English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

4 answers

The most meaningful scientific answers would come from reputable scientists concerning big bang cosmology. Some extrapolate the big bang back to a singularity. If they are correct, the initial universe occupied zero space. The next group would not consider it meaningful to extrapolate beyond the Planck Epoch. I don't know what size that would imply. So far, I haven't seen a sound theoretical basis for answering your question.

If you don't want to get that extreme, then instead imagine compacting the universe to an average density of the density of the sun. In that case, the volume would be about a billion cubic light years, see the second reference.

2007-07-22 19:20:48 · answer #1 · answered by Frank N 7 · 0 0

Well, if you did that, then the matter would undergo gravitational collapse and form a black hole. So, to answer your question, the lump would be an infinitely small point...smaller than a pencil tip.

2007-07-22 17:22:34 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

If we assume that you can prevent gravitational collapse then the lump's size would be immeasurable. You are made of matter therefore you would be contained within the lump and could not properly observe it. Any measuring device you might use would also be contained in the lump and would therefore be rendered useless.

2007-07-22 17:55:59 · answer #3 · answered by threelegmarmot 2 · 0 2

there is no limit it would be infinintely big

2007-07-22 18:29:20 · answer #4 · answered by Buck BUCK 2 · 0 3

fedest.com, questions and answers