End of the universe?

[metalmon1188]

Has anyone wondered if there is a limit to the universe? there must be an end somehow, if the end was like an electromagnetic shield, what is beyong that shield? heaven?

[trailerparktrash]

Considerations of the shape of the universe can be split into two parts; the local geometry relates especially to the curvature of the universe at points everywhere, and especially in the observable universe, while the global geometry relates especially to the topology of the universe as a whole — which may or may not be within our ability to measure.

Cosmologists normally work with a given space-like slice of spacetime called the comoving coordinate system. In terms of observation, the section of spacetime that can be observed is the backward light cone (points within the cosmic light horizon, given time to reach a given observer). For related issues, see distance measures (cosmology). The related term Hubble volume can be used to describe either the past light cone or comoving space up to the surface of last scattering. From the point of view of special relativity alone, speaking of "the shape of the universe (at a point in time)" is ontologically naive because of the issue of relativity of simultaneity: you cannot speak of different points in space being "at the same point in time", thus you cannot speak of "the shape of the universe at some point in time". However, the existence of a preferred set of comoving is possible and widely accepted in present-day physical cosmology.

If the observable universe is smaller than the entire universe (in some models it is many orders of magnitude smaller), one cannot determine the global structure by observation: one is limited to a small patch. Conversely, if the observable universe encompasses the entire universe, one can determine the global structure by observation. Further, the universe could be small in some dimension and not in others (like a cylinder): if a small closed loop exists, one would see multiple images of objects in the sky.

[nestlequikie]

[quote author=trailerparktrash link=topic=15410.msg948068#msg948068 date=1217423950]
Considerations of the shape of the universe can be split into two parts; the local geometry relates especially to the curvature of the universe at points everywhere, and especially in the observable universe, while the global geometry relates especially to the topology of the universe as a whole — which may or may not be within our ability to measure.

Cosmologists normally work with a given space-like slice of spacetime called the comoving coordinate system. In terms of observation, the section of spacetime that can be observed is the backward light cone (points within the cosmic light horizon, given time to reach a given observer). For related issues, see distance measures (cosmology). The related term Hubble volume can be used to describe either the past light cone or comoving space up to the surface of last scattering. From the point of view of special relativity alone, speaking of "the shape of the universe (at a point in time)" is ontologically naive because of the issue of relativity of simultaneity: you cannot speak of different points in space being "at the same point in time", thus you cannot speak of "the shape of the universe at some point in time". However, the existence of a preferred set of comoving is possible and widely accepted in present-day physical cosmology.

If the observable universe is smaller than the entire universe (in some models it is many orders of magnitude smaller), one cannot determine the global structure by observation: one is limited to a small patch. Conversely, if the observable universe encompasses the entire universe, one can determine the global structure by observation. Further, the universe could be small in some dimension and not in others (like a cylinder): if a small closed loop exists, one would see multiple images of objects in the sky.




[/quote]

Huh? 

[size=2pt]
I feel so damn dumb, now[/size]

[metalmon1188]

[quote author=trailerparktrash link=topic=15410.msg948068#msg948068 date=1217423950]
Considerations of the shape of the universe can be split into two parts; the local geometry relates especially to the curvature of the universe at points everywhere, and especially in the observable universe, while the global geometry relates especially to the topology of the universe as a whole — which may or may not be within our ability to measure.

Cosmologists normally work with a given space-like slice of spacetime called the comoving coordinate system. In terms of observation, the section of spacetime that can be observed is the backward light cone (points within the cosmic light horizon, given time to reach a given observer). For related issues, see distance measures (cosmology). The related term Hubble volume can be used to describe either the past light cone or comoving space up to the surface of last scattering. From the point of view of special relativity alone, speaking of "the shape of the universe (at a point in time)" is ontologically naive because of the issue of relativity of simultaneity: you cannot speak of different points in space being "at the same point in time", thus you cannot speak of "the shape of the universe at some point in time". However, the existence of a preferred set of comoving is possible and widely accepted in present-day physical cosmology.

If the observable universe is smaller than the entire universe (in some models it is many orders of magnitude smaller), one cannot determine the global structure by observation: one is limited to a small patch. Conversely, if the observable universe encompasses the entire universe, one can determine the global structure by observation. Further, the universe could be small in some dimension and not in others (like a cylinder): if a small closed loop exists, one would see multiple images of objects in the sky.




[/quote]
thanx for the input

[trailerparktrash]

Well, there is a specific distinction between the 'known universe', that is the part of the universe that we can observe and quantify, and 'the universe'

Oh I totally just copy pasted my previous post from wiki.

But I do space and all that it entails.

[metalmon1188]

well the big bang theory, pretty much the theory every scientist agrees on, is that the universe keeps expanding, and at a greater rate, FOR NOW. It will contract one day, God knows when, to a single point of singularity,

[trailerparktrash]

OH and you should read this book

[nestlequikie]

[quote author=trailerparktrash link=topic=15410.msg948093#msg948093 date=1217425185]
OH and you should read this book


[/quote]

So..... TPT, was your siggy with the girl in the space helmet from that Zathura movie???  :oops:

[trailerparktrash]

[quote author=nestlequikie link=topic=15410.msg948097#msg948097 date=1217425396]
So..... TPT, was your siggy with the girl in the space helmet from that Zathura movie???  :oops:
[/quote]

I don't know, I just founded the picture on google :oops:

[Karalicious]

:sleep2:

omg I almost killed you this morning tpt. Ive been having trouble sleeping and I was just dozing back off when I got your text message at 4 AM. You just wait, I will get you back. 

[trailerparktrash]

[quote author=Karalicious link=topic=15410.msg948105#msg948105 date=1217425728]
:sleep2:

omg I almost killed you this morning tpt. Ive been having trouble sleeping and I was just dozing back off when I got your text message at 4 AM. You just wait, I will get you back. 
[/quote]

Whateverrrrrrrrrrrr.  :2smiley:

I'm not scared.

Ps- I'm kinda sorry.  :kiss3:

[filthy gorgeous]

[quote author=trailerparktrash link=topic=15410.msg948109#msg948109 date=1217425854]
Whateverrrrrrrrrrrr.  :2smiley:

I'm not scared.

Ps- I'm kinda sorry.  :kiss3:
[/quote]

I wish you two would text me!

[leapfreak]

[quote author=trailerparktrash link=topic=15410.msg948109#msg948109 date=1217425854]
Whateverrrrrrrrrrrr.  :2smiley:

I'm not scared.

Ps- I'm kinda sorry.  :kiss3:
[/quote]

  How come you never text me anymore?  Although text me at 4am and I will personally fly to Australia and kick your arse