Can you honestly say the universe has no center?

[thedoc]

Think carefully.

PhilX

It depends on how you define "center". One scientist has claimed that everywhere is the center because everything started from a point and expanded from there. I don't agree and I think that if we knew the extent of the universe we could determine where the center is, right now. Like the magnetic north it could be moving if one part of the universe is expanding faster than the rest.

[Eodnhoj7]

All movement extends from a point, with all points being centers in themselves. The universe can have infinite centers, due to the presence of 0d point space as a quantum median, which summate as one point. All points in themselves are centers of origin, with these centers being origins of movement.

I'm not sure what a quantum medium has to do with points in space. Would you care to expand?

Everything we understand of movement is strictly a linear structure (straight or curved) between two zero dimensional points. We can observe this with the movement of any frequency, the observation of particles being approximately 93% (or 99%) empty 0d space (I can't remember the percentage), etc. All movement extends from and through 0d space with this 0d space being the completely absence of dimension universal to all particles.

For example, and I used this example alot, a line extending between two 0d points representing movement of any form (particle from A to B, entropy, etc.). The line extends from a 0d point and "projects away from its origins" to another 0d point. The 0d point from which the line projects is fundamentally the same 0d point it projects towards. The 0d point is universal and acts as a "quantum median" ("quantum" in regard to a specific measurement [which the 0d point is inevitably] and "median" in the respect it is a center of "origin"). Now you can use another term than "quantum median", I just applied it...well for the hell of it...but you should get the point.

The same point of space from which movement extends is the same median from which it returns, however a 0d point cannot be a median considering a median it in itself a dimension and 0d is "no dimension". Thus using the line as an example of movement, we can observe movement (as the line) being a median through which we observe the 0d point.

We observe the 0d space because of movement with this 0d space, summated under a point, acting simultaneously as a universal "field" in the respect a 0d point (or space) in "x" location is the same 0d point (or space) in "y" location even though "x" and "y" may be seperated by "A,B,C....".

Do points act as fields?
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=23345

[gaffo]

Think carefully.

PhilX

yes - since "space" did not exist prior/at the Big Bang.

no. there is no "Center" to our universe.

[Eodnhoj7]

Think carefully.

PhilX

yes - since "space" did not exist prior/at the Big Bang.

no. there is no "Center" to our universe.

Space is the "point" from which the bang bang came, and as a point is a boundary (or limit) to what we observe.

[gaffo]

Think carefully.

PhilX

yes - since "space" did not exist prior/at the Big Bang.

no. there is no "Center" to our universe.

Space is the "point" from which the bang bang came, and as a point is a boundary (or limit) to what we observe.

no, Sir, there was no "point" at the "time" (no time either) of the Big Bang.


the BB CREATED - BOTH - Time and SPACE - so no Sir, you understanding of "the BB" is incorrect.

whether that is the truth of our universe/it creation - no clue. I'm ok with not knowing (or even caring to be honest (to "know" is beyond my nature - so I don't worry over it much anymore (I used to fixate upon to "know" - when i was young, but older and wiser now), just relating to you the "dogma" of the nature of the Big Bang.

that prior to it, there was no space nor time.

and that AT/After it there was both.

thanks for reply!

[A_Seagull]

Its often useful to consider a simpler model .... in order to get a handle on things...

Consider a 2 dimensional universe.. like the surface of the Earth for example... it has a centre .. but the centre is nowhere on the 2 dimensional universe..

Now expand to 3 dimensions... our 3 d dimensional universe has a centre.. but it is nowhere in the 3 dimensional universe....

[gaffo]

Its often useful to consider a simpler model ....

if i remember it was a work (animation) called Flatland.

[gaffo]

Its often useful to consider a simpler model .... in order to get a handle on things...

Consider a 2 dimensional universe.. like the surface of the Earth for example... it has a centre .. but the centre is nowhere on the 2 dimensional universe..

Now expand to 3 dimensions... our 3 d dimensional universe has a centre.. but it is nowhere in the 3 dimensional universe....

IMO i don't think you argument (assumes there were dimensions) is sound.

at/prior to BB there was not a one, nor two nor 3 nor 4 (some say the 4th dim is time, nor 5 nor................50 dimensions.

[A_Seagull]

Its often useful to consider a simpler model ....

if i remember it was a work (animation) called Flatland.

Nah its a general principle..

[gaffo]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatland_(1965_film)

[gaffo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgqUya0kGPA

[Atla]

I usually think of the (part of the) universe we are in like this, but other scenarios are also possible:

A circle has no center on the circle. You can move in one dimension and if you go far enough, you'll end up where you started.

A spherical surface has no center on the spherical surface. You can move in two dimensions and if you go far enough, you'll end up where you started.

Our (part of the) universe has no center in our (part of the) universe. You can move in three dimensions and if you go far enough, you'll end up where you started. (Even if space is flat.)

Well maybe the universe has a center in a higher dimension, I don't know.

[gaffo]

I usually think of the (part of the) universe we are in like this, but other scenarios are also possible:

A circle has no center on the circle. You can move in one dimension and if you go far enough, you'll end up where you started.

A spherical surface has no center on the spherical surface. You can move in two dimensions and if you go far enough, you'll end up where you started.

Our (part of the) universe has no center in our (part of the) universe. You can move in three dimensions and if you go far enough, you'll end up where you started. (Even if space is flat.)

Well maybe the universe has a center in a higher dimension, I don't know.

the whole concept of space is mind bending.

we know that the universe is 13.8 billion yrs old..........but is it beleived to be 80 billion light yrs accross (radius) (its more than 6.9 due to "hyper inflation of space shortly after the BB - or so the story goes).........but some of that (20? pecent) is beyond the "event horizon" of the obvervable universe WRT to us.............i.e. the expansion of space is small..............but it adds up and by 50 billion light yrs or so WRT to our vantage piont, galaxies "over there" are moving away form us (not the matter over there - but the space bet them and us - is moving so fast - faster than light - so they "dissapear" literally WRT to us being able to see them).

I've thought about "what if the earth was in a galaxy "over there" - an edge (edge of the universe? - is here such a thing?) would the "Sky" be only 1/2 full of stars - the other 1/2 being just empty starless space with no matter (or space?)......................guess we have to ask those living over there this one - oh we can't they are now moving away faster than light and so its impossible to communcate with them (they litterally no longer exist WRT to us pragmatically speaking).

thanks for reply BTW.

[gaffo]

diameter of universe is thought to be 160 billion light years.

however ive also heard that we can only see 3-percent of.

those two to not fit. if the latter is so then the diameter is much greater.

just relating that i've heard.

i offer no answers ;-/.

[Eodnhoj7]

yes - since "space" did not exist prior/at the Big Bang.

no. there is no "Center" to our universe.

Space is the "point" from which the bang bang came, and as a point is a boundary (or limit) to what we observe.

no, Sir, there was no "point" at the "time" (no time either) of the Big Bang.


the BB CREATED - BOTH - Time and SPACE - so no Sir, you understanding of "the BB" is incorrect.

whether that is the truth of our universe/it creation - no clue. I'm ok with not knowing (or even caring to be honest (to "know" is beyond my nature - so I don't worry over it much anymore (I used to fixate upon to "know" - when i was young, but older and wiser now), just relating to you the "dogma" of the nature of the Big Bang.

that prior to it, there was no space nor time.

and that AT/After it there was both.

thanks for reply!

All points are merely an approximation of a unified existence. What happened "before the big bang" is merely an approximate of understanding one unified dimension of existence. To simplify this point, if the big bang began what we understand of as time with time being an approximation of unity (through relativity) the big bang falls under a cycle of "time through time" where this movement observes the mirroring of a unified reality from which it extends.