[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 2.29 MB, 1280x1280, Observable_Universe_with_Measurements_01.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15769840 No.15769840 [Reply] [Original]

How likely is it that the observable universe is only a infinitesimal part of the its totality?

>> No.15769842

0

>> No.15769843

1

>> No.15769844

50%

>> No.15769845
File: 42 KB, 600x540, 126115477157.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15769845

You can only have so much asymmetrical motion in one universe.

>> No.15769863

Unknowable

We can definitely say there's universe outside of the observable universe, but how much is pretty much anyone's guess. Best "theories" say that it's at least hundreds of times more voluminous, but it could also be infinite. I say "theories" because these are hard to test and/or falsify. Measuring the curvature of the universe could give us some hints, but that can't answer the question definitely

>> No.15770278

>The minimum size of the Universe is robustly constrained to encompass NU > ~251 Hubble spheres
>https://arxiv.org/abs/1101.5476
So at least 20% larger than what we can see.

>> No.15770283

>>15770278
20% larger radius, I mean, 75% more volume.

>> No.15770288

>>15770283
There's 2.28 billion stars

>> No.15770293

>>15769843
>>15769842
>>15769844
Indeterminable.
Life is unfair.

>> No.15770300

>>15769840
>infinitesimal
Too vague to be exactly possible, might as well ask if it is a tiny tiny part of the totality.
But if you ever actually measure let alone define exactly how much an infinitesimal part of the totality is, you can just look at an infinitesimal part of your totality and see if there is a universe to observe there.

>> No.15770639

>>15769840
Atleast 250 times larger