Near the border of our volume, there is interaction with stuff outside of the volume — Cornwell1
Does it not come down to whether or not, what you say here is true or false?
How would we obtain evidence of such interaction?
Are the hubble volumes described in Tegmark's level 1 multiverse, 3D volumes is a 4D space? — universeness
I think I see why you write about the 4d space. I don't think you need a 4th spatial dimension to leave the observable universe. — Cornwell1
It seems to me that near the edges of identical volumes there is information exchange with spheres outside — Cornwell1
Once one moves beyond 3D, higher dimensional "space" for me becomes an algebraic geometric concept rather than a reality. Very useful for predictions but that doesn't imply it truly exists. — jgill
Morning universeness — Cornwell1
(without a universe? Appropriate for this thread!). — Cornwell1
There is a whole lot of 3d space beyond the horizon. — Cornwell1
I get this too, because the light from other objects would reach us over time, if there was no expansion and the universe was flat.If the universe didn't expand there would become more and more visible. — Cornwell1
There fit about 10exp11 observable universe diameters in the whole... It inflated all in existence around the singularity — Cornwell1
It inflated all in existence around the singularity — Cornwell1
which is part of a 4d substrate — Cornwell1
another 3d universe on the other side of the singularity wormhole — Cornwell1
So there are a lot of Hubble volumes (they are defined as the volumes within the surface that recedes with lightspeed). — Cornwell1
If you near such a surface (or anywhere else from its center) you see different things, so there can't be two equals. This holds for all spheres that you suppose equal, so there are no equal volumes of any size. — Cornwell1
What? this text flew right past me! What does it mean? — universeness
Which surface in the Universe is receeding? — universeness
Can you exemplify this? What kind of difference might you see and why? — universeness
I wondered about "universeness". Doesn't this mean "without a universe"? — Cornwell1
The imaginary surface where the redshift of receding galaxies seems infinite. All galaxies seem to accumulate on this surface — Cornwell1
Imagine this. You find yourself 80 billion ly away from here. You can see things from there that I can't see, like you can see a part of the world where you live that I can't see. When 80 billion ly apart we can still see each other but we both can see things the other can't. Which means there can't be two identical Hubble spheres. Because if so, everything around it should also be the same, contrary to assumption. — Cornwell1
Nah! that would be UniverseLESS, universeness means something OF the universe.... — universeness
But if we live on opposite sides of a really big spherical universe then we don't need two 'hubble volumes', we could just be on opposite hemispheres of the same big Universe. — universeness
But why would all matter end up at the event horizon of black holes?
In the 'big rip' and 'heat death,' the expansion continues until we can't see any other galaxies and then everything just ultimately disassembles and fade's away. Why would everything end up at black hole's? — universeness
This suggests that only one Universe exists and what you are about to describe are possible limitations for any lifeform living within it, yes?Let's say the Universe is an infinite sheet of cookie dough. — pfirefry
It was super dense 14 billion years ago, but since then it has risen just enough for us to start making cookies. — pfirefry
14 billion years ago we drew a small circle on that dough, and this circle has been expanding with the dough this entire time — pfirefry
Besides that, there is a second circle that initially was equal to the first circle, but its expansion was at the speed of light — pfirefry
We know that dough expands slower than the speed of light, so the second circle ended up being larger than the first one. — pfirefry
so the second circle ended up being larger than the first one. — pfirefry
I think I see how you envision it. If we are on opposite sides of the universe we are not on opposite sides of a 3d sphere.
The balloon (2D). Draw, on a huge balloon of say Earth size, a circle on it. Diametrically opposed points on this circle are you and I on opposite sides of the visible universe (which you can see from the center).
In reality the balloon is much bigger. If you draw a circle of one meter radius on the balloon, then the circumference of the balloon is about 10exp11 meter... About a hundred million kilometers. There's more behind the horizon — Cornwell1
The matter seems to end up on the horizon because there time seems to stop — Cornwell1
However, it doesn't mean that all books will have more than one copy. Some books may be absent, and some books can appear only once. — pfirefry
Ok, yes, I understand what you have typed but what is the inside of the volume of the balloon you are describing in relation to the Universal structure you suggest — universeness
The matter seems to end up on the horizon because there time seems to stop
— Cornwell1
I am still very far away from getting this one.
Is this theory based on the idea that the black hole at the centre of a galaxy will eventually expand/grow so that it will consume all of the matter in that galaxy? — universeness
Will I run over a squirrel?
From Mike Sanders, mikedotsandersatpearsoneddotcom, Apr 6 2004 at 14:37
Q: Within the context of the multiverse, doesn't every conceivable physical possibility occur? If I'm driving my car and stop abruptly to keep from hitting a squirrel, don't I purposely run over that same squirrel in an alternate universe. And if so, isn't the number of universes that follow each outcome approximately the same?
A: No - and that's the crux. The laws of physics and your behavior evolved through natural selection create much regularity across the multiverse, so you'll try to spare that squirrel in the vast majority of all parallel universes where "you" are pretty similar to the copy reading this email (just as regards the above-mentioned gas station robbery). The fractions only split close to 50-50 for decisions that you perceive as a very close call.
It's the theory of black holes. If you look at a collapsing sphere of dust from a distance, the sphere seems to slow down in collapsing. When the sphere has a radius equal to the Schwarzschild radius it seems to have frozen and starts to emit Hawking radiation over a long time. On the inside the process takes a small time, about the time it takes light to travel over the Schwarzschild radius (so for the Sun about 1/100 000 seconds as the SR is about 3km — Cornwell1
This suggests that only one Universe exists and what you are about to describe are possible limitations for any lifeform living within it, yes? — universeness
It was super dense 14 billion years ago, but since then it has risen just enough for us to start making cookies.
— pfirefry
So we could call this state the singularity, yes? — universeness
14 billion years ago we drew a small circle on that dough, and this circle has been expanding with the dough this entire time
— pfirefry
So our current observable/detectable 'section' of this one Universe you posit. — universeness
So we now have a section of the Universe that expands faster than our section. — universeness
In my head, this would be the same idea as one of my organs moving faster than the rest of my body was running. Ouch! — universeness
So what did this cookie expand into? would it not crunch against its surrounding slower moving dough?
Does each cookie create a new layer to the Universe depending on its expansion rate? — universeness
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.