4 ms·

The evidence strongly indicates a flat, infinite, isomorphic universe. You are correct of course that we do not and cannot know, but anything else would require

The evidence strongly indicates a flat, infinite, isomorphic universe. You are correct of course that we do not and cannot know, but anything else would require extraordinary evidence to the contrary.

ipaddr 4y ago
Flat universe theory sounds like flat earth theory in the 14th century. How could the earth be round at that point? It would take extraordinary evidence to the contrary. That doesn't mean flat earth theory was true.. just that everyone accepts that answer now.
opportune 4y ago
Wouldn’t this evidence also be consistent with being “not near enough to the edge to perceive an edge”? And also consistent with that, because of the expansion of the universe we will never be able to get a signal from the “edge” to know anyway? My problem with an infinite isomorphic universe is that it implies infinite mass. I don’t know enough about cosmology or other physics to understand all the implications, but to me it seems like it would make models of the early universe janky - ie why would it not just immediately collapse in on itself?
AnimalMuppet 4y ago
Strongly indicates? I question that. As I understand it, the standard cosmology includes inflation, which stretched out the "full" universe to much larger than the observable universe. This also made the observable universe very, very close to flat, which makes it almost impossible to observe the difference between "flat" and "not flat, but very close to flat in the observable part of the universe". So if you think there's evidence that strongly indicates "truly flat", I'd like to hear what it is. Ditto for evidence that strongly indicates "infinite" as opposed to "finite, but considerably larger than the observable portion". [Edit: If you want to say that inflation is a just-so story, I'm not sure I will disagree. And if you say that inflation looks like it was specifically designed to be untestable, I could probably agree with that, too. But those are different from saying that you have sufficient evidence to rule out inflation.]
- fknorangesite 4y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilkinson_Microwave_Anisotropy_Probe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilkinson_Microwave_Anisotropy... > We now know (as of 2013) that the universe is flat with only a 0.4% margin of error. This suggests that the Universe is infinite in extent; however, since the Universe has a finite age, we can only observe a finite volume of the Universe. All we can truly conclude is that the Universe is much larger than the volume we can directly observe. https://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_shape.html https://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_shape.html
  - AnimalMuppet 4y ago
    Yeah. Not sure that's enough to support your original assertion, though.

ipaddr 4y ago

Flat universe theory sounds like flat earth theory in the 14th century. How could the earth be round at that point? It would take extraordinary evidence to the contrary. That doesn't mean flat earth theory was true.. just that everyone accepts that answer now.

opportune 4y ago

Wouldn’t this evidence also be consistent with being “not near enough to the edge to perceive an edge”? And also consistent with that, because of the expansion of the universe we will never be able to get a signal from the “edge” to know anyway? My problem with an infinite isomorphic universe is that it implies infinite mass. I don’t know enough about cosmology or other physics to understand all the implications, but to me it seems like it would make models of the early universe janky - ie why would it not just immediately collapse in on itself?

AnimalMuppet 4y ago

Strongly indicates? I question that. As I understand it, the standard cosmology includes inflation, which stretched out the "full" universe to much larger than the observable universe. This also made the observable universe very, very close to flat, which makes it almost impossible to observe the difference between "flat" and "not flat, but very close to flat in the observable part of the universe". So if you think there's evidence that strongly indicates "truly flat", I'd like to hear what it is. Ditto for evidence that strongly indicates "infinite" as opposed to "finite, but considerably larger than the observable portion". [Edit: If you want to say that inflation is a just-so story, I'm not sure I will disagree. And if you say that inflation looks like it was specifically designed to be untestable, I could probably agree with that, too. But those are different from saying that you have sufficient evidence to rule out inflation.]

fknorangesite 4y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilkinson_Microwave_Anisotropy_Probe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilkinson_Microwave_Anisotropy... > We now know (as of 2013) that the universe is flat with only a 0.4% margin of error. This suggests that the Universe is infinite in extent; however, since the Universe has a finite age, we can only observe a finite volume of the Universe. All we can truly conclude is that the Universe is much larger than the volume we can directly observe. https://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_shape.html https://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_shape.html
- AnimalMuppet 4y ago
  Yeah. Not sure that's enough to support your original assertion, though.