Do you think there's more than one universe?

[Pferd]

Only on Sherdog will you see a discussion about a theoretical multi-verse devolve into an offer of butt sex

<Lmaoo>

I know right . that' what I love about this place . you never know what direction these threads will gobut its almost always entertaining .talk about abstract thinking.

 

[Jack Reacheround]

I know right . that' what I love about this place . you never know what direction these threads will gobut its almost always entertaining .talk about abstract thinking.

I believe it is less abstract thinking and more trying to shoehorn butt sex into every topic.

 

[MusterX]

Nothingness cannot logically exist in reality. The concept of 'nothing' is a human abstraction that requires 'something' in order for its invention and existence in our minds because the fundamental idea of 'nothing' derives entirely from its inherent relationship with 'something'. Without 'something', 'nothing' would have no meaning

I don't know about that mumbo-jumbo so I'll fight it wit more of the same.

If the universe is not infinite and we were to drive our space ship to the edge and look beyond, what would be there, beyond the finite universe? The thought here is that time is defined as the passing of events. If you were to go outside of our universe, into the "nothing", time would cease to exist because without mass, without objects interacting with one another then there are no passing events, there are no events happening, which means there is no time outside of our universe. It only exists here.

 

[MusterX]

I think it is finite.

"The Big Crunch hypothesis is a symmetric view of the ultimate fate of the universe. Just as the Big Bang started as a cosmological expansion, this theory assumes that the average density of the universe will be enough to stop its expansion and begin contracting."

Some are finding the Big Crunch theory less and less likely after we discovered in the late 90's that the universe is actually accelerating the expansion faster and faster. It was a completely unexpected finding.

 

[rj144]

It wasn't really straight forward before Georg Cantor spent his life working on set theory.

Don't really know, but perhaps no one just bothered to think about it.

 

[faustian]

@MusterX
Changed my mind. Here goes.
Imagine the set of positive integers, 0,1,2,3,... It has an infinite number of terms.
If you take the set of integers, ...,-3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3... also infinite in number, there is a 1-1 correspondence between them. E.g. from the positive integers, assign odd numbers to negative integers and even numbers to positive integers, i.e.
+5,+3,+1,0,+2,+4,+6
-3, -2, -1, 0,+1,+2,+3
These 2 infinities are the same size.
But then look at the real numbers, 0, 0.1, 0.01, 0.001, 0.3453 etc, there is no 1-1 correspondence with either of the 2 sets above. It's a larger infinity.

Both sets represent the same thing tho: an infinite one-dimensional line

 

[Necromantic]

I disagree, and the bold part is just plain untrue.

What you're missing is that when infinity becomes useful in math, it can inform us about the real world. The mathematics doesn't just give us answers to questions, but the questions themselves tell us how the world works (in conjunction with empirical observation).

It's not surprising if you are having trouble imagining an infinite universe, but that is exactly what the math tells us about the universe we live in based upon what we have observed. As for an infinite number of universes, it's a nice idea but it's got a long way to go in terms of evidence. In both cases, however, infinity is not nonsense.

"It's not surprising if you are having trouble imagining an infinite universe, but that is exactly what the math tells us about the universe we live in based upon what we have observed. "
- LOL, this is exactly what physics is telling us is not the case at all. WTF are you talking about? Static universe theory has been dead, gaped by necrophiles, re-animated and shot in the face by Coral.


Well, 1st off the Big Bang theory is the most accepted theory. That means the universe is not infinite. Also, don't forget that you cannot ignore the 2nd law of Thermodynamics (a closed system will become more and more chaotic (entropy), and without an external energy source it will eventual lose all energy (the expected heat death of the universe).

I never said that infinity is not useful in math, in fact it is, but applying infinity to the real world never happens.
Say there is a 1x1 foot tile. There are "infinite points" in that tile, but guess what? I can cross those infinite points with one step. See, doesn't make sense in world.
Also, all time and space is contained inside our universe which has a beginning and end so time is not infinite either.

"As for an infinite number of universes, it's a nice idea but it's got a long way to go in terms of evidence. In both cases, however, infinity is not nonsense."
- it absolutely is nonsense as I previously explained why. You saying so really does not mean shit. Overcome my reason why an infinite number universes are ridiculous and I might be interested.

An additional reason an infinite number of universes is ridiculous. If universes are born and die, and there are an infinite umber of universes before ours, then our universe would never exist because an infinite number of universes have to be born before ours.

Nothingness cannot logically exist in reality. The concept of 'nothing' is a human abstraction that requires 'something' in order for its invention and existence in our minds because the fundamental idea of 'nothing' derives entirely from its inherent relationship with 'something'. Without 'something', 'nothing' would have no meaning

Exactly. Stephen Hawking said something about something coming out of "nothing" in our universe and NDT said, I don't call the 4 fundamental forces nothing. Plus, you have quantum foam and all that shit.

 

[rj144]

"It's not surprising if you are having trouble imagining an infinite universe, but that is exactly what the math tells us about the universe we live in based upon what we have observed. "
- LOL, this is exactly what physics is telling us is not the case at all. WTF are you talking about? Static universe theory has been dead, gaped by necrophiles, re-animated and shot in the face by Coral.


Well, 1st off the Big Bang theory is the most accepted theory. That means the universe is not infinite. Also, don't forget that you cannot ignore the 2nd law of Thermodynamics (a closed system will become more and more chaotic (entropy), and without an external energy source it will eventual lose all energy (the expected heat death of the universe).

I never said that infinity is not useful in math, in fact it is, but applying infinity to the real world never happens.
Say there is a 1x1 foot tile. There are "infinite points" in that tile, but guess what? I can cross those infinite points with one step. See, doesn't make sense in world.
Also, all time and space is contained inside our universe which has a beginning and end so time is not infinite either.

First, the known universe can be finite but the actual universe can be infinite. There is a distinction between the two.

Second, the universe doesn't lose energy. It's total energy is constant. A closed system doesn't lose or gain energy. What you just stated actually means that it's not closed and losing energy to another universe.

 

[GordoBarraBJJ]

If there is and there is another "me" out there I hope his love life is better than mine in this universe.

#foreveralone

 

[Necromantic]

First, the known universe can be finite but the actual universe can be infinite. There is a distinction between the two.

Second, the universe doesn't lose energy. It's total energy is constant. A closed system doesn't lose or gain energy. What you just stated actually means that it's not closed and losing energy to another universe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_death_of_the_universe
The idea of heat death stems from the second law of thermodynamics, of which one version states that entropy tends to increase in an isolated system. From this, the hypothesis infers that if the universe lasts for a sufficient time, it will asymptotically approach a state where all energy is evenly distributed. In other words, according to this hypothesis, in nature there is a tendency to the dissipation (energy transformation) of mechanical energy (motion) into thermal energy; hence, by extrapolation, there exists the view that the mechanical movement of the universe will run down, as work is converted to heat, in time because of the second law.
Proposals about the final state of the universe depend on the assumptions made about its ultimate fate, and these assumptions have varied considerably over the late 20th century and early 21st century. In a hypothesized "open" or "flat" universe that continues expanding indefinitely, a heat death is expected to occur.[1] If the cosmological constant is zero, the universe will approach absolute zero temperature over a very long timescale. However, if the cosmological constant is positive, as appears to be the case in recent observations, the temperature will asymptote to a non-zero, positive value and the universe will approach a state of maximum entropy.[8]

Everything in our universe came from the big bang and the universe is constantly growing.
The point is that we keep expanding out.


The universe was in a uniform, high density state at its very early stages, shortly after the big bang. The hot gas in the early universe was near thermodynamic equilibrium (giving rise to the horizon problem) and hence in a state of maximum entropy, given its volume. Expansion of a gas increases its entropy, however, and expansion of the universe has therefore enabled an ongoing increase in entropy. Viewed from later eras, the early universe can thus be considered to be highly ordered. The uniformity of this early near-equilibrium state has been explained by the theory of cosmic inflation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_(arrow_of_time)

 

[rj144]

Proposals about the final state of the universe depend on the assumptions made about its ultimate fate, and these assumptions have varied considerably over the late 20th century and early 21st century. In a hypothesized "open" or "flat" universe that continues expanding indefinitely, a heat death is expected to occur.[1] If the cosmological constant is zero, the universe will approach absolute zero temperature over a very long timescale. However, if the cosmological constant is positive, as appears to be the case in recent observations, the temperature will asymptote to a non-zero, positive value and the universe will approach a state of maximum entropy.[8]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_death_of_the_universe

Yes, I know that and how does that correct what you typed?

 

[Necromantic]

Yes, I know that and how does that correct what you typed?

The universe was in a uniform, high density state at its very early stages, shortly after the big bang. The hot gas in the early universe was near thermodynamic equilibrium (giving rise to the horizon problem) and hence in a state of maximum entropy, given its volume. Expansion of a gas increases its entropy, however, and expansion of the universe has therefore enabled an ongoing increase in entropy. Viewed from later eras, the early universe can thus be considered to be highly ordered. The uniformity of this early near-equilibrium state has been explained by the theory of cosmic inflation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_(arrow_of_time)

Like I said we experience entropy and at some point we will have heat death. Sorry if I am just giving evidence of what I am claiming and you are not.



Q: Why does the entropy of the universe always increase, and what is the heat death of the universe?
Posted on December 13, 2011 by The Physicist
Physicist: The increase of entropy is just how a scientist talks about the fact that the universe tends to do the most likely thing. For example, if you throw a bucket of dice you’ll find that about a sixth of them will be 1, about a sixth will be 2, and so on. This has the most ways of happening, so it’s the most likely outcome, and for the same reason it’s the outcome with the highest entropy.
One of the things that increasing entropy does is to spread out heat as much as possible. If you have a hot object next to a cold object, then the heat will spread so that the cooler object heats up, and the hotter object cools down, until the two are at the same temperature. The idea (the math) behind that is the same as the idea behind mixing fluids or sands together. There are more ways for things to be mixed than sorted.

The same thing happens on a much larger scale. The Sun, and every other star, is radiating heat into the universe. But they can’t do it forever. Eventually the heat will have spread out so much that there won’t be warmer objects and cooler objects. Everything will be the same temperature. The same, very cold, temperature. The vast majority of the universe is already screaming cold, so the heat death of the universe is just about burning what fuel there is and mixing the heat so created into the ever-expansive, cold, and unyielding cosmos. Both the burning of fuel (mostly through fusion in stars) and the distribution of heat are processes which increase entropy.
http://www.askamathematician.com/20...rease-and-what-is-heat-death-of-the-universe/

 

[Andy Capp]

A really fucking advanced one lol.

Time itself is quite the mystery. Scientists refer to the "arrow of time", meaning that like an arrow, time only flows in one direction. There are theories as well as evidence that time is a bit of an illusion and that all time, past, present, and future, are all occurring right now, simultaneously.

Here is a neat short video talking about this sort of thing that was aired on PBS. The topic goes much deeper than a 9 minute video but its a good starter. Its really weird to think that time itself is not really understood at all.

Yes, it's quite interesting. Some like to interpret the ambiguity around time as meaning it isn't real, but I think it's an emergent property of the universe.

"It's not surprising if you are having trouble imagining an infinite universe, but that is exactly what the math tells us about the universe we live in based upon what we have observed. "
- LOL, this is exactly what physics is telling us is not the case at all. WTF are you talking about? Static universe theory has been dead, gaped by necrophiles, re-animated and shot in the face by Coral.

You're going off for no reason. I never suggested the universe is static. It is, nevertheless, very very flat, and most likely infinite in extent.

 

[rj144]

The universe was in a uniform, high density state at its very early stages, shortly after the big bang. The hot gas in the early universe was near thermodynamic equilibrium (giving rise to the horizon problem) and hence in a state of maximum entropy, given its volume. Expansion of a gas increases its entropy, however, and expansion of the universe has therefore enabled an ongoing increase in entropy. Viewed from later eras, the early universe can thus be considered to be highly ordered. The uniformity of this early near-equilibrium state has been explained by the theory of cosmic inflation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_(arrow_of_time)

Like I said we experience entropy and at some point we will have heat death. Sorry if I am just giving evidence of what I am claiming and you are not.

It's not losing energy FFS.

 

[Necromantic]

Yes, it's quite interesting. Some like to interpret the ambiguity around time as meaning it isn't real, but I think it's an emergent property of the universe.

You're going off for no reason. I never suggested the universe is static. It is, nevertheless, very very flat, and most likely infinite in extent.

You said that the universe could be infinite.
What do you think a static universe is???

A static universe, also referred to as a "stationary" or "infinite" or "static infinite" universe, is a cosmological model in which the universe is both spatially infinite and temporally infinite, and space is neither expanding nor contracting.

It's not losing energy FFS.

t's not losing energy FFS
So, you think that stars are not burning out? We are using our energy. Eventually it will go bye bye. Do you think there is an infinite number of stars??? Do you think stars do not burn all their energy and collapse?


Q: Why does the entropy of the universe always increase, and what is the heat death of the universe?
Posted on December 13, 2011 by The Physicist
Physicist: The increase of entropy is just how a scientist talks about the fact that the universe tends to do the most likely thing. For example, if you throw a bucket of dice you’ll find that about a sixth of them will be 1, about a sixth will be 2, and so on. This has the most ways of happening, so it’s the most likely outcome, and for the same reason it’s the outcome with the highest entropy.
One of the things that increasing entropy does is to spread out heat as much as possible. If you have a hot object next to a cold object, then the heat will spread so that the cooler object heats up, and the hotter object cools down, until the two are at the same temperature. The idea (the math) behind that is the same as the idea behind mixing fluids or sands together. There are more ways for things to be mixed than sorted.

The same thing happens on a much larger scale. The Sun, and every other star, is radiating heat into the universe. But they can’t do it forever. Eventually the heat will have spread out so much that there won’t be warmer objects and cooler objects. Everything will be the same temperature. The same, very cold, temperature. The vast majority of the universe is already screaming cold, so the heat death of the universe is just about burning what fuel there is and mixing the heat so created into the ever-expansive, cold, and unyielding cosmos. Both the burning of fuel (mostly through fusion in stars) and the distribution of heat are processes which increase entropy.
http://www.askamathematician.com/20...rease-and-what-is-heat-death-of-the-universe/

I am done replying to you until you post any evidence counter to my claim. I could give a fuck less about your "because I said so".

The universe is experiencing entropy and will die a heat death. That is my claim. Debunk it with facts or go away.

 

[rj144]

You said that the universe could be infinite.
What do you think a static universe is???

A static universe, also referred to as a "stationary" or "infinite" or "static infinite" universe, is a cosmological model in which the universe is both spatially infinite and temporally infinite, and space is neither expanding nor contracting.



Q: Why does the entropy of the universe always increase, and what is the heat death of the universe?
Posted on December 13, 2011 by The Physicist
Physicist: The increase of entropy is just how a scientist talks about the fact that the universe tends to do the most likely thing. For example, if you throw a bucket of dice you’ll find that about a sixth of them will be 1, about a sixth will be 2, and so on. This has the most ways of happening, so it’s the most likely outcome, and for the same reason it’s the outcome with the highest entropy.
One of the things that increasing entropy does is to spread out heat as much as possible. If you have a hot object next to a cold object, then the heat will spread so that the cooler object heats up, and the hotter object cools down, until the two are at the same temperature. The idea (the math) behind that is the same as the idea behind mixing fluids or sands together. There are more ways for things to be mixed than sorted.

The same thing happens on a much larger scale. The Sun, and every other star, is radiating heat into the universe. But they can’t do it forever. Eventually the heat will have spread out so much that there won’t be warmer objects and cooler objects. Everything will be the same temperature. The same, very cold, temperature. The vast majority of the universe is already screaming cold, so the heat death of the universe is just about burning what fuel there is and mixing the heat so created into the ever-expansive, cold, and unyielding cosmos. Both the burning of fuel (mostly through fusion in stars) and the distribution of heat are processes which increase entropy.
http://www.askamathematician.com/20...rease-and-what-is-heat-death-of-the-universe/

I am done replying to you until you post any evidence counter to my claim. I could give a fuck less about your "because I said so".

The universe is experiencing entropy and will die a heat death. That is my claim. Debunk it with facts or go away.

Dude, you know no physics. Entropy is not energy. It is related how energy is transferred. You have zero idea what you're even quoting.

 

[rj144]

Yes, it's quite interesting. Some like to interpret the ambiguity around time as meaning it isn't real, but I think it's an emergent property of the universe.

You're going off for no reason. I never suggested the universe is static. It is, nevertheless, very very flat, and most likely infinite in extent.

Yeah, he has no idea what he's talking about. I'd just move on.

 

[IDL]

Does world of warcraft count as another universe?

 

[Bob Gray]

Well, no one on this site would have a damn clue.

 

[Phr3121]

Some are finding the Big Crunch theory less and less likely after we discovered in the late 90's that the universe is actually accelerating the expansion faster and faster. It was a completely unexpected finding.

Well, that is the problem with these guys. They keep finding new stuff every couple of years. Some of it contradictory to the previous findings. And Stephen Hawking, I'm so tired of his bullshit. He just loves media attention. He is not even in the top 10 physicists in the world. Amazing he is still alive. I had a friend die from ALS, Lou Gehrig's disease, and it went fast. Hawkins is a 'has been'. Should learn to keep his mouth shut for once. Go back to reading Penthouse magazines and fondling his wife who used to be his nurse.