radius of the universe

[Dirk Bruere at NeoPax]

Reading from

What makes you think that the "surface" of spacetime is 2-D? space-time
curvature is caused by infinite 3D space "stuffed" inside a finite space,
the confining effects of which are referred to as the "expanding universe"
or the remaining effects of the "big bang" if you like to entertain that
theory in the scheme of it all. That's why atoms vibrate. They're
"quivering" as if being held together by a force. Well, that "force" is the
effect of the big bang. For all I know, that could be what causes gravity,
itself. Infinity compression. Compress infinity at all and it's infinitely
compressed. So we won't experience true infinity until the universe stops
expanding, at which point it will be infinity UNconfined.

Then we'll see what happens to atoms and internal particle smearing. Up
until then, it'll be mysteries solved as we go forward.

Damaeus

Maybe the universe is 2D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bekenstein_bound
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Principle

--
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party
http://www.onetribe.me.uk/wordpress/?cat=5 - Our podcasts on weird stuff

 

[BradGuth]

Maybe the universe is 2Dhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bekenstein_boundhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Principle

Good grief, perhaps the radius of your last turd would have more
meaning.

Why the hell don't you at least focus on the Great Attractor, that
we're supposedly headed for at 6.111e3 km/s.

~ BG

 

[BradGuth]

The usual analogy to describe the geometry of spacetime
is an expanding balloon.  The surface is 2-D, closed, warped
in a 3rd dimension, inaccessible to the balloonists.  However,
the ballon has a center - in the 3rd dimension.

Now, extend this picture to our expanding 3-D universe;
can we compute the 'radius', the distance to the center,
in the 4th space dimension?  Analogous to the balloon
model, it should be the same for all observers.

And that would educe a circumference, would it not?

Unless you can figure out how to move physical matter much faster than
c, there's no objective way of telling how old or how large this
universe actually is.

~ BG

 

[Robert Monsen]

The usual analogy to describe the geometry of spacetime
is an expanding balloon. The surface is 2-D, closed, warped
in a 3rd dimension, inaccessible to the balloonists. However,
the ballon has a center - in the 3rd dimension.

Now, extend this picture to our expanding 3-D universe;
can we compute the 'radius', the distance to the center,
in the 4th space dimension? Analogous to the balloon
model, it should be the same for all observers.

And that would educe a circumference, would it not?

What makes you think it has a center? It clearly doesn't have one in 3
space. If you are on the 'balloon', and it is expanding, you see space
being created where you stand, ie, your legs get pulled apart. You
don't go anywhere when this happens. So, I always say that the big
bang happened wherever I currently am. It isn't false.

As to measuring the distance in another dimension, since the 4th
dimension is time, you would measure the distance in years from the
big bang. Everybody is approximately the same 'distance' from then,
give or take a few gravitational anomalies.

Regards,
Bob Monsen

 

[Dirk Bruere at NeoPax]

Good grief, perhaps the radius of your last turd would have more
meaning.

Why the hell don't you at least focus on the Great Attractor, that
we're supposedly headed for at 6.111e3 km/s.

~ BG

So, I assume you have refuted the Bekenstein Limit eh?

--
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party
http://www.onetribe.me.uk/wordpress/?cat=5 - Our podcasts on weird stuff

 

[Benj]

And that would educe a circumference, would it not?

No Center

1. No sense!

Also see Ned Wright's Cosmology Tutorial

2. Standard crap.

WMAP: Foundations of the Big Bang theory

3. Foundations of totally wrong theory.

WMAP: Tests of Big Bang Cosmology

4. More of same.

Universe is 4-D hypersphere WITH a center and diameter of
approximately 500 million light years.

5. gullible idiot.

 

[BradGuth]

So, I assume you have refuted the Bekenstein Limit eh?

Thanks anyway, but I'd have to look that one up.
“Bekenstein bound” doesn’t seem to apply here. Why did you bring
this “Bekenstein Limit” into this topic?

For the most part gravity sucks, and lots of cosmic stuff from all
directions is oddly headed for the GA (including us).

From the core of this GA, the universe is pretty much in blueshift.
As galaxies arrive from all directions, there an unavoidable
retrograde merging of all things cosmic. Of course we’re a good 250
million years away from knowing the outcome of those galaxies arriving
first. So, for all we know, this cosmic hypersphere GA eye of God may
have already vanished.

A couple of many white papers on this hypersphere universe of ours:
http://www.geocities.com/jsfhome/Think4d/Hyprsphr/hsphere.html
http://specularium.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=53

Earth is kind of a localized hypersphere, whereas the thin crust of
our otherwise 98.5% fluid Earth is where we happen to coexist. The
cosmic crust of the forever expanding hypersphere is perhaps 20
billion light years thick (God only knows how big around), within
which our known universe exist.

In other words, "You are More than You Know"

~ BG

 

[Dirk Bruere at NeoPax]

Thanks anyway, but I'd have to look that one up.
“Bekenstein bound” doesn’t seem to apply here. Why did you bring
this “Bekenstein Limit” into this topic?

Because it is an illustration that the amount of information in a volume
of space is a function of area ie 2D and not 3D
Hence its connection to Holographic Universe theory.

For the most part gravity sucks, and lots of cosmic stuff from all
directions is oddly headed for the GA (including us).

From the core of this GA, the universe is pretty much in blueshift.
As galaxies arrive from all directions, there an unavoidable
retrograde merging of all things cosmic. Of course we’re a good 250
million years away from knowing the outcome of those galaxies arriving
first. So, for all we know, this cosmic hypersphere GA eye of God may
have already vanished.

A couple of many white papers on this hypersphere universe of ours:
http://www.geocities.com/jsfhome/Think4d/Hyprsphr/hsphere.html
http://specularium.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=53

Earth is kind of a localized hypersphere, whereas the thin crust of
our otherwise 98.5% fluid Earth is where we happen to coexist. The
cosmic crust of the forever expanding hypersphere is perhaps 20
billion light years thick (God only knows how big around), within
which our known universe exist.

In other words, "You are More than You Know"

~ BG

Well, there's nothing to say that our universe is not part of a larger
affair where our small bit underwent a blast of inflation 13.7 GY ago.

--
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party
http://www.onetribe.me.uk/wordpress/?cat=5 - Our podcasts on weird stuff

 

[RichD]

   No Center
     http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/nocenter.html
     http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/infpoint.html

This elaborates that we can locate no center in our
observable 3-D universe. It tells nothing about whether
a center exists in some 4th spatial dimension, in which
our universe is embedded.

 

[RichD]

Dear David A. Smith:

Representing space.


... Time.

No. A 3rd spatial dimension, inaccessible to the Balloonlanders...
excepting the geometry majors...

 

[N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)]

Dear RichD:

On Dec 23 2008, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <[email protected]>
wrote:
....

No. A 3rd spatial dimension, inaccessible to the
Balloonlanders... excepting the geometry majors...

You clearly have difficulty separating the specifics of the
analogy from the concepts underlying its intent.

Is there a linear combination of the 2D surface axes
(representing 3D space) that can generate the "radius"? No.

Is there a 1:1 correspondence between the balloon radius at any
instant and the size of the "balloon Universe" at any given
instant? Yes.

See, you do understand. And if you don't agree with this, you
can start with the raisin bread analogy...

David A. Smith

 

[Sam Wormley]

This elaborates that we can locate no center in our
observable 3-D universe. It tells nothing about whether
a center exists in some 4th spatial dimension, in which
our universe is embedded.

A 4th uncurled-up spacial dimension would render orbits unstable.

 

[Richard Henry]

Universe is 4-D hypersphere WITH a center and diameter of
approximately 500 million light years.

10-D

 

[JosephKK]

A 4th uncurled-up spacial dimension would render orbits unstable.

Earth's orbit is not stable, nor is Mercury's, nor any other planet in
this solar system, nor any moons. That almost argues for a
non-rolled-up added dimension or more.

 

[Michael Press]

A 4th uncurled-up spacial dimension would render orbits unstable.

Not only that, I could not keep my shoe laces tied.