is just the only one we can detect with our puny instruments.
Why? AIUI the “Big Bang” describes an event that happened to the matter within the Universe, not the space in which it happened. In an infinite universe there could be any number of “big bangs” going off all over the place. The one we see evidence of is just the only one we can detect with our puny instruments.
NJ, //a Universe infinite in both time and space - fits the bill//
Thats something that I would go along with, purely because i am incapable of trying to imagine...or accept the concept of.. 'nothing'
(is there such a thing as nothing?) OUTSIDE of the universe.
Either model...infinite or bounded...raises yet more questions.
Blimey, time for another paracetomol...
Thats something that I would go along with, purely because i am incapable of trying to imagine...or accept the concept of.. 'nothing'
(is there such a thing as nothing?) OUTSIDE of the universe.
Either model...infinite or bounded...raises yet more questions.
Blimey, time for another paracetomol...
"the “Big Bang” describes an event that happened to the matter within the Universe, not the space in which it happened"
Not as I understand it. It didn't happen in a space, the space was created "at the same time" (for want of a better phrase) as the matter, and time itself. But if one is willing to consider an infinite area of infinite density to start with, I guess anything goes.
Not as I understand it. It didn't happen in a space, the space was created "at the same time" (for want of a better phrase) as the matter, and time itself. But if one is willing to consider an infinite area of infinite density to start with, I guess anything goes.
"...the space was created "at the same time" (for want of a better phrase)"
So what was there beforehand, OG? No space? No matter?
"But if one is willing to consider an infinite area of infinite density to start with"
It doesn't have to be of infinite density because there is more space than matter (just like the bits we can currently see). I accept that an infinite amount of space would contain an infinite amount of matter and accept that ∞/∞ is just as uncomfortable as 0/0. But I can live with that more than I can live with some of the other models for the Universe!
So what was there beforehand, OG? No space? No matter?
"But if one is willing to consider an infinite area of infinite density to start with"
It doesn't have to be of infinite density because there is more space than matter (just like the bits we can currently see). I accept that an infinite amount of space would contain an infinite amount of matter and accept that ∞/∞ is just as uncomfortable as 0/0. But I can live with that more than I can live with some of the other models for the Universe!
What was there before?
Quantum foam.
https:/
Quantum foam.
https:/
The Big Bang is about the creation and expansion of space, not of matter (or at least not only of matter). It's a common misconception, and one I think you have taken too much to heart, NJ.
It also makes the beginning of time itself, so asking what came "before" the Big Bang is (probably) as meaningless a question as asking what lies south of the South Pole.
It also makes the beginning of time itself, so asking what came "before" the Big Bang is (probably) as meaningless a question as asking what lies south of the South Pole.
// so asking what came "before" the Big Bang is (probably) as meaningless a question as asking what lies south of the South Pole.//
Why is that meaningless jim?
What is south of the south pole is more south (and into eternity?) Surely? Its still south.
Whereas asking what was before the big bang is a different question?
Why is that meaningless jim?
What is south of the south pole is more south (and into eternity?) Surely? Its still south.
Whereas asking what was before the big bang is a different question?
Latest Posts
Crosswords8 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles13 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles76 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles111 mins ago
Strands #260 “Coming Up For...
Quizzes & Puzzles117 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.