Philosophy Now Forum

It seems this question has no solution. Scientists say that since the Big Bang, the universe has been expanding. Okay I can buy that one. But then the question turns on inside of what? Another universe possibly? Or nothingness?

What say you to this?

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:It seems this question has no solution. Scientists say that since the Big Bang, the universe has been expanding. Okay I can buy that one. But then the question turns on inside of what? Another universe possibly? Or nothingness?

What say you to this?

PhilX

It's not actually expanding inside of anything. An expanding universe creates time and spaces as it expands. There is no edge.

Ginkgo wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:It seems this question has no solution. Scientists say that since the Big Bang, the universe has been expanding. Okay I can buy that one. But then the question turns on inside of what? Another universe possibly? Or nothingness?

What say you to this?

PhilX

It's not actually expanding inside of anything. An expanding universe creates time and spaces as it expands. There is no edge.

How would our universe be finite and have no edge? (unless you're saying the universe is infinite in size)

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Ginkgo wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:It seems this question has no solution. Scientists say that since the Big Bang, the universe has been expanding. Okay I can buy that one. But then the question turns on inside of what? Another universe possibly? Or nothingness?

What say you to this?

PhilX

It's not actually expanding inside of anything. An expanding universe creates time and spaces as it expands. There is no edge.

How would our universe be finite and have no edge? (unless you're saying the universe is infinite in size)

PhilX

An excellent question. No I am not saying the universe is infinite and in fact it doesn't have to be in order not to have an edge.

It is all a matter of topology. What we do know ( thanks to group of Aussie scientists) is that the universe in expanding at an ever increasing rate. So the conclusion seems inescapable. We live in a flat universe.

The problem now becomes the number of candidates in geometrical terms that explain a flat universe. No one know the correct model, but the interesting thing is that none of these models requires an edge.

Hi philosophy Explorer,

If it is hard for you to imagine this concept then you can be assured it is even harder for me.

Perhaps we can look at it this way. The 'shape' of a flat universe can be represented by a number of configurations. It seems that no mater the model we choose we always get the same result. When we reach one 'edge' we suddenly reappear in a different spot at a different 'edge'. Meaning there is no actual edge.

Probably not much help.

the universe is in side a nonlocality of a black hole.the black holes that seem to be on the inside in relation to the universe are in fact part of one never happened and nonmoving singlarity called consciousness.black holes are nonlocal points in the happening locality.locality obviously came from nonlocality or sizeless nothing.beond all event horizons its nonlocal but aware.wow.

jackles wrote:the universe is in side a nonlocal black hole.the black holes that seem to be on the inside in relation to the universe are in fact part of one never happened and nonmoving singlarity called consciousness.black holes are nonlocal points in the happening locality.locality obviously came from nonlocality or sizeless nothing.

Hi again jackles,

What you are saying can't really be explained using the topology I was suggesting. Everything contained 'within' and 'outside' of the universe is just everything that is contained within the universe. The universe is all there is, it is everything there is.

yes ginkgo got to agree but every thing there is is local to other bits of every thing there is .in a relative way.but every thing there is in local happening way is a presention of never happened nonlocality.so as far as nonlocality is concerned what is happening relative to its self is not real and therefor never happen .its just a construct of its self which is never happened.so the univers is and illusion relative to the more permament thing which is nonlocality..it is there for ultermatly nonlocality which moves moving things in location.

Philosophy Explorer wrote:...Scientists say that since the Big Bang, the universe has been expanding. Okay I can buy that one. But then the question turns on inside of what? Another universe possibly? Or nothingness?

There's a few options. It could be a proper, philosopher's abso-f@*king-lutely nothing kind of nothing; or it could be some namby-pampy physicists nothing. Alternatively, it could be something completely different.

Philosophy Explorer wrote:How would our universe be finite and have no edge? (unless you're saying the universe is infinite in size)

Tricky. But if you buy the idea of the Big Bang, consider that when it was the size of a football, every single point on it, even on the surface has been expanding for just shy of 14 billion years. If there is any meaningful absolute scale, then a part of the universe that was 1mm away then is now over 14 billion light years away (the most distant object we can see is over 20 billion light years away, that's expanding space for you). The same is true for whatever part of the football sized universe you start from. For all practical purposes, the universe is the bit we can see, there is no way of telling how big the part we can't see is.

uwot wrote:Tricky. But if you buy the idea of the Big Bang, consider that when it was the size of a football, every single point on it, even on the surface has been expanding for just shy of 14 billion years. If there is any meaningful absolute scale, then a part of the universe that was 1mm away then is now over 14 billion light years away (the most distant object we can see is over 20 billion light years away, that's expanding space for you). The same is true for whatever part of the football sized universe you start from. For all practical purposes, the universe is the bit we can see, there is no way of telling how big the part we can't see is.

Good point uwot. When we talk about such things as "flat universe" and "footballs" we are talking about a 2 D representation.

well it aint the nanbypamby kin of nothing thats for sure dude.haha .its more of an austrailian outback kin a nothing that we are talking here.dont forget nothing is the commnon denominator of everything in existance.heaven dosnt move cos its nothing and it aint got any size time wise or space wise.

Philosophy Explorer wrote:It seems this question has no solution. Scientists say that since the Big Bang, the universe has been expanding. Okay I can buy that one. But then the question turns on inside of what? Another universe possibly? Or nothingness?

I believe our universe is but a smokeplume that exist in a superuniverse.