4 ms·
The universe is (as far as we know) far larger than that. The thing is that it's literally impossible for us to interact with the parts of it outside one partic
by jbri 15y ago
The universe is (as far as we know) far larger than that. The thing is that it's literally impossible for us to interact with the parts of it outside one particular sphere.
Additionally, the universe is not expanding from one point - every point is functionally the "center" of the universe.
- sliverstorm 15y agoI do not understand how it is possible for something to expand without having a central locus. In fact, I am at a loss as to how it is possible for anything that posses bounds to fail to have a singular center. Explain?
- Cushman 15y agoWho says the universe has bounds? The classic analogy is of an inflating balloon. If you make two marks on the balloon, they'll expand away from each other, but neither one is the center. Of course AFAIK there isn't any solid proof for the "finite, unbounded" idea, mostly just speculation. But it was Einstein's thing so we (laymen ;) take it pretty seriously.
- sliverstorm 15y agoYou're saying that the space inside the balloon is not part of the Universe?
- Cushman 15y agoWell, Einstein is ;) But yeah, for the sake of the analogy we're talking about a 2-d universe which is the surface of the balloon, nothing else exists.
- sliverstorm 15y agoSo objects in the Universe are not traveling because they have velocity, rather, "space itself" is expanding?
- Cushman 15y agoI don't think I understand your question— both are true?
- prawn 15y agoFrom all I've read on it (the questionable balloon analogy is easily misleading at first), it's less something you can easily understand and almost something you have to trust. I guess there is another dimension involved and as such it's not all something that can be easily visualised when we're so used to dimensions as we experience them.