Path: csiph.com!au2pb.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 23:06:09 -0600 Message-ID: <56514D4C.2C55@ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 21:06:20 -0800 From: The Starmaker Reply-To: starmaker@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.astronomy,sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: Where is the center of the universe? References: <54D7D8B6.20A9@ix.netcom.com> <7282239.IrQLivXU8X@PointedEars.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 109 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 45.49.183.72 X-Trace: sv3-VIUboOMcSObnJlbIk1cJ2vGAyYvKwNixzqrNAOH+NAPAgdzW9HFMoLi8cHAANoDGoam1YGW6/K2458+!BmXLMxNnNFEKBvI1teJ2QLKJOdCZ53YCiOJJJRal4kMjKRDSYO1Z/jNVi+QsqEpdMk+3OxkEMsJP!0TB3bmOi X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 X-Original-Bytes: 5129 X-Received-Bytes: 5241 X-Received-Body-CRC: 2370046428 Xref: csiph.com alt.astronomy:279302 sci.physics:534492 sci.physics.relativity:370588 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > > dvus wrote: > > > On 11/20/2015 6:45 PM, Sam Wormley wrote: > >>> On 2/8/15 3:44 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > >>> Where is the center of the universe? > >> > >> No Center > >> http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/nocenter.html > >> http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/infpoint.html > >> […] > > I'm having a hard time with this. > > You are not alone. But that does not mean that it cannot be true. > > > If there is no "center" of the Universe then it would seem that it would > > have to be infinite in size. > > No. > > > Yet we are told the BB happened just under 13.75 light-years ago. > > Whoever told you this has no clue what they are talking about, although it > is very likely that you did not listen carefully. > > The current best fit of the age of the universe, by the Planck collaboration > in 2013, and even when combined with WMAP results, is ca. 1.38 × 10¹⁰ (13.8 > _billion_, short scale) _years_. [Light-years is a unit of length, not of > time. The current size (diameter) of the *observable* universe is ca. > 9.3 × 10¹⁰ (93 billion) light-years. For yet unexplained reasons the > expansion speed of the universe has been and still is increasing.] > > > How could it be infinite if it originated a finite time ago? > > Ex falso quodlibet. However, nobody said that the universe was infinite in > size. > > > Additionally, I have read numerous articles that purport that > > cosmologists are now able to see galaxies that formed a short time after > > the BB. > > What you have read is correct. > > > What will they see when they are able to see beyond those earliest > > galaxies? > > They are not going to be able to see beyond. A hot plasma is opaque to > electromagnetic radiation. However, if other ways of observation are found > (like gravitational waves), then current knowledge (quantum mechanics) > suggests that no events that happened before the Planck epoch can be > observed. There was no time yet then. > > > Also, I constantly see diagrams supposedly of the entire Universe shaped > > kind of like a football. > > Where? > > > (why it isn't round I don't know) > > Nobody knows why, but we are sure that it is not round like a ball. If it > were round like a ball, i.e. closed, large triangles like those to the CMB > would not have an inner angle sum of approximately 180°. See the surface of > Earth for an example of a closed space: a proper triangle from a pole to the > equator, then along the equator and back to the same pole always has an > inner angle sum that is greater than 180° as you already have two right > hangles (90°) at the equator. > > > > (I can highly recommend the entire talk.) > > > Those diagrams don't indicate the Universe is infinite or they would have > > to be be infinitely big. > > Good. > > > Then I read about theories of the "multiverse" composed of many bubble > > Universes surrounding ours. How can you surround an infinite Universe? > > Again, nobody except you said that the universe were infinite in size. > The size of the universe still is an open question. > > > I try to read everything I can get my hands on about this subject […] > > Try harder. A simple Google search returns a lot of pertinent information, > and Wikipedia has a lot of good articles on the subject. > > Please stop crossposting without Followup-To set, and start posting using > your real name. What if his real name is PointedLips? > > F'up2 sci.physics.relativity > > PointedEars > -- > Q: Where are offenders sentenced for light crimes? > A: To a prism. > > (from: WolframAlpha) Do you actually believe God can create a universe where he cannot see the edge?