I still find it hard to believe the complexity of the universe to be mere chance

[BluePriest]

Just space. Nothingness. Oldtrees or someone else, give me a hand explaining this. Im doing a crapjob right now lol. For the record marktwain Im on your side, Im just trying to answer your question. No matter. Just space. Ya know, the distance between 2 planets. That is all around the world. Edge of the universe simply means there isnt any matter after that because it hasnt expanded to that area yet.

[Daytripper]

I have struggled with this issue myself, so I am not sure. However, I think no one is sure here. I don't get this, though.

If the universe is expanding into nothingness, and nothingness equals regular space, which is the universe, how can you say it is expanding? There would be no difference. We would say: ''The matter of the universe is spreading into the universe.''

If the universe expands into nothingness, I think this does not equal space.

Or, the nothingness does in fact not exist/is unavailable, before the universe expands. In other words, the energy/expansion speed creates a distortion in the fabric of space or the space time continuum.

I know it sounds stupid, but that's the only thing I can think of that makes sense.

BACKUP please.

[killybob]

it's the matter in the universe or the "vacuum" expanding outwards (or more accurately moving away from other matter). actually vacuum is not a very accurate word as it happens that even in a vacuum there is a seething mass of potential subatomic particles that are continuously blinking in and out of existence having not enough energy to sustain themselves.

[BluePriest]

Even though I dont believe in the big bang, it is obvious that the universe is expanding, and when I try to make sense out of it scientifically, then this is how I look at it.

Space=inbetween 2 planets, the nothingness, however you want to describe it
Universe=Matter
Edge of universe=Where you go far enough into space, that the universe is no longer there

I consider space to be nothingness and so there is always space.


Hmmm.... this got me thinking.....

Imagine space like water. To a fish, water is all there is. Water is a fish's "space" The distance between 1 coral and the other is the universe for them....

[QuantumT]

Even though I dont believe in the big bang, it is obvious that the universe is expanding, and when I try to make sense out of it scientifically, then this is how I look at it.

Space=inbetween 2 planets, the nothingness, however you want to describe it
Universe=Matter
Edge of universe=Where you go far enough into space, that the universe is no longer there

I consider space to be nothingness and so there is always space.


Hmmm.... this got me thinking.....

Imagine space like water. To a fish, water is all there is. Water is a fish's "space" The distance between 1 coral and the other is the universe for them....

It's a nice analogy, so let me use it to explain the setup.

Space=water
Universe=Coral +water
Edge of universe=Imagine this as the edge of the fishbowl, beyond which not even water exists.

[BluePriest]

Even though I dont believe in the big bang, it is obvious that the universe is expanding, and when I try to make sense out of it scientifically, then this is how I look at it.

Space=inbetween 2 planets, the nothingness, however you want to describe it
Universe=Matter
Edge of universe=Where you go far enough into space, that the universe is no longer there

I consider space to be nothingness and so there is always space.


Hmmm.... this got me thinking.....

Imagine space like water. To a fish, water is all there is. Water is a fish's "space" The distance between 1 coral and the other is the universe for them....

Very nice analogy.

I'm curious if you could elaborate more on your view on "there is no big bang".

If the universe is expanding, ... could we not conclude if I rewind the clock and have things "collapsing" to ... a "backwards" point in time?  (not the full big bang theory)

If then we can agree on that above statement.. The next question would logically be... "the energy". (cohesive part of the big bang).

....

If you see a car driving down the road, does that mean you know where it started off as. Same with the universe. Just because you see it expanding it doesnt mean that you know where it started expanding.

[Bloodshadow]

What is outside the boundaries of our expanding universe?

You have heard of the balloon analogy, correct? The universe is a balloon, and we are two-dimensional beings living on the surface of that balloon. The balloon itself expands, so the surface expands, but as two-dimensional beings on the surface we can never perceive anything "outside" the balloon.

Our very existence requires us to be inside the universe. It's meaningless to try to understand the outside of the universe, because we simply cannot exist there. Just imagine a 2D drawing in space. This is my understanding at least.

Personally, I think all religions people should read at least a little into quantum theory. If, after reading into it, they still believe in some sort of god, then that's perfectly fine; but I just feel that religion should be aware of the latest scientific theories before trying to invalidate science.

[BluePriest]

What is outside the boundaries of our expanding universe?

You have heard of the balloon analogy, correct? The universe is a balloon, and we are two-dimensional beings living on the surface of that balloon. The balloon itself expands, so the surface expands, but as two-dimensional beings on the surface we can never perceive anything "outside" the balloon.

Our very existence requires us to be inside the universe. It's meaningless to try to understand the outside of the universe, because we simply cannot exist there. Just imagine a 2D drawing in space. This is my understanding at least.

Personally, I think all religions people should read at least a little into quantum theory. If, after reading into it, they still believe in some sort of god, then that's perfectly fine; but I just feel that religion should be aware of the latest scientific theories before trying to invalidate science.

Just because there is another explanation, it doesnt mean God existing is impossible.

You can take a computer program (now called P1), and write code that does the exact same thing as P1, and yet, someone else can look at P1, and write a program that does the exact same thing as P1 as well. When you look at the 2 peoples programs, they can be remarkably different, and yet, still do the exact same thing. Now how are we to know which one (if either) of them actually did it the way P1 actually was done? we cant. Just because there is one explanation, it doesnt mean there cant be others.

[killybob]

You have heard of the balloon analogy, correct? The universe is a balloon, and we are two-dimensional beings living on the surface of that balloon. The balloon itself expands, so the surface expands, but as two-dimensional beings on the surface we can never perceive anything "outside" the balloon.

Our very existence requires us to be inside the universe. It's meaningless to try to understand the outside of the universe, because we simply cannot exist there. Just imagine a 2D drawing in space. This is my understanding at least.

Personally, I think all religions people should read at least a little into quantum theory. If, after reading into it, they still believe in some sort of god, then that's perfectly fine; but I just feel that religion should be aware of the latest scientific theories before trying to invalidate science.

im religious (not seriously though. i merely believe there is a God) and i've read a little quantum theory (at one point i was pretty obsessed with it. i grew out of the obsession though ) and i find absolutely no reason not to believe in God. in fact there are a quite few religious physicists out there.

[Mark_Tran]

What is outside the boundaries of our expanding universe?

You have heard of the balloon analogy, correct? The universe is a balloon, and we are two-dimensional beings living on the surface of that balloon. The balloon itself expands, so the surface expands, but as two-dimensional beings on the surface we can never perceive anything "outside" the balloon.

Our very existence requires us to be inside the universe. It's meaningless to try to understand the outside of the universe, because we simply cannot exist there. Just imagine a 2D drawing in space. This is my understanding at least.

Personally, I think all religions people should read at least a little into quantum theory. If, after reading into it, they still believe in some sort of god, then that's perfectly fine; but I just feel that religion should be aware of the latest scientific theories before trying to invalidate science.

What do you mean it's meaningless to understand the outside of the universe just because we can not exist there?  If everyone thinks that we are fine with the knowledge we currently have, science would go nowhere.  The whole reason you and I can understand multiple dimensions is because people were not happy with their current knowledge and hungered to know more.

[killybob]

i agree with tran. what you are saying is paradoxical and does not make sense. also you seem to have made a stereotype of all religious people suggesting that they are inept in the field of science and reject it. religion is not about believing in God but disbelieving science.

[QuantumT]

i agree with tran. what you are saying is paradoxical and does not make sense. also you seem to have made a stereotype of all religious people suggesting that they are inept in the field of science and reject it. religion is not about believing in God but disbelieving science.

The reason he said that is because the idea of faith (which religion is based on) is inherently unscientific.