Anything exist outside the known universe?

  • 61 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by playmynutz (6346 posts) -
The universe is about 13.7 billion years old because the farthest light visible. Existence (complete universe) is infinite. While the known universe is a bubble in existence. My main point is the universe we know of 13.7 billion years old is not the final frontier. Do you believe there is existence which expands past the known universe?
#2 Posted by chaoscougar1 (36991 posts) -

The universe is about 13.7 billion years old because the farthest light visible. Existence (complete universe) is infinite. While the known universe is a bubble in existence.

My main point is the universe we know of 13.7 billion years old is not the final frontier. Do you believe there is existence which expands past the known universe?playmynutz

Thats an oxymoron
How can something be infinite but have a beginnning?
And on that point, how can you ask whether something is outside of an infinitely large object?

When you say known universe are you referring to the one we can see?
If thats the case, then yes, it's just that the universe is expanding faster than the speed of light, so we are losing more and more of the visible universe

However,
Time and space do not exist outside of the universe
So no, nothing exists

#3 Posted by konvikt_17 (22344 posts) -

The unknown universe

#4 Posted by Aljosa23 (25903 posts) -

1. The world is only 8000 years old, duh.
2. Probably not because God only created the Earth.

#5 Posted by GD-1369211121 (4086 posts) -

Sure. Why not?

#6 Posted by wis3boi (31957 posts) -

no possible way of knowing for the foreseeable future, thanks to the Planck Wall.  Physics breaks down at that point and any speculation prior to the beginning of the visible universe is a waste until we get a better understanding of the physics prior to that or a better understand of why we have such a wall.

#7 Posted by konvikt_17 (22344 posts) -

this actually seem impossible. i mean once we are able to observe it, it will be known, not unknown.

or some shit like that.

kinda like how tomorow doesnt really exist.

idk.

#8 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (4553 posts) -

Probably.

#9 Posted by playmynutz (6346 posts) -

Probably.

MakeMeaSammitch
Right
#10 Posted by Jimn_tonic (913 posts) -

The universe is about 13.7 billion years old because the farthest light visible. Existence (complete universe) is infinite. While the known universe is a bubble in existence. My main point is the universe we know of 13.7 billion years old is not the final frontier. Do you believe there is existence which expands past the known universe?playmynutz

 there has to be.

human comprehention can only reach so far in deep space.

classy name btw

#11 Posted by Laihendi (5834 posts) -
By definition it would be impossible for us to know.
#12 Posted by m0zart (11568 posts) -

The speed of light is only a limit on objects. It isn't a limit on the expansion of spacetime. According to the theory of inflation, the spacetime of the early universe expanded faster than the speed of light, and this expansion in a sense carried objects faster respective to each other than light. Technically the objects themselves didn't need to move at all (although they did)... they could be completely still in respect to their position in spacetime and yet those two objects would be gaining new distance with respect to each other. Therefore there could be parts of the universe which are not visible from our galaxy because they are carried faster than the speed of light respective to us by the expansion of spacetime, so that their light would never reach us.

However, even without the expansion of spacetime, I can see a scenario where this might be possible, although at least for now I have no idea if it ever happens. Since the limit is on the objects themselves, no one object can travel the speed of light. However, if two objects were moving away from each other at at least half the speed of light, with one of them exceeding half by an extremely small amount, then their combined speed respective to each other would be faster than the speed of light, and any light generated by those objects would never reach each other. That situation wouldn't necessarily be permanent though since one or both objects could for some reason be slowed down or change direction to effectively lower that total speed. As far as I know, it's not something that is known to occur right now anyway (at least not without the additional expansion of spacetime) as the fastest objects in the known universe seem to be rogue plannets going between 8000 and 9000 miles per second, and the amount of energy it takes for those two objects to actually travel that speed respective to spacetime would be immense and perhaps impossible to attain on just the objects themselves.

#13 Posted by iowastate (7873 posts) -

if it is outside the 'known' universe how the hell would we know about it in the first place?

#14 Posted by Laihendi (5834 posts) -

The speed of light is only a limit on objects. It isn't a limit on the expansion of spacetime. According to the theory of inflation, the spacetime of the early universe expanded faster than the speed of light, and this expansion in a sense carried objects faster respective to each other than light. Technically the objects themselves didn't need to move at all (although they did)... they could be completely still in respect to their position in spacetime and yet those two objects would be gaining new distance with respect to each other. Therefore there could be parts of the universe which are not visible from our galaxy because they are carried faster than the speed of light respective to us by the expansion of spacetime, so that their light would never reach us.

However, even without the expansion of spacetime, I can see a scenario where this might be possible, although at least for now I have no idea if it ever happens. Since the limit is on the objects themselves, no one object can travel the speed of light. However, if two objects were moving away from each other at at least half the speed of light, with one of them exceeding half by an extremely small amount, then their combined speed respective to each other would be faster than the speed of light, and any light generated by those objects would never reach each other. That situation wouldn't necessarily be permanent though since one or both objects could for some reason be slowed down or change direction to effectively lower that total speed. As far as I know, it's not something that is known to occur right now anyway (at least not without the additional expansion of spacetime) as the fastest objects in the known universe seem to be rogue plannets going between 8000 and 9000 miles per second, and the amount of energy it takes for those two objects to actually travel that speed respective to spacetime would be immense and perhaps impossible to attain on just the objects themselves.

m0zart
What is your major?
#15 Posted by m0zart (11568 posts) -

[QUOTE="m0zart"]

The speed of light is only a limit on objects. It isn't a limit on the expansion of spacetime. According to the theory of inflation, the spacetime of the early universe expanded faster than the speed of light, and this expansion in a sense carried objects faster respective to each other than light. Technically the objects themselves didn't need to move at all (although they did)... they could be completely still in respect to their position in spacetime and yet those two objects would be gaining new distance with respect to each other. Therefore there could be parts of the universe which are not visible from our galaxy because they are carried faster than the speed of light respective to us by the expansion of spacetime, so that their light would never reach us.

However, even without the expansion of spacetime, I can see a scenario where this might be possible, although at least for now I have no idea if it ever happens. Since the limit is on the objects themselves, no one object can travel the speed of light. However, if two objects were moving away from each other at at least half the speed of light, with one of them exceeding half by an extremely small amount, then their combined speed respective to each other would be faster than the speed of light, and any light generated by those objects would never reach each other. That situation wouldn't necessarily be permanent though since one or both objects could for some reason be slowed down or change direction to effectively lower that total speed. As far as I know, it's not something that is known to occur right now anyway (at least not without the additional expansion of spacetime) as the fastest objects in the known universe seem to be rogue plannets going between 8000 and 9000 miles per second, and the amount of energy it takes for those two objects to actually travel that speed respective to spacetime would be immense and perhaps impossible to attain on just the objects themselves.

Laihendi

What is your major?

Web searching. Majored in Google.

EDIT: Real answer, Computer Science.

#16 Posted by SirWander (5176 posts) -

dunno

#17 Posted by Vaasman (11762 posts) -

The unknown universe.

#18 Posted by Gaming-Planet (14360 posts) -

Space ends when it runs out of room.

It will always be spaceish. :P

#19 Posted by m0zart (11568 posts) -

Space ends when it runs out of room.

It will always be spaceish. :P Gaming-Planet

Is that you 0rbs?

#20 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -
Sure there could be. I suppose it's possible that our big bang wasn't the only one to ever happen and in a sea of nothingness that could potentially be infinite there could be other points where matter and energy originated from and the two haven't quite, or may never, overlap. Obviously there's no proof of that but I don't really see why it's impossible and since we're just speculating, why not? It's possible that at separate points in time every potential occurrence has happened as well and that what you see is just whatever existence you happen to occupy. We've had our perceptions of the way reality works questioned so many times throughout history I think that keeping an open mind about that is at the absolute least entertaining, if not helpful.
#21 Posted by foxhound_fox (90618 posts) -
The universe is not infinite. There might be an infinite number of multiverses, but the universe is definitely not infinite. We currently do not know what or if anything exists outside the known universe... and that's fine, because scientists are comfortable admitting that they do not know.
#22 Posted by konvikt_17 (22344 posts) -

[QUOTE="Gaming-Planet"]Space ends when it runs out of room.

It will always be spaceish. :P m0zart

Is that you 0rbs?

No. he didnt mention god.

#23 Posted by GD-1369211121 (4086 posts) -

If we knew something existed outside of the known universe, it would also be known. Correct?

#24 Posted by screaminBard (5 posts) -
Outside of the known universe... The unknown universe? Dun dun DUN
#25 Posted by lowkey254 (5904 posts) -

It's called Heaven. :cool:

#26 Posted by sune_Gem (12463 posts) -

I have a hard time grasping the concept of pure nothingness, so I'm going to say something's there, even if it's just a big black empty void, it's still a big black empty void.

#27 Posted by Nibroc420 (13567 posts) -

I have a hard time grasping the concept of pure nothingness, so I'm going to say something's there, even if it's just a big black empty void, it's still a big black empty void.

sune_Gem
It's not. Imagine you're a boat, floating in the middle of the ocean, you're going to see only so far around you. If you were to draw it on a map you'd see a circle with you in the center. Space is much the same. Light has only been traveling through space for 13.77 billion years, thus, we can only see 13.77 billion light years away. We can draw a circle around the earth with a radius of 13.77 billion light years, that is our visible space. 1 billion years from now, light will have had 14.77 billion light years to reach our planet, and thus we'd be able to see a billion light years further away. We cannot see things 100 billion light years from earth, because it would take another 86 billion or so years, for light 100 billion light years away to actually reach the earth.
#28 Posted by br0kenrabbit (13421 posts) -

The speed of light is only a limit on objects. It isn't a limit on the expansion of spacetime. According to the theory of inflation, the spacetime of the early universe expanded faster than the speed of light, and this expansion in a sense carried objects faster respective to each other than light. Technically the objects themselves didn't need to move at all (although they did)... they could be completely still in respect to their position in spacetime and yet those two objects would be gaining new distance with respect to each other. Therefore there could be parts of the universe which are not visible from our galaxy because they are carried faster than the speed of light respective to us by the expansion of spacetime, so that their light would never reach us.

However, even without the expansion of spacetime, I can see a scenario where this might be possible, although at least for now I have no idea if it ever happens. Since the limit is on the objects themselves, no one object can travel the speed of light. However, if two objects were moving away from each other at at least half the speed of light, with one of them exceeding half by an extremely small amount, then their combined speed respective to each other would be faster than the speed of light, and any light generated by those objects would never reach each other. That situation wouldn't necessarily be permanent though since one or both objects could for some reason be slowed down or change direction to effectively lower that total speed. As far as I know, it's not something that is known to occur right now anyway (at least not without the additional expansion of spacetime) as the fastest objects in the known universe seem to be rogue plannets going between 8000 and 9000 miles per second, and the amount of energy it takes for those two objects to actually travel that speed respective to spacetime would be immense and perhaps impossible to attain on just the objects themselves.

m0zart

Redshift is cumulative with distance, so that means the further away something is from the observer, the faster it's moving away from him due to expansion. So in theory there's only so far out that we'll ever be able to see, even given an infinite amount of time.

#29 Posted by sune_Gem (12463 posts) -

[QUOTE="sune_Gem"]

I have a hard time grasping the concept of pure nothingness, so I'm going to say something's there, even if it's just a big black empty void, it's still a big black empty void.

Nibroc420

It's not. Imagine you're a boat, floating in the middle of the ocean, you're going to see only so far around you. If you were to draw it on a map you'd see a circle with you in the center. Space is much the same. Light has only been traveling through space for 13.77 billion years, thus, we can only see 13.77 billion light years away. We can draw a circle around the earth with a radius of 13.77 billion light years, that is our visible space. 1 billion years from now, light will have had 14.77 billion light years to reach our planet, and thus we'd be able to see a billion light years further away. We cannot see things 100 billion light years from earth, because it would take another 86 billion or so years, for light 100 billion light years away to actually reach the earth.

It's crazy how people figure this stuff out.

Still though, what I meant was that the thought of nothingness is just a bizarre one to me. I mean you say we can't see too far because light hasn't reached it yet, but absolute nothingness would mean there's no darkness in the area in the first place as nothing exists there. That's why I would have thought there to be something out there, even if we can't see it yet and wont be able to for billions of years. Then again that's just my concept of what total nothing would be.

I'm confusing myself, I can't even word my thoughts properly. :lol:

#30 Posted by Wolfetan (7522 posts) -

[QUOTE="playmynutz"]
Time and space do not exist outside of the universe
So no, nothing exists

chaoscougar1
What??
#31 Posted by chaoscougar1 (36991 posts) -
[QUOTE="chaoscougar1"]Time and space do not exist outside of the universe
So no, nothing existsWolfetan
What??

Time and space are products of the universe we live in Outside it/before the big bang They did not exist
#32 Posted by chaoscougar1 (36991 posts) -
[QUOTE="sune_Gem"]

I have a hard time grasping the concept of pure nothingness, so I'm going to say something's there, even if it's just a big black empty void, it's still a big black empty void.

Nibroc420
It's not. Imagine you're a boat, floating in the middle of the ocean, you're going to see only so far around you. If you were to draw it on a map you'd see a circle with you in the center. Space is much the same. Light has only been traveling through space for 13.77 billion years, thus, we can only see 13.77 billion light years away. We can draw a circle around the earth with a radius of 13.77 billion light years, that is our visible space. 1 billion years from now, light will have had 14.77 billion light years to reach our planet, and thus we'd be able to see a billion light years further away. We cannot see things 100 billion light years from earth, because it would take another 86 billion or so years, for light 100 billion light years away to actually reach the earth.

That might not actually be the case Cause you have to take into account that some objects are traveling away from earth faster than the speed of light So technically, some light sources may never reach us
#33 Posted by chaoscougar1 (36991 posts) -

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="sune_Gem"]

I have a hard time grasping the concept of pure nothingness, so I'm going to say something's there, even if it's just a big black empty void, it's still a big black empty void.

sune_Gem

It's not. Imagine you're a boat, floating in the middle of the ocean, you're going to see only so far around you. If you were to draw it on a map you'd see a circle with you in the center. Space is much the same. Light has only been traveling through space for 13.77 billion years, thus, we can only see 13.77 billion light years away. We can draw a circle around the earth with a radius of 13.77 billion light years, that is our visible space. 1 billion years from now, light will have had 14.77 billion light years to reach our planet, and thus we'd be able to see a billion light years further away. We cannot see things 100 billion light years from earth, because it would take another 86 billion or so years, for light 100 billion light years away to actually reach the earth.

It's crazy how people figure this stuff out.

Still though, what I meant was that the thought of nothingness is just a bizarre one to me. I mean you say we can't see too far because light hasn't reached it yet, but absolute nothingness would mean there's no darkness in the area in the first place as nothing exists there. That's why I would have thought there to be something out there, even if we can't see it yet and wont be able to for billions of years. Then again that's just my concept of what total nothing would be.

I'm confusing myself, I can't even word my thoughts properly. :lol:

See my reply to nibroc
#34 Posted by EmpCom (3451 posts) -
Yes Verizon customer services
#35 Posted by mattbbpl (10909 posts) -

Probably.

MakeMeaSammitch
Hehehe... P-Branes....
#36 Posted by Jimn_tonic (913 posts) -

dunno

SirWander

probably the most valid answer 

#37 Posted by lx_theo (6211 posts) -

Answer... We don't know. There's a reason its the "known" universe. 

#38 Posted by chaoscougar1 (36991 posts) -
[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

Probably.

mattbbpl
Hehehe... P-Branes....

Never been a big fan of string theory
#39 Posted by m0zart (11568 posts) -

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

Probably.

chaoscougar1

Hehehe... P-Branes....

Never been a big fan of string theory

Xaos absolutely detested it.

#40 Posted by Firmaments (83 posts) -

The universe is a lie. There is nothing outside of our atmosphere. The lies spread about our solar system and universe were just put in place by God to test our faith. Plus the Earth is around 7000 years old like the rest of our universe. Duh.

#41 Posted by m0zart (11568 posts) -

The universe is a lie. There is nothing outside of our atmosphere. The lies spread about our solar system and universe were just put in place by God to test our faith. Plus the Earth is around 7000 years old like the rest of our universe. Duh.

Firmaments

That has to be 0rbs... or a reasonable facsimile.

#42 Posted by chaoscougar1 (36991 posts) -

[QUOTE="chaoscougar1"][QUOTE="mattbbpl"] Hehehe... P-Branes....m0zart

Never been a big fan of string theory

Xaos absolutely detested it.

I miss Xaos and Frame_D Always learned so much
#43 Posted by lostrib (42212 posts) -

how would we know what is outside the "known universe."  It would by definition be unknown

#44 Posted by Rich3232 (2628 posts) -

[QUOTE="chaoscougar1"][QUOTE="mattbbpl"] Hehehe... P-Branes....m0zart

Never been a big fan of string theory

Xaos absolutely detested it.

why?
#45 Posted by Nibroc420 (13567 posts) -
[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="sune_Gem"]

I have a hard time grasping the concept of pure nothingness, so I'm going to say something's there, even if it's just a big black empty void, it's still a big black empty void.

chaoscougar1
It's not. Imagine you're a boat, floating in the middle of the ocean, you're going to see only so far around you. If you were to draw it on a map you'd see a circle with you in the center. Space is much the same. Light has only been traveling through space for 13.77 billion years, thus, we can only see 13.77 billion light years away. We can draw a circle around the earth with a radius of 13.77 billion light years, that is our visible space. 1 billion years from now, light will have had 14.77 billion light years to reach our planet, and thus we'd be able to see a billion light years further away. We cannot see things 100 billion light years from earth, because it would take another 86 billion or so years, for light 100 billion light years away to actually reach the earth.

That might not actually be the case Cause you have to take into account that some objects are traveling away from earth faster than the speed of light So technically, some light sources may never reach us

I agree completely that some objects would move faster away than others, however thanks to things like rogue stars/planets there might be objects speeding closer to us (as a solar system, not talking Armageddon style). Also, Even if one were to say that objects are moving away from each other, as we move further away from the center of our galaxy, so will other solar systems move from the center of their galaxies, and that again creates the possibility of things moving closer to us, does it not?
#46 Posted by chaoscougar1 (36991 posts) -
[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="chaoscougar1"][QUOTE="Nibroc420"] It's not. Imagine you're a boat, floating in the middle of the ocean, you're going to see only so far around you. If you were to draw it on a map you'd see a circle with you in the center. Space is much the same. Light has only been traveling through space for 13.77 billion years, thus, we can only see 13.77 billion light years away. We can draw a circle around the earth with a radius of 13.77 billion light years, that is our visible space. 1 billion years from now, light will have had 14.77 billion light years to reach our planet, and thus we'd be able to see a billion light years further away. We cannot see things 100 billion light years from earth, because it would take another 86 billion or so years, for light 100 billion light years away to actually reach the earth.

That might not actually be the case Cause you have to take into account that some objects are traveling away from earth faster than the speed of light So technically, some light sources may never reach us

I agree completely that some objects would move faster away than others, however thanks to things like rogue stars/planets there might be objects speeding closer to us (as a solar system, not talking Armageddon style). Also, Even if one were to say that objects are moving away from each other, as we move further away from the center of our galaxy, so will other solar systems move from the center of their galaxies, and that again creates the possibility of things moving closer to us, does it not?

Few things Firstly, I wasn't referring to things in our own galaxy We aren't moving any closer to or further away from other stars (by any great margin) Galaxies are held together pretty tightly by gravity and dark matter (we believe) The biggest mind fvck about the big bang is that expansion is happening everywhere at once So, in 99% of cases, everything (other galaxies) are moving away from us Granted, we are supposed to be combining with Andromeda in the next billion years or so (I think) And we have viewed galaxies doing the old gravity dance across the universe But they are a small percentage of the ?0,000 we have discovered
#47 Posted by Nibroc420 (13567 posts) -

We aren't moving any closer to or further away from other stars (by any great margin)... Granted, we are supposed to be combining with Andromeda in the next billion years or so (I think) chaoscougar1

So we're getting closer to andromeda, but none of the stars of andromeda?

#48 Posted by LJS9502_basic (152313 posts) -
That's unknown....
#49 Posted by Nibroc420 (13567 posts) -
Do you believe there is existence which expands past the known universe?playmynutz
That's unknown....LJS9502_basic
Did you not even read the initial post? Or is your reading comprehension failing again?
#50 Posted by LJS9502_basic (152313 posts) -
[QUOTE="playmynutz"]Do you believe there is existence which expands past the known universe?Nibroc420
That's unknown....LJS9502_basic
Did you not even read the initial post? Or is your reading comprehension failing again?

Mine is fine....I see yours is failing again.