If the universe is infinite

Post Reply New Topic

Just going by Occam's Razor. How can something that's infinite expand, or have a beginning? If the Big Bang is true, then the universe is also finite. We have evidence to suggest this, but no final proof (just like we do not have any final proof that macroevolution is true, despite an overwhelming amount of evidence).

No. Imagine a four side triangle.

As a child I always had trouble accepting the Big Bang; as an answer it is inherently unsatisfying. An infinite universe on the other hand at least leaves no a priori questions.

Fully aware of the Russell's Teapot I'm committing, but if the Universe was either infinite or vastly more immense than we are considering, is it not possible that we are in a local expansion only - especially considering the limited distance/time we can observe and have observed?

But then the expanding balloon of our universe would start to butt against other parts of the Universe.

Like a wave or ripple in a pond. Or like a shock wave in air after an explosion, with a ring of compression behind which may be a ring of slight expansion, the "bubble" bouncing between reducing cycles of expansion and contraction until the difference between it and the surrounding space is equalized. If the area of expansion is larger than we can currently observe or measure, we might assume that it is the entirety of the Universe.

But if the area we can perceive is just a tiny sphere just behind the (currently expanding) boundary of a larger sphere of expansion, why, that would make us even smaller, shorter lived and less significant than we now consider ourselves...

I imagined this in a spiritual, or, you could say childish, way.

Like the ends of the Earth, in the Unico cartoon.

You can imagine that all the possibilities are in a sort of dustbin, repository, or library, but are not necessarily expressed, simultaneously.

They might be seen as data sets or potentials, with no kinetic expression.

The universe almost certainly 'began' at one point. So far, it has been demonstrated that if you embed the quantum theory of the minisuperspace into a time neglecting theory of quantum gravity , it does not allow harmonic recurrences indefinitely. So we certainly rule out a cyclic model of the universe.

Again, the issue of time persists thus, it is fully dependent on whatever Hamiltonian constraint is put in. Moreover, the WDW formulation is an extremely rudimentary form of QG, so it may or may not be correct.

Not in a flat universe.