Do you believe the Universe is infinite?

[foetus]

If you were in one of the most distant galaxies we know of at this moment, you would be able to see the light from the explosion that killed the dinosaurs.

Don't want to be an arse but this isn't technically correct. Dinosaurs were only wiped out 66 millions years ago...some galaxies are known to be over 10 billion light years away from us.

The point still stands though...if you were at the correct distance away from the earth, you could indeed see the light from the explosion as if it were only happening today.

 

[Blue Tooth]

A bit.

 

[whp.blue]

I think it's infinite, and somewhere in the vastness of space and time, City are actually beating a team of hard-working journeymen after having 75% possession and 22 shots.

Why do some people confuse Infinite size with multi-verse/ parallel universe theories
Just because the universe is infinite in size doesn't mean there are millions of versions of Earth. Earth could still be unique in an infinite universe.

 

[SWP's back]

No such thing as nothing though

Not known by man can mean nothing. Like there was nothing before the big bang (that we can know of) there is nothing behind the curtain on expanding space.

It's always seemed a catch 22 to me, if at one point there was absolute nothing, this would have to be infinite by definition, even getting your head round that is hard enough, but if it was the case then the Big Bang could not have happened as an event, but something happened to create the universe, a reaction cannot happen without something being there in the first place

Do you not read anything Damocles posts.

You believe something has to create something else as that is the law of causality in physics. But before the Big Bang there was no causality as it didn't come into being until after the Big Bang. That's when the laws of physics as they are known were created.

 

[SWP's back]

No.

Because I've got no idea if it is or not, and no way of finding out.

Scientists get paid to theorise and pontificate about the universe, and they don't know either.

I don't believe it is finite either, for the same reasons.

Didn't you post that a few pages back and were informed then as well?

 

[inbetween]

I think it's infinite, and somewhere in the vastness of space and time, City are actually beating a team of hard-working journeymen after having 75% possession and 22 shots.

Why do some people confuse Infinite size with multi-verse/ parallel universe theories
Just because the universe is infinite in size doesn't mean there are millions of versions of Earth. Earth could still be unique in an infinite universe.

But if it is infinite then there is an equal probability to the power of infinite that the Earth is not unique.

I think infinite is far too complex of a notion to be attached to something like this because infinite implies the universe never ends, it therefore cannot have an ending nor starting point. A single creation point at the big bang implies an expansion and that expansion must have a quantifiable rate so it cannot be infinite, hence no infinite universe.

The big bang is still however a theory, we do not know if it ever truly happened, if it did then the universe cannot be infinite. Still, it could be that the universe is infinite but this is only because we just do not understand how to evaluate it mathematically. Personally I doubt it can be but then what is it? It just isn't something we will ever be able to measure which makes infinity a very easy concept to attach to the shear magnitude.

Infinite can be often seen as a singular, casual point that will forever be beyond our understanding.

 

[Damocles]

But if it is infinite then there is an equal probability to the power of infinite that the Earth is not unique.

The amount of positive numbers is infinite. But there is only one number 4.

I think infinite is far too complex of a notion to be attached to something like this because infinite implies the universe never ends, it therefore cannot have an ending nor starting point. A single creation point at the big bang implies an expansion and that expansion must have a quantifiable rate so it cannot be infinite, hence no infinite universe.

There are an infinite amount of counting numbers. But they start at 0.

The big bang is still however a theory, we do not know if it ever truly happened

The Big Bang is not actually a theory, but a theoretical model.

Either way, you have confused the scientific term "theory" and the common usage of the word "theory".

In the common way we talk, when we say that we have a theory what we really mean is that we have a hypothesis. This means a possible explanation of why something just happened. This is not the scientific definition of theory.

When somebody is talking about a scientific theory, they mean that a particular hypothesis is so well supported by experimental evidence and has made constantly correct predictions that it has become so well established that it is extremely unlikely to be overturned. The Earth orbiting the Sun is a theory. So is gravity. And electromagnetism.

When somebody is given the status of "a theory" in science, it means that it is almost undoubted true and everybody recognises that this is the way that something works. Often small changes come along that change the minutia of it but very, very rarely are whole theories overthrown in modern science.

if it did then the universe cannot be infinite. Still, it could be that the universe is infinite but this is only because we just do not understand how to evaluate it mathematically. Personally I doubt it can be but then what is it? It just isn't something we will ever be able to measure which makes infinity a very easy concept to attach to the shear magnitude.

Infinite can be often seen as a singular, casual point that will forever be beyond our understanding.

I'm not sure why you feel infinite is so mysterious or incomprehensible. It's a very well understood and often used concept in both physics and maths in general. It just means "without boundaries"

 

[whp.blue]

But if it is infinite then there is an equal probability to the power of infinite that the Earth is not unique.

The amount of positive numbers is infinite. But there is only one number 4.

I think infinite is far too complex of a notion to be attached to something like this because infinite implies the universe never ends, it therefore cannot have an ending nor starting point. A single creation point at the big bang implies an expansion and that expansion must have a quantifiable rate so it cannot be infinite, hence no infinite universe.

There are an infinite amount of counting numbers. But they start at 0.


The Big Bang is not actually a theory, but a theoretical model.

Either way, you have confused the scientific term "theory" and the common usage of the word "theory".

In the common way we talk, when we say that we have a theory what we really mean is that we have a hypothesis. This means a possible explanation of why something just happened. This is not the scientific definition of theory.

When somebody is talking about a scientific theory, they mean that a particular hypothesis is so well supported by experimental evidence and has made constantly correct predictions that it has become so well established that it is extremely unlikely to be overturned. The Earth orbiting the Sun is a theory. So is gravity. And electromagnetism.

When somebody is given the status of "a theory" in science, it means that it is almost undoubted true and everybody recognises that this is the way that something works. Often small changes come along that change the minutia of it but very, very rarely are whole theories overthrown in modern science.

if it did then the universe cannot be infinite. Still, it could be that the universe is infinite but this is only because we just do not understand how to evaluate it mathematically. Personally I doubt it can be but then what is it? It just isn't something we will ever be able to measure which makes infinity a very easy concept to attach to the shear magnitude.

Infinite can be often seen as a singular, casual point that will forever be beyond our understanding.

I'm not sure why you feel infinite is so mysterious or incomprehensible. It's a very well understood and often used concept in both physics and maths in general. It just means "without boundaries"

Thank You Damocles I was just about to say the exact same thing (not so eloquently though I'm sure) but you beat me to it

I was right with my post then You have taught me a few things on this subject I actually understand bits of this now

 

[hilts]

Not known by man can mean nothing. Like there was nothing before the big bang (that we can know of) there is nothing behind the curtain on expanding space.

It's always seemed a catch 22 to me, if at one point there was absolute nothing, this would have to be infinite by definition, even getting your head round that is hard enough, but if it was the case then the Big Bang could not have happened as an event, but something happened to create the universe, a reaction cannot happen without something being there in the first place

Do you not read anything Damocles posts.

You believe something has to create something else as that is the law of causality in physics. But before the Big Bang there was no causality as it didn't come into being until after the Big Bang. That's when the laws of physics as they are known were created.

I did read it, I guess you didn't read mine

 

[Damocles]

It's always seemed a catch 22 to me, if at one point there was absolute nothing, this would have to be infinite by definition, even getting your head round that is hard enough, but if it was the case then the Big Bang could not have happened as an event, but something happened to create the universe, a reaction cannot happen without something being there in the first place

Do you not read anything Damocles posts.

You believe something has to create something else as that is the law of causality in physics. But before the Big Bang there was no causality as it didn't come into being until after the Big Bang. That's when the laws of physics as they are known were created.

I did read it, I guess you didn't read mine

He's referring to the last line. The only reason that a reaction cannot happen without something being there is because reactions apply the laws of causality.

Once you remove spacetime which is why causality exists, there's no reason that something had to precede a reaction. There's no reason why "ingredients" had to exist.