rainbow walking

As there seems to be some confusion as to the infiniteness of our universe, rather than address every single objection and argument, I thought it would be best just to state the obvious reasons why the universe cannot be considered finite.

Definition 1. Universe: The aggregation of all phenomenological attributes of an event at any given point in time.

In arguing the salient points of an infinite universe I will use the example graciously provided by YHWH666:

(rw: But remains, nonetheless, a phenomenological attribute of it anyway.)

(rw: Whether the universe rotates or not is irrelevant. I would also argue that it does not rotate but is drifting like a submerged jelly fish in an ocean current.)

Point 1. It is physically impossible to climb inside a completely sealed balloon and blow it up or cause it to expand. There must be a point or points of entry to allow the introduction of something to create the “expanding” phenomenon, as well as a place to "climb inside".

Point 2. This necessitates a sufficient supply of something from somewhere to facilitate the phenomenon of “expansion”.

Point 3. A finite amount of material inside a closed system cannot cause an “expansion” effect and be “cooling down” simultaneously. Only heat causes expansion of matter. Our universe is not “heating up”. In fact, its continued existence depends on it "cooling down".

Point 4. A balloon cannot be indefinitely inflated without creating the danger of rupturing.

Point 5. The rupturing of the universe is prevented by relief vents or “black holes”. This necessitates that there must be something outside the confining parameters of the universe where all excess matter is ejected, hence Hyper-space

Point 6. If pressure in hyper-space is greater at some points then it must be less at others. This would allow for both "injection" and "ejection" to occur as a phenomenon of the universe. Since pressure is created by heat, super heated pressure points would allow "injection" of energy into this universe with the effect of immediate Particalization as it comes into contact with a much cooler dimensional phenomenon thus the transferance of energy into material particles. Quarks and other sub-atomic phenomenon are evidence of this particalization. Likewise, to maintain super-heated status requires material to transform into energy thus the "ejection" of matter thru black holes feed hyper-space with this matter. Matter ejected into hyper-space is again super-heated into energy to continue the process of expansion.


Point 7. Increased pressure points sufficient to create the “injection” of matter into the balloon/universe is accomplished by super-heating of the elements of matter causing the “nebulae effect” that, in turn, spews out super hot material into the balloon that congeals into stars and other forms of cosmic material in proximity to the nebulae creating the phenomenon of expansion.

Point 8. It is not necessary that there be only one point of introduction of matter into a balloon. “Injection” points inside the balloon, created by vacuum fluctuations inherent in a “vent” or black hole, can reverse the process of “ejection” and become ports of “injection”, thus creating the phenomenon of continuity of matter/energy transfer, much the way a tornado creates a vacuum inside itself that eventually snuffs it out.

Point 9. Since nebulae and black holes are phenomenon that appear to be inside the balloon/universe rather than just on the fringes of its skin, hyper-space cannot be considered to exist outside the balloon in the conventional sense of a balloon as a closed system. It must, therefore, exist as another dimension thru which the universe is moving and flowing. Hence the fourth dimension.


Point 10. Based on these phenomena and the professionally postulated “hyper-space” theory, this universe is not a closed system but only one link in a chain of events as yet un-known.

Thus I conclude with this quote:

There is still debate among cosmologists whether our universe is a hyper-bubble or if it is truly infinite even in the fourth dimension. But the fact that our universe is expanding and that space is curved has been verified by a number of experiments, both on the earth and in space. M.K.

In my opinion the balloon example is not adequate to explain the “effect” of this universe. I would postulate a single celled organism as a better example more analogous to this universe. Such a system requires the continual introduction of energy derived from matter to survive and grow with the eventual “effect” of division. Whether this will result in two separate and distinct universes or is just an on-going development of something more complicated remains speculative. The only way this universe could die would be for it to assimilate all energy from hyper-space and become a closed system in the conventional sense. Until it can be demonstrated that there is a "limit" on the energy of hyper-soace, it isn't likely this universe will ever die and hence infinity is the only logical conclusion. Additionally, the continual recirculation of matter/energy between dimensions also supports an infinite status to this universe.

[ July 26, 2002: Message edited by: rainbow walking ]</p>

scumble

It's curious, but I really don't think we can ever attain sufficient information to conclude on such things. We don't really comprehend the enormity of the universe as it is, just approximations and abstractions that are woefully inadequate.

HelenM

Hi rw

Do you know why it is important to you to believe that the Universe is 'infinite'?

I'm assuming you wouldn't have posted about it if it weren't.

love
Helen

rainbow walking

Hi Helen,
Because it is true, do you know why you believe it isn't true?

rainbow walking

Hi scrumble,
We have attained a sufficient amount of data to allow modeling. As more data is attained models will be fine tuned. I do not share your pessimism about what we will accomplish in the future.

atrahasis

Hi RW,
What is the universe expanding into? The answer: It is expanding in the fourth dimension, hyperspace, which is not visible, and exists off the surface of our hyper-bubble.
-------------------------------------------------
If this is true then the possibility of existence of multiuniverses is viable.

According to Quantum cosmology in the beginning there was nothing, no space, no matter or energy. Even nothing became unstable, nothing began to decay. With billions of tiny bubbles forming and expanding rapidly. Each bubble forming a universe.
Some bubbles are still expanding. Others have collapsed.
RW is it? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

[ July 26, 2002: Message edited by: Black Moses ]</p>

rainbow walking

Hi Black Moses,
Any attempt to formulate models based on the incomplete research in quantum theory is sure to produce such oddities as this.

Additionally, nothing in my above post suggests an explanation of origins or causes of the current configuration.

What did you mean by the "RW is it? with the icon attached?

HelenM

Hi rw

Actually I don't know whether it's true or not.

I suppose I'd lean towards it not being infinite but it's not something that I take a strong stand on. I probably lean that way because I think that the scientific/mathematical models describing it as finite seem plausible.

love
Helen

rainbow walking

Hi Helen,
Models that ascribe finitude without establishing specifics are to be taken like a grain of sand. We can ascribe finite measurements to many things but the universe itself is not one of them...primarily due to the curvature of space. Can you see over the horizon? How wide is it? How high? How deep or far across from one end to the other? How many stars does it contain, or planets, or electrons? It is foolish to declare a thing closed that has not yet been opened.

HelenM

Yes but rw if your reasoning is that our knowledge of the universe is inadequate to declare it finite, isn't it also inadequate to to declare that God doesn't exist?

And you seem pretty sure about that

How is it that you can rule out God's existence categorically but when it comes to the universe we need to be open-minded?

love
Helen