/sci/ - Science & Math

>implying the universe isn't a curved whole

If you go far enough, who knows? You might run into another universe. If you could go near the speed of light, then with Time dilation's effect you could keep going to see exactly what is out there if you want to leave Earth behind forever.

Captcha: Number(Upside down for some reason) Osrees

>>3568034
The question you asked makes NO FUCKING SENSE. Go read some physics books AND FUCKING TRY AGAIN LATER!

1. No possible way to make 1 light year with current technology
2. Absolutely no way to make ~40 billion light years
3. [insert speculation here]

>>3568044
NOPE

I think OP is saying, assuming the universe has a actual end point (even if it s expanding ect ect). And you somehow managed to reach it, what would happen if you crossed it?

Want to come along and check some stuff out OP? You know, I've never tried that before. Sounds delightful!

Hands off Pond though... She's my alien fuck toy.

>>3568058
>>3568058
The OP is fucking retarded and obviously knows jack shit about geometry or physics. His question literally doesn't make any sense at all.

The universe is all, it is a closed connected space, with a shit-ton of known properties. You cannot simply travel to the fucking "end", and you actually can't define a fucking "end".

>>3568034

I think that in your universe, where there is an expanding sphere of universe with a discernible edge, the distance between you and the edge would be expanding so fast that the light from it would never reach you. To expand slower than the speed of information would imply that it would be possible to leave the universe, which is impossible. I speculate that in your universe, the expanding "edge" is like the rendering in a video game. It creates traversable spacetime as it expands, and it moves at or exceeds the speed of information.

But spacetime is probably curved via the 4th spatial dimension so that if you traveled in one direction long enough and fast enough, you would go back to where you started.

>>3568073
>Implying you didn't understand the root of OP's question
>Implying you know that the universe is a closed connected space

Why you do this?

thisiswhywecanthavenicethings.jpg

>>3568034
OP has the highschool notion that the universe is some physical space, contained in a greater physical space. OP needs to look up what "universe means"....UNI...UNI...UNI!

LMFAO

>>3568051
1. I said if you "could". Lrn2read.
2. If you could make it to near lightspeed, then 40 billion light years would be near instantaneous for the traveler. It just depends on how close you come to lightspeed.
3. Read a physics book.

>>3568054
So you're stupid too, huh? I'll be honest, not many humans understand the concept of time dilation.

>>3568083
>implying the universe isn't a closed connected space BY FUCKING DEFINITION

Read a FUCKING BOOK DIPSHIT

hey bro these guys are just h8ters. Check it out your asking about what happens when you cross into the ether. If you view the universe like spilt milk your asking what happens when you cross the threshhold. Basically, if big bang is correct and matter is propigating through empty space, what happens when you reach a point where particles have yet to exist. You are an explorer.

>>3568034
Please OP look up what "UNIVERSE" means before you ask such retarded questions.

It's basically, like your asking, "what is the biggest number?". THAT IS HOW FUCKING RETARDED YOUR QUESTION IS!

Op here, I have fucking issues when trying to vocalize my thoughts. A better way to phrase this would be, When would happen if you entered an area where there have been no particles, no negative/ positive energy.

>>3568091
Outside observer here, I understood you. The closer you come to light speed, the slower you progress in time.
>Traveling the speed of light = one way time machine

So assuming you could go fast enough for long enough time within the vessel would slow down so that you'd reach your destination in X time while only observing Y time passing.

I used the word universe to set up a type of scenario, wrong choice on my part.

>>3568106
In other words... if multiverses existed and there was "space" between each universe what would be in that space?

Ask the Eldrazi

>>3568106
>Negative energy

WTF am I reading?
You have never read any physics book have you?

WHO THE FUCK KNOWS?
/thread

MFW when everyones caught up on the fact that op's word choice isnt all the great. Instead of answering the question.

supportive fag here. Basically op, in big bang theory the universe unfolded from a single point and is still expanding your wording was eh good enough. Now what would happen. I can tell you this much, I wouldn't want to be on that ship :)
ps i think big bang theory came from people working in the Manhattan projects, the similarity to the a bomb and the big bang are too similar ethnocentrism seems to have played a huge part, besides where did the stuff come from that originated it what set off the singularity is it ever expanding or will there be a collapse back into a singularity.

>>3568124
This is why the eldrazi have arrived. They want to clear things up.

Ill take a shot at trying to answer OP.
Im gonna guess your talking about the space that would exist between two universes.
Well since there would be no enegry there we can assume that the majority of the laws of gravity, ect. wouldnt apply anymore. Also we dont know if time would even exist there.

Basically your talking about a place that breaks laws of everything we know and doesnt technically exist. So how the fuck show we know whats out there?

I like how it incorporates gravity , sure that is fine and it fits with the motions of the heavens, that is fine too. But it seems abit out of place like were not getting the whole picture, I know its science if we had the whole picture then well. But i guess my main point is atomic bomb, a substance reaches critical mass causing an explosive some thought unending chain reaction. Big bang theory, a substance reaches critical mass causing explosion universe(un-ending) reaction.

>>3568106
By defintion, you cannot simply "walk" out of the universe. That is actually part of the standard "defintion" of the universe. Yes, your orginal question was phrased poorly.

There does not exist "space" without particles. One of the fucking great things that we have discovered over the last century is that particles can "pop" and "dissapear" from existance (there are very percise physics that we know that governs this). This happens in vaccume all the fucking time, so the premise for your new senario is impossible.

I wouldn't be suprised if "space itself" somehow is responsible for particles (by that is just speculataion, and neither here or there).

>>3568129
>space that would exist between two universes

Bullshit detected

>>3568073

Now OP's question has been answered,post more Indian porn.

Let's say you managed to capture a unicorn, What would be the color of its mane?

>>3568139

its called zero point energy or ether

>>3568139
winrar

Let's say you managed to capture a unicorn, What would be the color of its mane? The same color(s)/pattern as its coat (maybe)

>>3568149
Purple.
The fur would be a much lighter purple and it would have stars for a cutie mark.

>>3568139
Harley sure does like Dick.

If you passed the edge of the universe you would fall off. It's completely flat. Everyone knows this.

OP, you asking the same questiong I was when I was 5-6 years old. "What the fuck happens if you go as far as space goes??"

I couldn't fucking sleep because of not knowing this.

Push it to the limit.

Physics is largely constrained by how our bodies and experience have shaped our perception. I think there are things in the physical reality which escape our grasp because of this. Physics and mathematics only model what we can perceive one way or another (directly or indirectly, through instruments).

There is no physics of what we cannot perceive in any form or effect on what we perceive.

>>3568195
>implying Rarity and Sweetie Bell aren't unicorns
>implying unicorn[0] of his question is unicorn[1] of your answer

>>3568212
It sad you were such a stupid kid.

I think OP was just wondering what is there, where there is nothing.

I think you should watch Krauss' "Universe from nothing". I fucking enjoyed that shit.

When you got to the edge and stuck your foot through, the edge of the universe would bend around your foot until your toenails poked through. On the other side everything would be sorta dark... kinda like the black of empty space but maybe even blacker. As you squeezed through, the edge of the universe would undulate like a waterbed and make a "wubba wubba wubba" sound. You could just hang out there for awhile, but it'd be boring. You'd have to be real careful not to tear the edge of the universe, because the tear could get really big, and the universe would start deflating through the rip.

>>3568246
Typical American answer.

>>3568221
So you're effectively saying there is nothing out there besides what we can perceive already?

>>3568227
I bet you were thinking of Schrodinger's equations and poked holes in the Standard model when you were 5-6 old. I was reading about space exploration technology when I was 7.

>>3568272
No. What I'm saying is that our physics and mathematics are shaped by how our brains develop through interaction with the same physical world it tries to describe. So there could be factors which influence both cognition/perception and its description in science and which remain invisible to both. In fact, I'm pretty sure there are.

>>3568073

Source on the girl?

>>3568286
*they try to describe

ITT semantics, theoretical astrophysics and thought for a world

>>3568298
Embodied cognition is not exactly semantics.

>>3568286
Ah, I see. I agree with that.

a wall of cotton candy forever, you aren't supposed to be in there, god will be pissed

>>3568038
lol this dumb fag still believes in a fabric of time

>>3568034
You're forgetting something radically simple and obvious.

YOU ARE THE UNIVERSE

you can only move as fast as the expansion, you can't move faster than the expansion. Even if you somehow moved faster than the known and known properties of the kosmos and reached beyond the "edge" you would seize to exist.

You would seize to exist because your existence is inherently and intrinsically tied to the comos.

"Nothing" literally is what lies beyond the Universe. If there was something beyond this Universe, then it would be just another universe or you'd still be on the same universe.

Whatever lies beyond the expanding edge of the universe has to be inherently independent of the Universe and all it's properties known or unknown.

The only way to describe it is, "an infinity of pure emptiness".

Its like pacan, if you go to one side youll pop out on the other

>>3568034

NO.

The universe is expanding at the speed of light.

To go beyond the universe you have to travel faster than the speed of light.

The edge of the universe is travelling faster than the speed of light, in order to reach the edge of the universe you must go faster than the speed of light, which means you will be going back in time, so you would go back in time to the big bang then see whatever happened before the big bang.

LOL.

everyone on this board thinks that they have this shit figured out..

think again

and prepare to be educated

The universe is expanding faster than the speed of light, ie two galaxies (frames of reference) can move away one from the other at more than the speed of light. But none of them moves separately faster than the speed of light.

So you have many galaxies moving at different speeds from each other and "the universe" expanding faster than any individual instance of light going through it. It's possible the space is "created" by this expansion, so you cannot go to the edge of space since it's being created by the expansion itself.

>>3568491
Pseudointellectual detected

Why such hatred towards OP? Insecure much? I'm stupid as hell and even I understood the question. Decent discussion would've been great food for thought.

>>3568511
>>3568466
>The edge of the universe is travelling faster than the speed of light

because you've seen it, right?

>>3568124
Splendid observation

>>3568546

bitches don't know 'bout my redshift...

you did not honestly expect to find genuine scientists on 4chan instead of bunch of pretentious faggots, did you?

>>3568601
>implying you saw a star from the edge of the universe

>>3568624

>implying star needs to be at edge of universe to gain distance from another star at superluminal speeds

>>3568546
No, I havent said that. I said the distance between two galaxies (frames of reference) moving away from each other can grow faster than any distance travelled by light. So the universe as a whole can be said to expand faster than light, not a particular edge or galaxy. The word edge doesn't make any sense, if space itself is expanding with the universe.

>>3568641
no edge or end implies the universe was never compacted

>>3568631
>implying that you didnt know that gravity pull is bigger here then at the egde of universe

sorry OP I don't want to add to the plethora of ignorant stupid shit I've said on the internet