Does the universe have a definite "size"?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ScottVal
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Universe
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The universe has an observable diameter of approximately 92 billion light years, as stated in a Fermilab video. This measurement refers specifically to the observable universe, which is limited by the finite speed of light and the age of the universe. The concept of a finite universe implies an edge, which contradicts the understanding that the universe may be infinite and not flat, similar to the surface of a sphere. Therefore, while the observable universe is bounded, the universe itself is likely infinite in all directions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the concept of the observable universe
  • Familiarity with the speed of light and its implications in cosmology
  • Basic knowledge of the geometry of the universe, including non-flat models
  • Awareness of the expansion of space and its effects on cosmic observations
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the concept of the observable universe and its limitations
  • Learn about the implications of the speed of light on astronomical observations
  • Study the geometry of the universe, focusing on non-Euclidean models
  • Explore the concept of cosmic expansion and its evidence
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, cosmologists, physics enthusiasts, and anyone interested in understanding the structure and size of the universe.

ScottVal
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
There's a YouTube video which says the universe is 92 billion light years wide; is this true?
Hello-
I just watched (or tried to watch) a YouTube video by Fermilab, in which the speaker states that the universe has a definite "width" of 92 billion light years. I could only watch about half of it because more and more terms were used which it am not familiar with. Besides, his pedantic nature is very annoying. I made the following comment on YouTube:

You lost me when you talked about "space expanding." I guess the video is meant for people who already understand that concept (which I don't). However, I pondered the idea of the universe having finite size several years ago, and got some help from some people on a physics forum, and I concluded that the question is sort of a paradox, because, if the universe had a finite size, you could imagine an inhabited planet on the edge of the universe, and the people who lived there would see the cosmos only on one side of their celestial sphere, which wouldn't make much sense. I think it makes more sense to consider the universe as having an indefinite size. I.e., you see galaxies in all directions, no matter where you are.

The video has about 4000 comments, so I'm not expecting anyone to reply to my comment. However, this forum seems like a smaller group, and I was wondering what you all think of this...
-Scott V.
 
Space news on Phys.org
The observable universe is 92 billion lightyears across.
 
Your assumption that the size is finite implies there is an edge. However if the universe is not flat, like a three dimensional analog of the surface of a sphere, there will not be an edge.
 
mathman said:
Your assumption that the size is finite implies there is an edge. However if the universe is not flat, like a three dimensional analog of the surface of a sphere, there will not be an edge.
Based on current observations, if this is the case this 3-sphere is significantly larger than 92 billion lightyears. The statement in the video is about the observable universe.
 
From what we understand, space is infinite in every direction. The video from Fermilabs was indeed talking about the observable universe, which is a sphere of about 92 billion light years. The reason that the observable universe is this size is because the speed of light is finite and there was a beginning of time. We simply can't see things further away than that because there hasn't been enough time for light from beyond that edge to reach us, but it's still out there.

This would be true regardless of whether or not space is expanding (which it is.)
 
I think I see now, that the implication is not that there is an "edge" to the universe 92 billion light years away (which wouldn't make sense), but that the "observable" universe seems to be bounded by a sphere 92 BLY in radius, simply because of the age of the universe, etc. Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
7K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 103 ·
4
Replies
103
Views
11K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K