
#73
Jul1010, 03:30 PM

P: 50

Fredrik, I did not know..that is why i asked the questions...you know the math, you know your theory, it's history, strengths and weakness, i don't.
I have to take it on faith, and i don't do faith well. If Darwin and others point out what will falsify their theory, then i assumed that every theory has an argument or evidence that will falsify it. Has nothing to do with what others believe or think if they can support their theories and those theories are not falsified. I thought that is what science is, postulating a theory and trying to falsify it. I only have theories based on what i observe and understand. These can be easily falsified because observation without specific knowledge is prone to error. So, if there are no questionable variables in your mathematical models which no one has taken issue with, then it is a sound working theory and obviously beyond my understanding. I can only try. And the center of the universe is not me..(: 



#74
Jul1010, 04:16 PM

Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 8,992





#75
Jul1110, 01:45 AM

Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 9,182

Ok, back to the original question, in case we lost track of that. We are at the temporal edge of the universe and the rest of it looks very smooth. Does that mean we reside at the center of the universe?




#76
Jul1310, 03:48 PM

P: 50

What if we observe that the universe goes back 100bly? That would make the universe much, much older than we think it is now...If some mathematical model says it is 14bly, then observation or the model is in error. There may not ever be a way to confirm if there is an edge to the universe other than a mathematical model, so that has to be tested and questioned and if a weakness is found, suspected as flawed beyond a certain point. I just read that "singularities" are a problem...I have a problem with them too...The BB makes a ripping good yarn, gives people something to think about and have faith in, but singularities may be an invention because we can't see mathematically into the area that we are looking toward. Another problem: Too many infinities...infinity this, infinity that...infinities piled into, onto, or otherwise associated with infinities...the universe may not be infinite. time may not be infinite..infinite mass, just a glitch in the math. To say for certain that there is or is not an edge to a universe requires faith, or faith based science...for now, anyway. 



#77
Jul1410, 03:03 PM

P: 366





#78
Jul2810, 05:10 PM

P: 4





#79
Jul2810, 11:07 PM

Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 9,182

Everywhere is the short answer. Since everything began at the initial 'singularity', every atom in the universe still thinks it is at the center.




#80
Aug410, 12:05 PM

P: 36





#81
Aug410, 12:14 PM

P: 366





#82
Aug1710, 08:03 PM

P: 334

Let's assume that our universe is one of the theoretical millions that are like soap bubbles in a vast endless sea. If so then it is finite. If finite that means it has a periphery. If it has a periphery then the distance from its peripheries inward until we achieve radius would give us its approximate center.
Multiverse Theory http://www.makli.com/multiversetheory008210/ 



#83
Aug1710, 11:19 PM

Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 9,182

We are at the temporal edge of the universe. No matter what direction we look, the rest of the universe appears more ancient [due to the finite speed of light]. Since it looks the same in every direction, it creates the illusion we are at the center. The same is true for any other observer in the universe. The concepts of 'center' or 'edge' of the universe are therefore irrelevant.




#84
Aug1810, 11:12 AM

P: 334





#85
Aug1910, 03:18 AM

Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 9,182

Do you agree every observer in the universe perceives they are as far away as possible from the 'center' of the 'big bang', 'now'? [given the finite speed of light]?




#86
Aug1910, 04:57 PM

P: 334

I agree that every observer sees the universe receding from his position. That doesn't justify the observer to conclude he holds the universal central position. It only proves that from his perspective it seems as if he does. Neither does it prove there is no central position. If indeed the relativity of perspective justifies concluding that no central position is possible then please explain how. 



#87
Aug2010, 12:37 AM

Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 9,182

Science is derived from observation. If it appears you are at the center of the universe, you must derive an experiment that attempts to disprove this theory. Lacking any such evidence means either you are at the center, or no center exists. We can say with fair certainty we are at the temporal edge of the universe, yet we observe the same distribution of galaxies [at large scales] in every direction. That too is compelling evidence the notion of any 'edge' to the universe is an illusion. An unbounded region has no 'center' according to the rules of geometry.




#88
Aug2010, 02:14 AM

P: 44

So basically, you're saying if i'm drifting somewhere in a big ocean and can see the distance of water to the horizon is equal in every direction I have to conclude that i'm either at the center of that there's no center to the ocean at all? That makes no sense at all... It just means that the ocean is bigger than your horizon and thus you can't determine if there's a center and if you're at that center. 



#89
Aug2010, 12:16 PM

P: 366





#90
Jan712, 06:29 PM

P: 1

This still does not make sense, there HAS to be a "center" of the Universe under the big bang theory, even if it is a ball or balloon blowing up, there is still a CENTER or middle of the ball or balloon. Even if there are no "edges" of the universe there is still a geometrical point of center. If the universe started from one point in space and expanded in all directions there is a center even if it is a moving central point.



Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
Center of the universe  Cosmology  62  
Center of the Universe  Special & General Relativity  7  
The Center of the Universe  Cosmology  55 