The edge of the universe seems to be universally less dense than the 3 degree background radiation from the expanding big bang. Otherwise it wouldn't be uniform in all directions as the edge travels into the void.

Just aman

Originally posted by fafalone

Everything has meaning.

I see no evidence to support that assertion, or any logical argument that would lead to that conclusion.

 

Maybe I am just dense.

 

kind regards

Originally posted by the GardenGnome

Just being curious. Nothing bad.

Nothing wrong with being curious. In fact, if you were not curious I would find that more "wrong".

 

Sorry if my reply seemed to be harsh or offensive. It was not intended that way.

 

kind regards

Originally posted by Piccolo

Ever see the never ending story?

 

Actually no. How does it go?

Originally posted by NSX

 

Actually no. How does it go?

 

The kid reads a book and enters some fantasy land, there are a bunch of creepy creatures. And the story never ends. Correct me if I'm wrong. It's been awhile since I've seen it.

To get back to the original thread, it's called "nullity".

 

Or if you prefer a catchier name, unspace. A bit like subspace - but less roomy®.

One can assume that it exists and can be occupied by matter, so what would it be like if we flew into it?

Originally posted by fafalone

what would it be like if we flew into it?

Extremely dull.

Extremely fascinating; as this was the kind of space that gave rise to the universe.

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/010902a.html --- How some NASA people anwser that question. I believe our atoms would be ripped apart and expand as a forward extention of our universe..

Originally posted by fafalone

One can assume that it exists and can be occupied by matter, so what would it be like if we flew into it?

 

flew into what?

Originally posted by fafalone

Extremely fascinating; as this was the kind of space that gave rise to the universe.

If you flew into it a few billion years ago, then it might be interesting.

 

I interpreted your question as "what if we launched a ship tomorrow and flew out of the universe". If it were me I'd take some magazines.

Well I'm assuming this will occur at a time where travelling 14 billion light years is practical.

 

You'd fly into something, since the space-time of the universe continually is.

It would still be dull.

 

If you can get to the edge of the universe and beyond, then by default you are travelling faster than anything in the universe. So nothing else would have got 'out there' yet.

But it's the same nothing that existed before the universe did; therefore everything in it can't be absolutely null; or the universe couldn't have arisen.

Everything 'in' it when the universe began is still contained in the universe.

 

Mind you, it does depend on how you look at 'in' I suppose.

 

Moral of the story: don't bother travelling, it's all on your doorstep.

The universe arose at specific points; how could this happen if there were no points?

what specific points?

Originally posted by fafalone

The universe arose at specific points; how could this happen if there were no points?

You mean something that can be defined in spatial terms?

In order for a point into more than 1 point, there must exist multiple points; so why didn't the universe start at some points and not others?

*** mangled post alert ***

is the concept of a point really relevant? it seems to imply absolute space to me.

All points of origin during the big bang had distance between them; but the new space-time wasn't part of this distance, so what was?

I imagine the big bang as one point, expanding in all directions from that point and the start of our coordinate space/time. Now we are somewhere away from that point and 14 billion light years from the outer border. Maybe?

Just aman

The current big bang theory states that there were multiple points.