Non-Infinite Universe, Universal Expansion, Gravity, Big Bangs and a Flat Earth

  • 56 Replies
  • 9710 Views
?

Doctor Yotsuba

  • 56
  • Hi! I'm new!
To bring you up to speed, this is a theory I developed to cater to the individuals who believe the expanding universe has some variety of walls or boundaries and possibly explain the origin and collapse of a limited limited universe. Most people believe the universe to be infinite, but without any genuine proof of this, there is no reason to rule out the possibility of limited universal space.

The first part of this theory (A) embodies the belief in spherical bodies in space and (Newton's) gravity, but the second part (B) has been revised to cover the possibility of flat objects in space and an absence of gravity. Both theories suggest multiple "big bangs".

Article A : Limited Universal Expansion with Traditional Gravity



figure 1:A - Following the "big bang", all undeveloped matter, used to forge the universe, is thrown outwards to gradually take shape. With the absence of friction, the contents will continue to move outwards, spreading out over a projected period of time. The universe itself is not expanding, but its contents are moving further and further way from the hypothetical nucleus; the illusion of expansion is created.



figure 2:A - The contents of the universe collide, at maximum velocity, with the outer walls of the universe, literally bouncing off and being forced back to the hypothetical nucleus.



figure 3:A - Matter, reflected from collision with the outer walls, collapses on itself, being reduced to a singularity and attracting an unmeasurable gravitational force.



figure 4:A - The process begins, once again, with an other "big bang" and the creation of a new universe.

Article B : Limited Universal Expansion with a Flat Earth



figure 1:B - Perhaps the universe looks like this? A universe containing a flat earth would have no need to be spherical, as all matter appears to be moving upwards. In such a case, all planets and bodies in space may have, at one time, originated from a single plate on the floor of the universe, broken apart and thrown upwards by what we know as the big bang.



figure 2:B - The contents of the trapezoid universe crash into the outer wall, fusing together in preparation for the creation of a new universe. The process repeats infinitely as the indestructible energy and subatomic matter majestically volleys back and forth.

---

We will never truly know whether or not the universe is infinite, but if there are walls, they will eventually be reached.

Food for thought.
I'm also an artist, I guess.


But what is the wall around the universe made of? It had to have come from somewhere. That of course leads to the question: Where did all the matter in the universe come from?

It is possible that the universe is 4 dimensional. If you were to go past the 'end' of the universe, you would appear on the other side. Light would also do this, which would mean that we would not notice going to the other side of the universe. Some people think that there is an infinite amount of matter in the universe, but it might just be light going past the end of the universe and ending up at the other side, creating an infinite loop.

I would really like to know how everything started. I mean all matter. Everything in the universe. If there were multiple big bangs, how did the first one start? Where did the matter come from?

Sometimes I think that there is a god like being, but acting more as a programmer. He (or she or it) coded in all the laws of physics and created matter and watches as it expands, and maybe restarts the program every now and then to see what changes. But then I think, "So where did he come from?" No, I don't think that there is a god watching over us. If there was a god, then he/she/it would be extremely busy watching over the entire universe. He/she/it could be watching a more advanced life form on a planet billions of light-years away.
30,000 feet isn't very high. It's certainly possible to breath.
Or not...
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=20398.0
I win

*

Re-re

  • 34
  • yo RE4lyf u know the shit!!!
Interesting concept!

?

Wakka Wakka

  • 1525
  • Beat The Hell Outta Spheres!
I know this is kind of a "little kid" question but what would be on the other side of the wall?
Normally when I'm not sure I just cop a feel.

?

Doctor Yotsuba

  • 56
  • Hi! I'm new!
I would really like to know how everything started. I mean all matter. Everything in the universe. If there were multiple big bangs, how did the first one start? Where did the matter come from?

It has always existed. There was no "first" big bang. Existence itself has no beginning or end.

Sometimes I think that there is a god like being, but acting more as a programmer. He (or she or it) coded in all the laws of physics and created matter and watches as it expands, and maybe restarts the program every now and then to see what changes. But then I think, "So where did he come from?" No, I don't think that there is a god watching over us. If there was a god, then he/she/it would be extremely busy watching over the entire universe. He/she/it could be watching a more advanced life form on a planet billions of light-years away.

Who created this deity, then? And who created the deity that created this one? According to you, everything must have been created by something else, but if that is the case, it is an infinite cycle, and there is still no true beginning of existence. Expand your perception.
I'm also an artist, I guess.


I know this is kind of a "little kid" question but what would be on the other side of the wall?

Most likely nothing. Empty space.

I love talking about stuff like this. It is so interesting. Here are some weird facts that I learned (most of them from the science channel):

If the string theory is correct (that every atom is made up of a ton of extremely small strings that are basically codes that tells it what it does), then if an atom were expanded to the size of the known universe, one of these strings would be about the size of a medium sized tree.

The nucleus of an atom is about 10,000 times smaller than the entire atom. An atom is mostly empty space.

2600 (2 multiplied by itself 600 times) is greater than the number of atoms in the known universe.

The closer you get to the speed of light, the faster you travel through time.

If you could travel faster than the speed of light, you would go back in time.

There are no laws of physics that say that it is impossible to go back in time, which means that it is possible (somehow).


There are probably some more facts that I know, but I can't think of them right now.
30,000 feet isn't very high. It's certainly possible to breath.
Or not...
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=20398.0
I win

?

Doctor Yotsuba

  • 56
  • Hi! I'm new!
I know this is kind of a "little kid" question but what would be on the other side of the wall?

Most likely nothing. Empty space.

Or perhaps an other universe? Who's to say it stops with ours?
I'm also an artist, I guess.


*

Re-re

  • 34
  • yo RE4lyf u know the shit!!!


If you could travel faster than the speed of light, you would go back in time.



You can't travel faster than the speed of light, it's just impossible. Thinking you can do so is like punching the laws of physics in the face.

One of the reasons why you can't travel faster than the speed of light is that mass isn't constant when moving at these velocities - it increases with velocity and it goes to infinity at the speed of light.
Eventually you would need infinite amount of energy to accelerate the object further beyond the speed of light.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2008, 05:28:10 PM by Re-re »

On some show on the science channel they said that if you could somehow go faster than the speed of light, you would be traveling backwards in time. So if you go from 0 to 299,793,458 m/s (1000 m/s faster than the speed of light) in 1 millisecond for 2 seconds:

1)you would most likely explode, along with everything else near you from the extremely intense speed and friction.
2) you would travel back in time (I'm not sure how long, could be hours, days, months)
30,000 feet isn't very high. It's certainly possible to breath.
Or not...
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=20398.0
I win

*

Re-re

  • 34
  • yo RE4lyf u know the shit!!!
On some show on the science channel they said that if you could somehow go faster than the speed of light, you would be traveling backwards in time. So if you go from 0 to 299,793,458 m/s (1000 m/s faster than the speed of light) in 1 millisecond for 2 seconds:

1)you would most likely explode, along with everything else near you from the extremely intense speed and friction.
2) you would travel back in time (I'm not sure how long, could be hours, days, months)

Well here's the problem, you can't go faster than the speed of light.

EDIT:

Intense friction in space? wat?
« Last Edit: May 08, 2008, 05:33:55 PM by Re-re »

I never said it was possible. I just said that if it was then that would happen. I'm not sure if it's even true, but it's cool.
30,000 feet isn't very high. It's certainly possible to breath.
Or not...
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=20398.0
I win

*

Re-re

  • 34
  • yo RE4lyf u know the shit!!!
I never said it was possible. I just said that if it was then that would happen. I'm not sure if it's even true, but it's cool.

It's a cool concept, but I wonder how they 'discovered' this theory. It seems like they've pulled it out of their ass.

I never said it was possible. I just said that if it was then that would happen. I'm not sure if it's even true, but it's cool.

It's a cool concept, but I wonder how they 'discovered' this theory. It seems like they've pulled it out of their ass.

Possibly, but I'm sure they did some weird experiment to figure it out...
30,000 feet isn't very high. It's certainly possible to breath.
Or not...
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=20398.0
I win

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Probably by using a higher number than c for the time dilation formulas. It's still nonsense because you can never reach c, but mathematically it seems reasonable. I'm not sure where the exploding part comes in, except for the fact you'd have infinite mass  at c, but whatever.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

?

Doctor Yotsuba

  • 56
  • Hi! I'm new!
From where do people adopt the assumption that time is recorded and can be traversed? Travelling "faster than light" would not tear the fabric of time, it would only affect the render time. For instance; if you were to look into a mirror while travelling faster than light speed, you would not see your reflection.
I'm also an artist, I guess.


*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
For instance; if you were to look into a mirror while travelling faster than light speed, you would not see your reflection.
Uh, what?


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

pancakes

  • 68
  • flat like pancakes! get it?
thats cool and all, but the earth is flat.
Quote from:  pancakes
i can have a relevant sig too!

thats cool and all, but the earth is flat.

If you say the earth is flat, prove my evidence wrong (link in my sig).
30,000 feet isn't very high. It's certainly possible to breath.
Or not...
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=20398.0
I win

*

pancakes

  • 68
  • flat like pancakes! get it?
thats cool and all, but the earth is flat.

If you say the earth is flat, prove my evidence wrong (link in my sig).

i would, but i have more important things to do. like drawing in marker on the back of my hand.
Quote from:  pancakes
i can have a relevant sig too!

*

DrJoe

  • 18
thats cool and all, but the earth is flat.
ok
Test.

?

Doctor Yotsuba

  • 56
  • Hi! I'm new!
I was not contesting the flatness of the Earth. This theory includes both a round and flat earth.

READ the thread before getting on your high horse.
I'm also an artist, I guess.


*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
This thread was the most retarded thing I have ever read......

What's outside of the universe..... cocks gun

Probably another universe or something..... grits teeth

How does it end is there like a wall or something..... fuck it *blam*

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
For instance; if you were to look into a mirror while travelling faster than light speed, you would not see your reflection.
Uh, what?


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

?

Doctor Yotsuba

  • 56
  • Hi! I'm new!
For instance; if you were to look into a mirror while travelling faster than light speed, you would not see your reflection.
Uh, what?

Vision is based on light reflecting off of objects into the eye, where it is understood by the brain. Reflection cannot take place at speeds greater than that of light. (unless flat earth people believe differently)
I'm also an artist, I guess.


*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
For instance; if you were to look into a mirror while travelling faster than light speed, you would not see your reflection.
Uh, what?

Vision is based on light reflecting off of objects into the eye, where it is understood by the brain. Reflection cannot take place at speeds greater than that of light. (unless flat earth people believe differently)
So according to your theory, if you are going nearly at the speed of light it would take light a very long time to catch up to you?
Wow, relativity much?

?

Doctor Yotsuba

  • 56
  • Hi! I'm new!
So according to your theory, if you are going nearly at the speed of light it would take light a very long time to catch up to you?
Wow, relativity much?

It's not a theory, it's a fact. If it were possible for anything to move faster than the speed of light (and it is not), reflection of any kind would not be possible. Light isn't going to go faster than the speed of itself.

EDIT: If you're still confused, take into mind that stars that have gone out many light years ago are still visible.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2008, 10:19:16 PM by Doctor Yotsuba »
I'm also an artist, I guess.


*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
So according to your theory, if you are going nearly at the speed of light it would take light a very long time to catch up to you?
Wow, relativity much?

It's not a theory, it's a fact. If it were possible for anything to move faster than the speed of light (and it is not), reflection of any kind would not be possible. Light isn't going to go faster than the speed of itself.
Light goes at the speed of light from any frame of reference. If you are going 1 m/s slower than the speed of light, and i shot a laser by you, you would watch it go by at what would still appear to be the speed of light. Though the spectrum would be greatly shifted for you. And as for the greater than speed of light crap. Information can't travel faster than light. So your point is inapplicable.

?

Doctor Yotsuba

  • 56
  • Hi! I'm new!
Light goes at the speed of light from any frame of reference. If you are going 1 m/s slower than the speed of light, and i shot a laser by you, you would watch it go by at what would still appear to be the speed of light. Though the spectrum would be greatly shifted for you. And as for the greater than speed of light crap. Information can't travel faster than light. So your point is inapplicable.

Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.
I'm also an artist, I guess.


*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Light goes at the speed of light from any frame of reference. If you are going 1 m/s slower than the speed of light, and i shot a laser by you, you would watch it go by at what would still appear to be the speed of light. Though the spectrum would be greatly shifted for you. And as for the greater than speed of light crap. Information can't travel faster than light. So your point is inapplicable.

Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.

Light goes at the same speed from any frame of reference.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
I don't think he's getting it...
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."