The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Whats your theory explaining what could be on the other side of the end of the universe, is there an end or a continuess relm of empty space?
Page:
Halo vampire wrote:
> The universe is approx 99 × 1000000000000000000000000000000
> ^ 975312468926820349722881276 miles cubed.
I'm not sure how much truth is in that, but the observable universe is about 92 billion light years across.
That's about 870,387,203,477,433,600,000,000,000 meters for those of you who like big numbers.
Another cool fact, if you drive the world's fastest production car at it's max speed indefinitely, it would take you 244,455,346,341,600,000 years to get from one side to the other of JUST the observable universe.
That's over 17 million times the age of Universe itself :)
> The universe is approx 99 × 1000000000000000000000000000000
> ^ 975312468926820349722881276 miles cubed.
I'm not sure how much truth is in that, but the observable universe is about 92 billion light years across.
That's about 870,387,203,477,433,600,000,000,000 meters for those of you who like big numbers.
Another cool fact, if you drive the world's fastest production car at it's max speed indefinitely, it would take you 244,455,346,341,600,000 years to get from one side to the other of JUST the observable universe.
That's over 17 million times the age of Universe itself :)
My tape measure only goes as far as 8ft...
The universe is approx 99 × 1000000000000000000000000000000 ^ 975312468926820349722881276 miles cubed.
Necroing for potential interesting debate.
razzel wrote:
> Whats your theory explaining what could be on the other side of
> the end of the universe, is there an end or a continuess relm of
> empty space?
The other side of what? Space ends, there is no other side :)
Sonic Chris wrote:
> The most mind boggling question ever. First of all, I don't
> believe infinite space. It's science's lazy way of admitting they
> don't know. But the idea that there's an ending is just as
> impossible. If you took someone to the edge of the universe and
> said "it stops here", you'd be tempted to ask what was
> on the other side. Some people believe that the universe is a
> donut, but what's in the middle of it then?
>
> Safe to say, we'll never ever know in our lifetime, which is
> quite sad really. I'm sure it's quite a simple explanation ;D But
> there's no point worrying about a question we'll never know the
> answer to.
A clever, slightly obnoxious, scientist would say it's both infinite and finite and leave it at that.
The point here they're getting across, is that space is a mathematical construct and has a finite limit as we know it. The Universe is different, represents everything and almost certainly is infinite.
A couple things we know, firstly, space must be expanding. We know this primarily from the mutual redshift of all points relative to us (in English, everything is moving away from everything else) and also from lovely Mr. Hubble realising that the galaxies seem to move faster away from each other the further apart they are.
Secondly, time had a start. The Universe in it's present form cannot be infinitely old. It may, however, tend to infinity in age. This is because, as you might imagine, there cannot be an infinite amount of time before the point you are in now. You would be waiting for moment "infinity" forever :)
Now, space and time are entwined with one another, so we can infer that space had a beginning too. This is leads rather nicely to the Big Bang model. The third and possibly final thing we can be sure of.
Now, just quickly, common misconceptions.
- There was no bang
- There was no fire
- Galaxies didn't come flying out of an explosion
What there was, was an enormous amount of energy, on a level that is easily beyond comprehension, compressed to a point of equally incomprehensible tininess.
The lovely, infinitesimal dot had some very odd qualities. Time had no bearing, there was no before or after, or even present. It was all one gloup of chaos. Equally, there was no up, down, left nor right, and there was no outside the dot. Space didn't exist yet.
Luckily for us, this dot did the honourable thing and began expanding. Why? No one knows, and if you figured it out, you'd win more than the Nobel prize, you'd likely unlock all the secrets of the Universe and go down in history as one of the greatest humans to ever exist. Get cracking.
This is where we leave comfortable certainty and begin making rational assumptions.
I'm blabbering and went on far too long, I'll sleep now.
razzel wrote:
> Whats your theory explaining what could be on the other side of
> the end of the universe, is there an end or a continuess relm of
> empty space?
The other side of what? Space ends, there is no other side :)
Sonic Chris wrote:
> The most mind boggling question ever. First of all, I don't
> believe infinite space. It's science's lazy way of admitting they
> don't know. But the idea that there's an ending is just as
> impossible. If you took someone to the edge of the universe and
> said "it stops here", you'd be tempted to ask what was
> on the other side. Some people believe that the universe is a
> donut, but what's in the middle of it then?
>
> Safe to say, we'll never ever know in our lifetime, which is
> quite sad really. I'm sure it's quite a simple explanation ;D But
> there's no point worrying about a question we'll never know the
> answer to.
A clever, slightly obnoxious, scientist would say it's both infinite and finite and leave it at that.
The point here they're getting across, is that space is a mathematical construct and has a finite limit as we know it. The Universe is different, represents everything and almost certainly is infinite.
A couple things we know, firstly, space must be expanding. We know this primarily from the mutual redshift of all points relative to us (in English, everything is moving away from everything else) and also from lovely Mr. Hubble realising that the galaxies seem to move faster away from each other the further apart they are.
Secondly, time had a start. The Universe in it's present form cannot be infinitely old. It may, however, tend to infinity in age. This is because, as you might imagine, there cannot be an infinite amount of time before the point you are in now. You would be waiting for moment "infinity" forever :)
Now, space and time are entwined with one another, so we can infer that space had a beginning too. This is leads rather nicely to the Big Bang model. The third and possibly final thing we can be sure of.
Now, just quickly, common misconceptions.
- There was no bang
- There was no fire
- Galaxies didn't come flying out of an explosion
What there was, was an enormous amount of energy, on a level that is easily beyond comprehension, compressed to a point of equally incomprehensible tininess.
The lovely, infinitesimal dot had some very odd qualities. Time had no bearing, there was no before or after, or even present. It was all one gloup of chaos. Equally, there was no up, down, left nor right, and there was no outside the dot. Space didn't exist yet.
Luckily for us, this dot did the honourable thing and began expanding. Why? No one knows, and if you figured it out, you'd win more than the Nobel prize, you'd likely unlock all the secrets of the Universe and go down in history as one of the greatest humans to ever exist. Get cracking.
This is where we leave comfortable certainty and begin making rational assumptions.
I'm blabbering and went on far too long, I'll sleep now.
:D
It's taken me 25 years (and a lot of them on here) but I finally made a funny :D
It's taken me 25 years (and a lot of them on here) but I finally made a funny :D
Edgy wrote:
> Sonic Chris wrote:
> Some people believe that the universe is a
> donut, but what's in the middle of it then?
>
> Raspberry Jam of course :P
I laughed at this more than I should of :D
> Sonic Chris wrote:
> Some people believe that the universe is a
> donut, but what's in the middle of it then?
>
> Raspberry Jam of course :P
I laughed at this more than I should of :D
Halo moiser wrote:
yeah we need to remember we traveled to the moon 40ish years ago why is it taking so long to deploy a vessel to a further location?
The Moon is an average of ~239 thousand miles from Earth and the next nearest location we could land on, i.e. Mars (Venus is too hostile), is at its nearest ~49 million miles from Earth which is over 200 times further.
The first Apollo mission took 8 days, around 7 of which were travel time, so it'd take at least 1400 days or nearly 4 years to get there and back.
I could go on, but I've bored myself.
yeah we need to remember we traveled to the moon 40ish years ago why is it taking so long to deploy a vessel to a further location?
The Moon is an average of ~239 thousand miles from Earth and the next nearest location we could land on, i.e. Mars (Venus is too hostile), is at its nearest ~49 million miles from Earth which is over 200 times further.
The first Apollo mission took 8 days, around 7 of which were travel time, so it'd take at least 1400 days or nearly 4 years to get there and back.
I could go on, but I've bored myself.
Sonic Chris wrote:
Some people believe that the universe is a
> donut, but what's in the middle of it then?
>
Raspberry Jam of course :P
If the course of the stars/galaxies/etc suggest the Universe is expanding, then it would take a huge force to limit that expansion.
However, I don't think I'll know in my lifetime the answer to the question, and would be suprised if we go any further than Mars for planet landings in that same period.
Why haven't we gone further than the moon so far with manned craft? Easy answer...Money.
Some people believe that the universe is a
> donut, but what's in the middle of it then?
>
Raspberry Jam of course :P
If the course of the stars/galaxies/etc suggest the Universe is expanding, then it would take a huge force to limit that expansion.
However, I don't think I'll know in my lifetime the answer to the question, and would be suprised if we go any further than Mars for planet landings in that same period.
Why haven't we gone further than the moon so far with manned craft? Easy answer...Money.
yeah we need to remember we traveled to the moon 40ish years ago why is it taking so long to deploy a vessel to a further location?
It's interesting to theorize about the wonders of the Universe, but at the moment, humanity has only recently developed the technology to study our own galaxy and we still don't fully understand it yet.
It will obviously be centuries, if not milennia before the human race is capable of even considering going out into the Universe and trying to discover the secrets it holds.
As some people on this site will know by now I tend to have some weird theories :)
If you consider the atom, it is a tiny molecular structure, but everything is made up of hundreds of millions of them. What if we are the equivelent of an atom and our Universe is actually just part of a much larger organism/entity?
It will obviously be centuries, if not milennia before the human race is capable of even considering going out into the Universe and trying to discover the secrets it holds.
As some people on this site will know by now I tend to have some weird theories :)
If you consider the atom, it is a tiny molecular structure, but everything is made up of hundreds of millions of them. What if we are the equivelent of an atom and our Universe is actually just part of a much larger organism/entity?
Page: