If the universe is finite in size, what is at the end of it?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Kutt
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Finite Universe
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of the universe's finiteness and the implications of having an "edge" or boundary. Participants explore theoretical models, analogies, and the nature of dimensions in relation to the universe's structure.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that a finite universe does not necessarily imply an edge, drawing parallels to the Earth as a finite object without an edge.
  • Others propose that the universe might be a 3D projection of a higher-dimensional space, which could complicate the notion of an edge.
  • A few participants introduce analogies, such as a two-dimensional creature on a plane or the surface of a sphere, to illustrate the concept of boundaries versus edges.
  • One participant humorously suggests a model involving cheese, while another critiques the use of loose analogies in serious discussions.
  • There is a discussion about the limitations of understanding higher dimensions, with some arguing that without direct experience, the existence of more than three spatial dimensions remains speculative.
  • Some participants express confusion over the transition from 2D to 3D concepts and the implications for understanding the universe.
  • There is mention of time as a potential fourth dimension, but the discussion remains open regarding the nature of this dimension.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether the universe has an edge or what that would mean. Multiple competing views and interpretations of dimensionality and boundaries are present throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of analogies used to explain the universe's structure, indicating that these analogies may not fully capture the nuances of the concepts being discussed. The discussion also reflects a variety of assumptions about dimensionality and the nature of the universe.

Kutt
Messages
237
Reaction score
1
If the universe is finite in size, what is at the very edge of it?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Kutt said:
If the universe is finite in size, what is at the very edge of it?

Its boundary, which lies at infinity. :wink:
 
Kutt said:
If the universe is finite in size, what is at the very edge of it?

Finite in size \neq has an edge.

Look at our earth: it's finite in size but it doesn't have an edge.
 
micromass said:
Finite in size \neq has an edge.

Look at our earth: it's finite in size but it doesn't have an edge.

I think OP is referring to the 3D projection of the multidimensional universe (or as we normally see it). Although multidimensional universe might not have an edge, our 3D representative one might have one.

e.g. circle, which is a projection of a sphere in 2D.
 
Kholdstare said:
I think OP is referring to the 3D projection of the multidimensional universe (or as we normally see it). Although multidimensional universe might not have an edge, our 3D representative one might have one.

e.g. circle, which is a projection of a sphere in 2D.

Projection of the universe on what?? The universe is all that there is :confused:
 
Cheese lots and lots of it.
 
micromass said:
Projection of the universe on what?? The universe is all that there is :confused:

When an apple is cut in two halves, the apple is all that there is. Yet we get a projection of apple in 2D by the framework defined by the movement of a knife. That framework has no existence, yet the apple is cut.
 
Kholdstare said:
When an apple is cut in two halves, the apple is all that there is. Yet we get a projection of apple in 2D by the framework defined by the movement of a knife. That framework has no existence, yet the apple is cut.

Universe \neq apple.
Making physical statements based on loose analogies like this is very dangerous.
 
micromass said:
Finite in size \neq has an edge.

Look at our earth: it's finite in size but it doesn't have an edge.

What do you mean? I live on it. (tee hee I live on the edge)

Seriously though, I am on the edge of the Earth.

Isn't this one of those "dangerous" & loose analogies?
 
  • #10
nitsuj said:
Seriously though, I am on the edge of the Earth.

I think micromass is looking at the Earth as a sphere rather than a ball.
 
  • #11
micromass said:
Universe \neq apple.
Making physical statements based on loose analogies like this is very dangerous.

Would you explain how it is a loose analogy?

jgens said:
I think micromass is looking at the Earth as a sphere rather than a ball.

I think nitsuj meant boundary, when he said "edge". It determines whether you are inside or outside.
 
  • #12
Kholdstare said:
Would you explain how it is a loose analogy?



I think nitsuj meant boundary, when he said "edge". It determines whether you are inside or outside.

Hmm looks like there is a difference between boundary and edge that I didn't know of.
 
  • #13
jgens said:
I think micromass is looking at the Earth as a sphere rather than a ball.

Sorry I'm not sure of the difference
 
  • #14
nitsuj said:
Sorry I'm not sure of the difference
Imagine a two dimensional creature living on a plane. If the plane is finite, then it has a boundary line around it and the creature can't go beyond that boundary because that's the edge of the universe. Now consider a creature living on the surface of a very large sphere. To the creature, it seems that the universe is a plane if the radius is large enough. Such a creature lives in a finite universe, but it has no edge. Now think about how we may be living in a finite 4 dimensional curved universe that has no edge.
 
  • #15
Jimmy Snyder said:
Imagine a two dimensional creature living on a plane. If the plane is finite, then it has a boundary line around it and the creature can't go beyond that boundary because that's the edge of the universe. Now consider a creature living on the surface of a very large sphere. To the creature, it seems that the universe is a plane if the radius is large enough. Such a creature lives in a finite universe, but it has no edge. Now think about how we may be living in a finite 4 dimensional curved universe that has no edge.

I totally appreciate that popular analogy, I find the transition from 2D to 3D is lost on me though :cry:
 
  • #16
nitsuj said:
I totally appreciate that popular analogy, I find the transition from 2D to 3D is lost on me though :cry:
Do you mean to tell me that you can't imagine a 3 dimensional object curved in the 4th dimension? Yeesh.
 
  • #17
Containment said:
Cheese lots and lots of it.

The trouble with this model is that we can easily predict the cheese would rot and smell bad. No one has ever detected such a cosmic stench, and any attempt to preserve this model will just be more speculation. However, I read a book by a Dutchman whose grandmother told him when you came to the edge of the universe it was covered over with old newspapers and flour paste. This vastly more sophisticated model certainly explains the absence of "The Cosmic Stench", and it also happens that all the "dark" matter they can't find exactly equals the amount of newspaper and flour it would take to cover the edges of the universe. I'd call that 'the smoking gun that shot the magic bullet' if ever there was one.
 
  • #18
Jimmy Snyder said:
Do you mean to tell me that you can't imagine a 3 dimensional object curved in the 4th dimension? Yeesh.

lol, i know right. How has the spoon made it's way to my mouth all these years?
 
  • #19
Jimmy Snyder said:
Imagine a two dimensional creature living on a plane. If the plane is finite, then it has a boundary line around it and the creature can't go beyond that boundary because that's the edge of the universe. Now consider a creature living on the surface of a very large sphere. To the creature, it seems that the universe is a plane if the radius is large enough. Such a creature lives in a finite universe, but it has no edge. Now think about how we may be living in a finite 4 dimensional curved universe that has no edge.

We might be living in that or something else. If we can never literally experience the higher dimensions (except time) in any way, we will never be sure that there exists more than three. One may argue the possibility, but it remains as mathematical one as no convincing evidence can be gathered.

Think of an an ideal 2D creature on that sphere (a dot, not an ant, not even a human). Whatever the dot does it will never find the edge of the sphere. However, he might suspect the sphere to be 3D if he is an intelligent creature (his ability only comes from some example in his own 2D world). But having never experienced the 3rd dimension in any way he'll never realize/believe/have evidence of this being true. (Remember he is incapable of imagining anything 3D (cause he's never been a 3D creature himself)).

He'll say "What other stuff can lie in other dimension out there? I already have all stuffs in my universe uniquely mapped in 2D. How can I be sure that there are stuff out there in other dimension? If there are no stuff in other dimension we should not be calling the universe more than 2D." This is similar to what we experience.
 
  • #20
Kholdstare said:
We might be living in that or something else. If we can never literally experience the higher dimensions (except time) in any way, we will never be sure that there exists more than three. One may argue the possibility, but it remains as mathematical one as no convincing evidence can be gathered.
I was not suggesting that there are more than 3 spatial dimensions. Although I didn't specify what the 4th dimension was, I was thinking of time. More correctly, I was thinking of 4 dimensional space-time.

Kholdstare said:
Think of an an ideal 2D creature on that sphere (a dot, not an ant, not even a human). Whatever the dot does it will never find the edge of the sphere. However, he might suspect the sphere to be 3D if he is an intelligent creature (his ability only comes from some example in his own 2D world). But having never experienced the 3rd dimension in any way he'll never realize/believe/have evidence of this being true. (Remember he is incapable of imagining anything 3D (cause he's never been a 3D creature himself)).
This is not correct. The angles on a triangle on a sphere add up to more than 180 degrees. A 2D creature could measure it and so detect the third dimension. In similar fashion, if we measure the angles of a triangle to be more or less than 180 degrees, we too would have concrete evidence of curvature.
The bending of light near the surface of the sun is an example of just such a measurement. This is evidence that space-time is indeed curved, but does not answer the question of whether the universe is so curved that it closes in on itself like a sphere.
 
  • #21
Jimmy Snyder said:
I was not suggesting that there are more than 3 spatial dimensions. Although I didn't specify what the 4th dimension was, I was thinking of time. More correctly, I was thinking of 4 dimensional space-time.This is not correct. The angles on a triangle on a sphere add up to more than 180 degrees. A 2D creature could measure it and so detect the third dimension. In similar fashion, if we measure the angles of a triangle to be more or less than 180 degrees, we too would have concrete evidence of curvature.
The bending of light near the surface of the sun is an example of just such a measurement. This is evidence that space-time is indeed curved, but does not answer the question of whether the universe is so curved that it closes in on itself like a sphere.

I'm not telling that he'll not find evidence of the 3rd dimension. I'm asking how he'll find there's stuff in the 3rd dimension. When I said "never realize/believe/have evidence of this being true" I meant "never know if there's some stuff in it". A sphere can be full or empty one. If it is empty why would he call it 3D (from his perspective).

Although from higher perspective the universe can definitely be called having more than 3 dimension.
 
  • #22
Kholdstare said:
But having never experienced the 3rd dimension in any way he'll never realize/believe/have evidence of this being true.

Kholdstare said:
I'm not telling that he'll not find evidence of the 3rd dimension.
I'm confused.
 
  • #23
Jimmy Snyder said:
I'm confused.

I'm sorry. The first one is damn wrong.

On second thought, in my last post it would be better if called "human-observable universe". The word "universe" should be reserved for the higher dimension one.
 
  • #24
Kutt said:
If the universe is finite in size, what is at the very edge of it?

A cop. If you ever got there, you definitely must have been speeding.

BTW, despite what everyone here has said, I'm convinced it's somewhere in the state of Nevada.
 
Last edited:
  • #27
Kutt said:
If the universe is finite in size, what is at the very edge of it?
Unanswerable question.

Kholdstare said:
Its boundary, which lies at infinity. :wink:
Bounded yet infinite is a mathematical concept. Physical objects which have boundaries are, either observationally or by definition, not infinite.

micromass said:
Finite in size \neq has an edge.

Look at our earth: it's finite in size but it doesn't have an edge.
What would you call the outer crust? What about an expanding wave shell ... in any medium?

Kholdstare said:
I think OP is referring to the 3D projection of the multidimensional universe (or as we normally see it). Although multidimensional universe might not have an edge, our 3D representative one might have one.

e.g. circle, which is a projection of a sphere in 2D.
I think the OP is asking a very straightforward, and unanswerable, question about the possible nature of our universe. Eg. our universe might be a bounded finite entitiy (eg., the interior of a 3D wave shell in some medium of unknown strutcture). If, per the OP, the universe is "finite in size", then, by definition, the universe under consideration isn't infinite, and has a boundary, or edge. (The boundary or edge being, presumably, the same 'stuff' that mediates the interior. Which remains unknown.)

micromass said:
Projection of the universe on what?? The universe is all that there is :confused:
"All that there is" can refer to some metaphysical speculation or it can refer to all that's amenable to detection. Either case can be projected onto a speculative preexisting background.

SW VandeCarr said:
A cop. If you ever got there, you definitely must have been speeding.

BTW, despite what everyone here has said, I'm convinced it's somewhere in the state of Nevada.
My favorite reply. :smile:
 
  • #28
nanosiborg said:
"All that there is" can refer to some metaphysical speculation or it can refer to all that's amenable to detection. Either case can be projected onto a speculative preexisting background.
No there is a precise mathematical distinction micromass is making. Space - time is a 4 - manifold that is not embedding in some ambient space.
 
  • #29
WannabeNewton said:
No there is a precise mathematical distinction micromass is making. Space - time is a 4 - manifold that is not embedding in some ambient space.
Amazing that you can tell that from what he wrote:
micromass said:
Projection of the universe on what?? The universe is all that there is :confused:
 
  • #30
nanosiborg said:
Amazing that you can tell that from what he wrote:
It's more amazing than that. I was able to tell the same thing.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
9K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 70 ·
3
Replies
70
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K