surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 20, 2017 11:07 am
ken wrote:
Okay so to avoid any confusion and to see if your definition of universe being local cosmic
expanse is rigorous enough where does this so called local cosmic expanse start and end
Where are and what are the defining points of the so called local cosmic expanse which separates it from the rest of the Universe
Is there any scientific evidence that there is even a local cosmic expanse which is within or which is just a part of the Universe
The
local cosmic expanse is the observable universe that apparently began nearly I4 billion years ago. What happened before
that is unknown. Anything outside of it such as other universes would be the Multiverse.
Surely even you could see the illogicality of this?
Why does 'anything outside of 'it', (whatever it is) suddenly have to be such as other universes?
Why can whatever is allegedly "outside" of what you say is only a "local" cosmic "expanse" just also be a part of the Universe?
Do you really think that what human beings see, defines the border of
local cosmic expanse, which is what you call 'universe'. This is such a narrow and short sighted view of the Truth that it literally speaks for itself.
Are you aware that over time human beings have been continually seeing further afield in regards to the observable part of the Universe, with no obvious end in sight I might add.
If you had to imagine what the edge or border of your so called 'universe' looked like, what could you even come up with?
There is also nothing whatsoever to suggest a beginning anywhere. A bang of any size does NOT even imply a beginning, let alone mean a beginning. And, as for some thing else creating or beginning ALL-THERE-IS, then that is still as laughable now as it was to just about every young child when they first hear this.
Adult human beings really do NEED to start growing up in relation to learning HOW to look at and see the Truth of things.
surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 20, 2017 11:07 am
There is however no evidence for the
Multiverse but that does not mean it does not exist. It is possible that it does but it is purely hypothetical at this point in time
The reason WHY it is still hypothetical is pretty obvious. But we all do NOT see things the same way, because, Everything is relative to the observer.
You are free to look at and define things any way you like, but your definitions are NOT supported in any way whatsoever, that I can see. There appears to be NO careful nor any thoroughness at all that has gone into the way you look at this. "Your" definitions are straight out text book definitions, which obviously need a lot of work on.