Perkil8r Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 The video didn't work for me. I'm a bit curious about the title. As far as I know, the universe does not have an edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perkil8r Posted December 17, 2012 Author Share Posted December 17, 2012 the known universe then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 the known universe then Many cosmologists think that there are parts of the universe that aren't observable because they are receding faster than the speed of light. However, it STILL has a finite size and doesn't have an edge or a centre. If I knew what a 4-dimensional "sphere" looked like I could picture it because the universe is a 3-dimensional surface of a 4-dimensional sphere. OK, there may be more than 3/4 dimensions, like 11/12 but the principle still stands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 Many cosmologists think that there are parts of the universe that aren't observable because they are receding faster than the speed of light.. I'm surprised if this is the case. The speed of light is widely regarded as the "speed limit", past which further speeds would result in all sorts of unpleasant effects. Cosmologists should be familiar with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red dwalf Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 very enjoyable, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kheldar Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) I'm surprised if this is the case. The speed of light is widely regarded as the "speed limit", past which further speeds would result in all sorts of unpleasant effects. Cosmologists should be familiar with this. This is why the bits we can see are referred to as the observable Universe Space can expand faster than the speed of light, that's not movement, it's expansion of the space between things and is perfectly valid! Theory suggests the Universe is infinite / donut shaped ... Mmmm .... donut ..... Edited December 21, 2012 by Kheldar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perkil8r Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 I have a single hair left on my head, anybody care to split it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 This is why the bits we can see are referred to as the observable Universe Space can expand faster than the speed of light, that's not movement, it's expansion of the space between things and is perfectly valid! Theory suggests the Universe is infinite / donut shaped ... Mmmm .... donut ..... I can relate to the concept of space expanding faster than the speed of light and there was (apparently) a brief period of "inflation" where the universe did just that very early in its history. What I fail to "get" is what caused this "inflation" and what stopped it and why the universe can accelerate and decelerate its expansion. Logic suggests that the universe should expand at a constant rate or that it should expand at a uniformly accelerating or decelerating rate. I'll probably be ripped to bits and fed to the lions by cosmologists for this but I think the "inflation" if the universe may well be the "epicycle" of the 20th century. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kheldar Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) Most understandable explanation I've read is by the guy who theorised all this in the first place: early in the history of the universe a chance fluctuation led to a localized area in a false vacuum state. This false vacuum state possessed negative gravitational energy which rapidly inflated that small area at super-luminal velocities to be many, many orders of magnitude larger. The inflation died out as a result of the natural decay of the false vacuum state. What logic suggests the Universe should expand at a constant rate? Edited December 21, 2012 by Kheldar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now