Well - the universe is infinite in so far as it can have an infinite distance. However, if you take the classical approach, you can assume that the universe is at LEAST twice as wide as the distance light has travelled in the billions of years since the Big Bang, or moment of creation. The reason is that the Universe contains all things, and it's width can be measured as the point between the two things at greatest distance from eachother. The greatest distance between any two points is the distance between the first two photons that headed off in opposite directions at the time of the Big Bang. Those photons still exist, and are still making their lonely trek through the unimaginable black nothingness at close to two hundred thousand miles per second. So yes, I do believe the universe is that big. At some point, you can view the positions of those photons more as a variable in some giant computer. Their distance from everything else is actually pretty much irrelevant, since there is nothing out there for them to interact with.
2006-06-18 17:20:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by greeneyedprincess 6
·
4⤊
3⤋
Yes, it is possible. We as humans say what is there and what isn't there, almost in all things. Sometimes it seems like we've got tunnel vision and we need to open our eyes.
There are pictures of the vast universe and just because we cannot physically put ourselves there, then it either doesn't exist or it isn't worth our time. Maybe it is the fear of the unknown, the fear that science may have been wrong all along about their predictions, or maybe we just don't want to finance the people and the time to find out all the infinate possiblities that the universe holds for us.
And as for it being 100,000,000,000,000,000 I don't think anyone knows, not me, anyone else, or anyone who wrote that estimation. But I would think if there are black holes in our universe that are powerful and vast enough to make light, stars, and planets disappear (to where I might riddle your brain) I wouldn't doubt that the universe is that huge.
2006-06-18 17:16:57
·
answer #2
·
answered by bridetobebrandie 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
According to inflation theory, the standard model for cosmologists, it can be possible, and likely to me. In a nutshell, inflation theory states that during the big bang, our observable universe underwent a massive inflation- an incredible accelerated expansion- from proton size to grapfruit size-within the first fematoseconds of its creation. This helps explain why the universe seems to symetrical and geometrically "flat" (by flat I mean space is not negatively or positively curved- ala general relativity -gravitational curvature ).
A further conjecture is that this inflation was "local"- that our observable universe was the result of the "inflation" of a minute portion of a primal "super-universe", and that similar inflation events may be happening all the time in this super-universe, budding an infinity of other bubble universes such as ourselves, possibly with radically different physical laws.
Therefore it is very likely that our universe is one of an infinity of very small bubble universes within an infinitely larger universe- so the number you qoute might actually be much too small.
2006-06-18 17:31:49
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
No one and I mean NO ONE knows this answer for sure and probably never will...
The problem is, as the universe expands, there comes a point that the expansion between 2 points in the universe can actually be moving away from each other faster than light.
The key word is each other... It means that if you move at a little over 1/2 light speed and I move at just a little faster than 1/2 light speed, in the opposing direction, we will never see each other, because light can't and never will catch up.
So beyond about the 13.5 billion light year distant we can't see anything. That might mean there is nothing there, that might mean that there is something there but we can't see it because the universe expansion relative to us is retreating so fast that it has a faster than light condition relative to say an earth observer.
2006-06-18 17:22:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by chas s 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
The known universe (currently) is over a hundred billion light years in radius. Those stats you are using are well out of date. Multiplying that up it would be more like 100 million billion billions years to create. Its the same problem with the great pyramids in Egypt with the number of stones and a time line of 20 years given by the experts. They would have needed to be laying one stone every 5 minutes. But as the experts say they only worked on it during the winter then they would have to have layed one stone every second. The weights involved with moving the stones are truly enormous. The stones weights range from c.20 tons to over 100 tons. The maths dont work so they are wrong. There is one giant statue made of pink granite, quarried from down the Nile and over a mountain range, that weighs over 2000 tons, its in a single piece. We can only lift 200 tons today, and that is using a fixed gantry straight from a cargo ship to a waiting lorry or train. Not dragged over a mountain range with no visible road. You would need a very substantial ship to transport a 2000 ton rock up the Nile, like the size of a modern cargo ship, which would be too large for the Nile to take. Its a complete mystery how they moved it. *grins* Practicing Shaman... quantum physics rocks.
2016-03-26 21:11:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Of course it's true! I'm not sure about the real size of the universe but if you understand what a galaxy is (Wikipedia defines it as: huge gravitationally bound system of stars, interstellar gas and dust, plasma, and (possibly) unseen dark matter. Typical galaxies contain 10 million to one trillion stars, all orbiting a common center of gravity)
Some galaxies exist as groups. Some of these groups, like the Virgo cluster and the Coma cluster, are massive and contain thousands of galaxies over an area in the region of 20 million light-years across.
So, the entire universe is so huge..... to me it's unmeasurable.
What's also interesting is there's a theory that explains the universe must have originated from a single point, but not necessarily from a central point. Imagine the skin of a balloon that stretches as we blow air into it, there's no centre point as the skin all move away from each other.
2006-06-18 17:38:16
·
answer #6
·
answered by annmohdali 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes,
Normally a small short formula is a solution for a very big result.
By sitting on earth and observing the movements of the plannets, man achieved the exact calulations of the sizes,orbits and time etc not by measuring those things by measuring tape/scale etc.
It means Science has its own solution for every thing
serch/ think for it definetly you are knowing it.
BY cluculation angle, and light travell , we are caluclating the distences of planets and stars.
like wise obserivng and caluclationg the visiable( a part) unverse we can caluculate total universe.
wheter it may not be 100,000,000,,000000,000 or may be will be known by anthetication only
thank u
2006-06-18 17:49:55
·
answer #7
·
answered by moorthyovsn@yahoo.com 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well interesting number you came up with, the probability of there being intelligent life in our universe resembled that by the way. Though it's are to say, I do believe that the universe is much much larger. I believe it's as big as God made it to be.
2006-06-18 17:14:54
·
answer #8
·
answered by Appalachian Arbiter 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes. However, do not only consider the massiveness of the "macro" universe, but also the "micro". Specifically, consider the latest study of "String Theory" and the theoretical, unobservable, tiny alternate realities that are too small to observe. Amazing.
2006-06-18 17:19:14
·
answer #9
·
answered by moonwheeler 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Its entirely possible that the universe is so big that light hasnt had enough time to travel from one side to the other, so it cannot be seen. The further away we see the further back in time we see. Doesnt that make the universe, to our perceptions, something like a bowl? Doesnt a bowl suggest a sphere?
2006-06-18 17:15:06
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋