When the word 'Universe' is defined as ...

[Age]

While the 'Universe' word is being defined as, and thus meaning and referring to, everything; all there is; totality, then the Universe, Itself, is infinite and eternal.

This is proved by the Fact that there is no border, boundary, nor end, spatially. And, to the Fact that what was existing before any claimed beginning was, again, just the Universe, Itself.

Now, for any claim that 'there was no before' a so-called 'big bang' is just absolute nonsense as this would mean that the 'big bang' occurred from absolutely nothing, at all. The illogical irrational absurdity of this claim speaks for itself. And, any claim that God created the Universe, literally, means that God, Itself, is the Universe, or a part of the Universe, Itself.

See, the fact that 'a bang' could have occurred, from one solitary infinite compression of matter, or singularity, just means that all matter from one particular area, or from the whole infinite area, was just compressed together with no space, nor distance, between 'it'. And, for that singularity to have been able to expand, then obviously there would have had to have been 'space', for 'matter' to expand out.

Now, both all 'matter', and, all 'space' is a part of everything, all there is, and totality, itself. Therefore, if there was 'matter', and, 'space' existing before what is called 'the big bang', then that was just how the Universe, Itself, just was.

And, for those who, still, want to claim that there was no 'time' before 'that bang', then obviously this is just because of what the 'time' means, and refers to, exactly, and what is able, or not able, to be done when there is only 'space', and, 'matter' existing when all the known matter is compressed together with all 'space' removed from 'matter'. That is, it is completely impossible to measure the duration between any perceived events. This is because at least two pieces of particles of matter have to be in Existence, or to be able to be witnessed, to be able to 'measure duration' or what some call 'tell (the) time'.

The Universe, Itself, is always existing, just within a continual change in way, shape, and/or form, and this continual change is happening and occurring in the HERE, and, NOW, always. And, in all ways some might also say and argue.

The Universe, Itself, is not bordered nor bounded by absolutely any thing, other than of course when you human beings limit your observations.

I agree that the word "universe" ought to apply to all that is, has ever been, and will ever be.

To you, why 'ought' that one word apply to all, at all times?

Absolutely any word could suffice, would they not?

And if that is the case, then one would think that it might be infinitely boundless and timeless.

Why would one only 'think' this?

Yet, in the realm of human activity and consciousness, the idea of a timeless and boundless universe is almost as difficult to wrap our heads around as is the idea of a bounded and temporary universe.

Well, if this is true, then 'I' am not a 'human' with 'my own head', because, to me, the Fact that the Universe, Itself, is and could only every actually be, physically and logically, infinite and eternal, or timeless and boundless, in the only Real and Right way to 'look at' and 'see' things here.

But, why you, personally, cannot fathom, comprehend, and understand, or what you call 'get your head around', this irrefutable Fact yet is, also, fully understood, and known.

See, it is absolutely totally understandable why you cannot 'see' what is blatantly obviously True, Right, Accurate, and Correct is absolutely no surprise, at all, especially considering what you have 'experienced' and have had to 'go through'.

In short, I don't think any of us knows much about the universe beyond what we can possibly experience.

Well 'this', I thought, went without needing to be said.

Is there absolutely any thing one can know about if they have never had absolutely any 'experience' of 'it' at all?

Beyond that there is only speculation without certainty.

Here is another one who believes that the actual 'proof' for what is irrefutably True here does not exist.

It is like this one, and "henry quirk" have never ever even considered that the actual 'proof' of and for things here has and is always existing, just 'waiting to be uncovered, or revealed', some might say.

Unless of course, I'm the only human in the world and everyone else is a higher entity and therefore knows with certainty things that I don't know with certainty.

Why is there 'only' two choices here to 'choose from'?

Why, to you, is it that there is 'no certainty' at all, OR, absolutely everyone else has already obtained 'the certainty' but you have not.

Were you not yet aware that absolutely all knowledge, or information, is grasped, and/or learned, 'along the way', and absolutely no two of you human beings grasps nor learns the exact same knowledge, or information, at nor in the exact same moment?

However, I suppose that could conceivably be the case as well.

How many people do you think or believe learned, and realized, that it is actually the earth that is revolving around the sun, and not the other way around, before anyone else did?

And, when just one person learned, and realized, this Fact, then do you think or believe that absolutely everyone else came-to-know and understand the exact same thing, at the exact same moment or time?

When, and if, one, for example, presents the 'proof' that the Universe could not and thus did not begin, nor could not and thus is not expanding, then do you think or believe that others will 'catch up on', this, relatively, new/er knowledge and information, individually, or all at once?

Also, and by the way, there may well be some who continue to 'believe' otherwise. So, to these ones, while they believe otherwise they cannot and thus will not ever 'catch up', with 'the rest' of 'us'.

you human beings, at times, can be very, very slow to 'catch up', 'with us'.

Just realizing how long it took 'some' to 'realize, and agree with and accept, that, actually, it is the earth that revolves around the sun, and that it is not the other way around, could be all the 'proof' needed to not to continue to hold onto beliefs nor assumptions 'about things'.

But, then again, 'some of you' are also very, very slow to 'catch up' with and on this irrefutable Fact, as well.

[seeds]

...in the realm of human activity and consciousness, the idea of a timeless and boundless universe is almost as difficult to wrap our heads around as is the idea of a bounded and temporary universe.

Actually, Gary, it's kinda easy to wrap one's head around the idea of both a boundless and bounded universe.

Why?

Because your head (or skull) is already literally wrapped around the perfect example of something that is both boundless and bounded at the same time.

I am, of course, talking about your mind.

If you close your eyes and peer into the inner dimension of your own mind you will realize that (just like the universe) it is impossible to locate the outer boundary of your mind, for just like the universe, it appears to be open and endless.

On the other hand, we can intuit the fact that there must be a boundary to your mind based on the fact that there is a limited amount of life energy (or life essence) that makes up the sum total of your mind.

Indeed, it is a boundary that delineates the point where your mind ends, and other minds begin, yet, again, our own minds feel boundless (infinite) to us as seen from the inside.

I suggest that the same thing applies to the universe.
_______

[Gary Childress]

...in the realm of human activity and consciousness, the idea of a timeless and boundless universe is almost as difficult to wrap our heads around as is the idea of a bounded and temporary universe.

Actually, Gary, it's kinda easy to wrap one's head around the idea of both a boundless and bounded universe.

Why?

Because your head (or skull) is already literally wrapped around the perfect example of something that is both boundless and bounded at the same time.

I am, of course, talking about your mind.

If you close your eyes and peer into the inner dimension of your own mind you will realize that (just like the universe) it is impossible to locate the outer boundary of your mind, for just like the universe, it appears to be open and endless.

On the other hand, we can intuit the fact that there must be a boundary to your mind based on the fact that there is a limited amount of life energy (or life essence) that makes up the sum total of your mind.

Indeed, it is a boundary that delineates the point where your mind ends, and other minds begin, yet, again, our own minds feel boundless (infinite) to us as seen from the inside.

I suggest that the same thing applies to the universe.
_______

The above makes about as much sense to me as trying to imagine a bounded or else unbounded universe.

[Gary Childress]

While the 'Universe' word is being defined as, and thus meaning and referring to, everything; all there is; totality, then the Universe, Itself, is infinite and eternal.

This is proved by the Fact that there is no border, boundary, nor end, spatially. And, to the Fact that what was existing before any claimed beginning was, again, just the Universe, Itself.

Now, for any claim that 'there was no before' a so-called 'big bang' is just absolute nonsense as this would mean that the 'big bang' occurred from absolutely nothing, at all. The illogical irrational absurdity of this claim speaks for itself. And, any claim that God created the Universe, literally, means that God, Itself, is the Universe, or a part of the Universe, Itself.

See, the fact that 'a bang' could have occurred, from one solitary infinite compression of matter, or singularity, just means that all matter from one particular area, or from the whole infinite area, was just compressed together with no space, nor distance, between 'it'. And, for that singularity to have been able to expand, then obviously there would have had to have been 'space', for 'matter' to expand out.

Now, both all 'matter', and, all 'space' is a part of everything, all there is, and totality, itself. Therefore, if there was 'matter', and, 'space' existing before what is called 'the big bang', then that was just how the Universe, Itself, just was.

And, for those who, still, want to claim that there was no 'time' before 'that bang', then obviously this is just because of what the 'time' means, and refers to, exactly, and what is able, or not able, to be done when there is only 'space', and, 'matter' existing when all the known matter is compressed together with all 'space' removed from 'matter'. That is, it is completely impossible to measure the duration between any perceived events. This is because at least two pieces of particles of matter have to be in Existence, or to be able to be witnessed, to be able to 'measure duration' or what some call 'tell (the) time'.

The Universe, Itself, is always existing, just within a continual change in way, shape, and/or form, and this continual change is happening and occurring in the HERE, and, NOW, always. And, in all ways some might also say and argue.

The Universe, Itself, is not bordered nor bounded by absolutely any thing, other than of course when you human beings limit your observations.

I agree that the word "universe" ought to apply to all that is, has ever been, and will ever be.

To you, why 'ought' that one word apply to all, at all times?

Absolutely any word could suffice, would they not?

And if that is the case, then one would think that it might be infinitely boundless and timeless.

Why would one only 'think' this?

Yet, in the realm of human activity and consciousness, the idea of a timeless and boundless universe is almost as difficult to wrap our heads around as is the idea of a bounded and temporary universe.

Well, if this is true, then 'I' am not a 'human' with 'my own head', because, to me, the Fact that the Universe, Itself, is and could only every actually be, physically and logically, infinite and eternal, or timeless and boundless, in the only Real and Right way to 'look at' and 'see' things here.

But, why you, personally, cannot fathom, comprehend, and understand, or what you call 'get your head around', this irrefutable Fact yet is, also, fully understood, and known.

See, it is absolutely totally understandable why you cannot 'see' what is blatantly obviously True, Right, Accurate, and Correct is absolutely no surprise, at all, especially considering what you have 'experienced' and have had to 'go through'.

In short, I don't think any of us knows much about the universe beyond what we can possibly experience.

Well 'this', I thought, went without needing to be said.

Is there absolutely any thing one can know about if they have never had absolutely any 'experience' of 'it' at all?

Beyond that there is only speculation without certainty.

Here is another one who believes that the actual 'proof' for what is irrefutably True here does not exist.

It is like this one, and "henry quirk" have never ever even considered that the actual 'proof' of and for things here has and is always existing, just 'waiting to be uncovered, or revealed', some might say.

Unless of course, I'm the only human in the world and everyone else is a higher entity and therefore knows with certainty things that I don't know with certainty.

Why is there 'only' two choices here to 'choose from'?

Why, to you, is it that there is 'no certainty' at all, OR, absolutely everyone else has already obtained 'the certainty' but you have not.

Were you not yet aware that absolutely all knowledge, or information, is grasped, and/or learned, 'along the way', and absolutely no two of you human beings grasps nor learns the exact same knowledge, or information, at nor in the exact same moment?

However, I suppose that could conceivably be the case as well.

How many people do you think or believe learned, and realized, that it is actually the earth that is revolving around the sun, and not the other way around, before anyone else did?

And, when just one person learned, and realized, this Fact, then do you think or believe that absolutely everyone else came-to-know and understand the exact same thing, at the exact same moment or time?

When, and if, one, for example, presents the 'proof' that the Universe could not and thus did not begin, nor could not and thus is not expanding, then do you think or believe that others will 'catch up on', this, relatively, new/er knowledge and information, individually, or all at once?

Also, and by the way, there may well be some who continue to 'believe' otherwise. So, to these ones, while they believe otherwise they cannot and thus will not ever 'catch up', with 'the rest' of 'us'.

you human beings, at times, can be very, very slow to 'catch up', 'with us'.

Just realizing how long it took 'some' to 'realize, and agree with and accept, that, actually, it is the earth that revolves around the sun, and that it is not the other way around, could be all the 'proof' needed to not to continue to hold onto beliefs nor assumptions 'about things'.

But, then again, 'some of you' are also very, very slow to 'catch up' with and on this irrefutable Fact, as well.

You're far more knowledgeable about the universe than I am then.

[Age]

...in the realm of human activity and consciousness, the idea of a timeless and boundless universe is almost as difficult to wrap our heads around as is the idea of a bounded and temporary universe.

Actually, Gary, it's kinda easy to wrap one's head around the idea of both a boundless and bounded universe.

Why?

Because your head (or skull) is already literally wrapped around the perfect example of something that is both boundless and bounded at the same time.

I am, of course, talking about your mind.

The Mind, Itself, is absolutely not bounded at all.

The brain, however, is obviously bounded, and thoughts can be also.

If you close your eyes and peer into the inner dimension of your own mind

Once again, these people, back then, would use the 'mind' word as though they actually knew what they were saying, and talking about.

Now, what is this 'mind' thing, exactly, which you also claim 'you people', actually, 'have'?

When, and if, you ever do this, Accurately, and Correctly, then 'we' can begin to understand by what you mean, exactly, when you say things like; 'Peer into the inner dimension of your own mind'.

you will realize that (just like the universe) it is impossible to locate the outer boundary of your mind, for just like the universe, it appears to be open and endless.

you cannot even accurately inform the readers here who and what 'you' are, nor who and what 'I' am, exactly. Yet you believe, absolutely, that 'you', and 'others', have 'your own individual and different minds', but then go on to say and claim that if 'others' only peered into the inner dimension of their own mind, then they, also, would 'see', 'comprehend', 'realize', and/or 'understand' what 'you', personally, do.

If all of you people have 'your own minds', then why would every one of 'you' 'see' or 'realize' the exact same thing, exactly?

On the other hand, we can intuit the fact that there must be a boundary to your mind based on the fact that there is a limited amount of life energy (or life essence) that makes up the sum total of your mind.

LOL you do not even 'know' what 'a mind' is, let alone what 'your mind', supposedly, is.

Look, it is this simple, the Universe is boundless because there is absolutely nothing 'bounding' It spatially, nor temporally. And, the personal thoughts, within an individual human body are limited, or bounded, by the personal and individual past experiences of that human body. Whereas, the Mind is always open, and which is why you human beings, individually and collectively, are able to keep on learning, and creating, new/er and more things all of the time.

Indeed, it is a boundary that delineates the point where your mind ends, and other minds begin, yet, again, our own minds feel boundless (infinite) to us as seen from the inside.

I suggest that the same thing applies to the universe.
_______

Well your own personal and individual suggestion here is absolutely False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect. And, because you do not even want to discuss this, implies further so.

[Age]

I agree that the word "universe" ought to apply to all that is, has ever been, and will ever be.

To you, why 'ought' that one word apply to all, at all times?

Absolutely any word could suffice, would they not?

And if that is the case, then one would think that it might be infinitely boundless and timeless.

Why would one only 'think' this?

Yet, in the realm of human activity and consciousness, the idea of a timeless and boundless universe is almost as difficult to wrap our heads around as is the idea of a bounded and temporary universe.

Well, if this is true, then 'I' am not a 'human' with 'my own head', because, to me, the Fact that the Universe, Itself, is and could only every actually be, physically and logically, infinite and eternal, or timeless and boundless, in the only Real and Right way to 'look at' and 'see' things here.

But, why you, personally, cannot fathom, comprehend, and understand, or what you call 'get your head around', this irrefutable Fact yet is, also, fully understood, and known.

See, it is absolutely totally understandable why you cannot 'see' what is blatantly obviously True, Right, Accurate, and Correct is absolutely no surprise, at all, especially considering what you have 'experienced' and have had to 'go through'.

In short, I don't think any of us knows much about the universe beyond what we can possibly experience.

Well 'this', I thought, went without needing to be said.

Is there absolutely any thing one can know about if they have never had absolutely any 'experience' of 'it' at all?

Beyond that there is only speculation without certainty.

Here is another one who believes that the actual 'proof' for what is irrefutably True here does not exist.

It is like this one, and "henry quirk" have never ever even considered that the actual 'proof' of and for things here has and is always existing, just 'waiting to be uncovered, or revealed', some might say.

Unless of course, I'm the only human in the world and everyone else is a higher entity and therefore knows with certainty things that I don't know with certainty.

Why is there 'only' two choices here to 'choose from'?

Why, to you, is it that there is 'no certainty' at all, OR, absolutely everyone else has already obtained 'the certainty' but you have not.

Were you not yet aware that absolutely all knowledge, or information, is grasped, and/or learned, 'along the way', and absolutely no two of you human beings grasps nor learns the exact same knowledge, or information, at nor in the exact same moment?

However, I suppose that could conceivably be the case as well.

How many people do you think or believe learned, and realized, that it is actually the earth that is revolving around the sun, and not the other way around, before anyone else did?

And, when just one person learned, and realized, this Fact, then do you think or believe that absolutely everyone else came-to-know and understand the exact same thing, at the exact same moment or time?

When, and if, one, for example, presents the 'proof' that the Universe could not and thus did not begin, nor could not and thus is not expanding, then do you think or believe that others will 'catch up on', this, relatively, new/er knowledge and information, individually, or all at once?

Also, and by the way, there may well be some who continue to 'believe' otherwise. So, to these ones, while they believe otherwise they cannot and thus will not ever 'catch up', with 'the rest' of 'us'.

you human beings, at times, can be very, very slow to 'catch up', 'with us'.

Just realizing how long it took 'some' to 'realize, and agree with and accept, that, actually, it is the earth that revolves around the sun, and that it is not the other way around, could be all the 'proof' needed to not to continue to hold onto beliefs nor assumptions 'about things'.

But, then again, 'some of you' are also very, very slow to 'catch up' with and on this irrefutable Fact, as well.

You're far more knowledgeable about the universe than I am then.

And, conversely, you are far more 'knowledgeable' about some things than i am.

Which just goes to 'stand to' 'reason'.

Also, and by the way, when, and if, I get to explain, fully, what I want to, then what is found is that what I will be saying, and revealing, is not, really, some thing 'new' nor even 'that exciting', and that 'they' were just things 'already known', but just things that had never ever been taught before, but were 'already known', just unconsciously within.