I think I just found a major contradiction in theoretical physics.

Most theoretical physicists hold that space must go on forever, and dismiss the idea that there might be an "edge" to the universe.

I'm not 100% sure I understand the argument correctly, but Steven Hawkins said that there can't be an edge to the universe because that would mean that the laws of physics aren't the same at every point in space.

That sounds fine, except..... the laws of physics aren't the same at every point in space. It's generally thought that within a black hole, the laws of physics as we understand them break down. So, the idea that the laws of physics are the same everywhere must be false.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Black holes are a singularity. I think that is the physicist’s equivalent of 1/0… it is unknown what happens on the inside because we couldn’t do enough calculations to simulate the inside of one (we already have infinite matrices for known quantum physics and a black hole would be infinite that and gravity and have no contain Hawking radiation and information and probably a zillion other things that we don’t even know yet). By definition the singularity cannot describe time-space.

When the going gets weird, the weird turns quantum!!



PS - I am not an authority upon physics just an enthusiast like yourself. And when it comes to quantum physics we could both be right at the same time until someone collapses the wave function!!

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

If the Universe is a sphere , and why wouldn't it be , it would have no edge.

Every time we put a better telescope up there we put our current understanding of the universe in jeopardy.

a reply to: gortex

The classic example example is dots on a balloon. As the universe expands the dots move away from each other. But that is happening everywhere!

As space time expands it is not expanding into something but creating it! I.E., no balloon edge.

I think the argument is that the universe’s furthest points are moving away so fast that we will never see them because it would take 13 billions of years to see where they are today!

The geometric argument says that spacetime is flat (or pretty darn close) which implies an infinite universe (and a big freeze ending where all stars use up their fuel and, given enough time, even black holes boil away to nothing).

At least that’s what I understand about the theory!



a reply to: bounder

Not “in jeopardy”. How about “in focus”?? It is more data (observations with better instruments), which means that we test our knowledge and understanding of what we thought we know which, because it is theoretical, could be wrong or incomplete!

Here’s some early morning headaches for you! The scientists think that the spiders web is an extension of its brain. If that is true, what is a better telescope to humans??

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

You do realize space time or time space does not exist. It is only a mathmatical concept used to simplify some equations.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Physics are only real if you are a turkey scientist.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

If there is an edge, what's on the other side seems to be a rather pertinent question.

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

The geometric argument says that spacetime is flat (or pretty darn close) which implies an infinite universe (and a big freeze ending where all stars use up their fuel and, given enough time, even black holes boil away to nothing).

I have a really hard time with "infinity" , to me it's the equivalent to science saying "we just don't know" , personally I can't accept that anything could be infinite.

I'm still keen on the Universe being on or in a Black Hole theory.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

If there is an edge, what's on the other side seems to be a rather pertinent question.

That's like saying the earth is flat has an edge but even if it was you would fall off into space so there's no end point If you stood on the edge of the Universe you would see the other side of the border - i kind of explained this to myself as a circle

Even a Circle has a beginning point in order to be a Circle there has to be a end point also however where they meet becomes something completely different but allows the end to continue back thru the begging once it completes the full circle ... At the point the beginning and the end meet must be where all the answers are .

originally posted by: bounder
Every time we put a better telescope up there we put our current understanding of the universe in jeopardy.

Which is a good thing! Never stop learning! Imagine if we had called our science solved at four elements...

a reply to: Ravenwatcher

I would have said it's more along the same to similar lines as which came first the chicken or the egg?

You see the shape of our universe aside if it has an edge or border, then it must exist within something else.

Sounds like what you are describing somewhat resembles a Mobius strip of sorts.

A lot of people speculate the shape of our universe to toroidal by nature.

As to our Earth well that's most definitely an oblate spheroid where the shape is concerned.

Given our limited perspective and lack of understanding regarding the grand totality of it all, somehow i suspect the question is somewhat above humanity's pay grade, and beyond any sort of meaningful answer or our ability to comprehend.

a reply to: gortex

Concepts like “really big” and “really small” are difficult to understand even for specialized researchers!

Infinity is one of those! Even when you start thinking about different types of infinity! In math, you can have individual units that you can number “1,2,3..), and other numbers that go on forever like pi or square root of 2, and if you use a numbering system that uses both you have yet another set of infinity!

Heck, mathematicians still argue about how infinite set there are!

So don’t feel bad!

I struggle with some of this too!

Me too. How about the now, would that be quantifiable as infinite?
a reply to: gortex

a reply to: gortex

I'm still keen on the Universe being on or in a Black Hole theory.

I like the idea myself.

But the question still begs if we exist within the event horizon of a Black Hole, then what does the blackhole exist within?

"Turtles all the way down" is as good an answer as any other i suppose.

originally posted by: bounder
Every time we put a better telescope up there we put our current understanding of the universe in jeopardy.

There is a point that no telescope -- no matter how good -- can see.

That's because (theoretically) the apparent expansion of the universe from our point of view is faster than the speed of light. So there is light emitted from some parts of the universe that has no possible way to ever reach us (reach Earth/our eyes/ a telescope).

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
That sounds fine, except..... the laws of physics aren't the same at every point in space. It's generally thought that within a black hole, the laws of physics as we understand them break down. So, the idea that the laws of physics are the same everywhere must be false.

I think the wording is throwing you off here. Laws of physics don't 'break down' anywhere. Laws of physics are laws of physics, they work exactly as they do everywhere.

What breaks down is our understanding of those laws, as you mentioned. Just because we don't understand what happens does not means laws themselves stop working. One day we will have a newer theory and we will understand perfectly what goes on in and out of black holes, and there won't be any mystery around it and we won't be saying anything breaks down.

And cosmos can absolutely have an edge. In fact many string and information theories predict that all information could be written on the edge, or the membrane of the universe, it is a 2D surface that projects, in 3D, all that happens within the volume; almost as a hologram projection of a lower dimensional surface.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

The geometric argument says that spacetime is flat (or pretty darn close) which implies an infinite universe (and a big freeze ending where all stars use up their fuel and, given enough time, even black holes boil away to nothing).

I have a really hard time with "infinity" , to me it's the equivalent to science saying "we just don't know" , personally I can't accept that anything could be infinite.

I'm still keen on the Universe being on or in a Black Hole theory.

Then what is beyond that black hole ?

I think the laws of physics are different in every point in space to a degree.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

If the Universe is a sphere , and why wouldn't it be , it would have no edge.

It would be a bubble. Bubbles of any size and shape have at least two edges.

Inside and outside.