If we consider the universe as bounded but infinite

[Atlas3]

Would someone like to have a conversation with me about the bounds of the universe and energy? I have a few ideas rambling around.. When I say bounds I mean the expanding bubble. But I would like to discuss infinite matter and infinite energy big crunch possibility. I'm a beginner with BIG thoughts.

 

[wabbit]

I'm afraid you won't find that here, have you had a chance to look at the forum rules ?

 

[PeterDonis]

Would someone like to have a conversation with me about the bounds of the universe and energy?

That's too broad as it stands for a PF thread. Can you pick one specific thing you have a question about?

 

[Atlas3]

I'm afraid you won't find that here, have you had a chance to look at the forum rules ?

 

[Atlas3]

I am trying to navigate and I'll find the guidelines. Thank you. If you are a moderator you can delete or close this thread. Thank you

 

[wabbit]

No I'm not, just a wabbit here : )
Sorry if I sounded abrupt, it wasn't my intention. The guidelines are here : https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/physics-forums-global-guidelines.414380/

 

[Atlas3]

No I'm not, just a wabbit here : )
Sorry if I sounded abrupt, it wasn't my intention. The guidelines are here : https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/physics-forums-global-guidelines.414380/

Why is mass in the universe bounded?

 

[wabbit]

Why is mass in the universe bounded?

There's no proof that it is, we don't know. What is bounded is the mass in the observable universe, but I'm stuck for a proof here. I would say because we know (or at least we have good evidence that) the observable universe has a finite volume (there's a limit to how far we can see), and finite volumes can contain only a finite number of particles.

 

[PeterDonis]

the observable universe has a finite volume (there's a limit to how far we can see), and finite volumes can contain only a finite number of particles.

Yes, exactly.

 

[Atlas3]

There's no proof that it is, we don't know. What is bounded is the mass in the observable universe, but I'm stuck for a proof here. I would say because we know (or at least we have good evidence that) the observable universe has a finite volume (there's a limit to how far we can see), and finite volumes can contain only a finite number of particles.

Yes, exactly.

Yes, exactly.

There does not seem to be a limit on how many particles there are? Exactly that there is no distance between them and an infinite number of them. I could call them Dark Particles.

 

[PeterDonis]

there is no distance between them

This is not correct. What we are calling "particles" are not really point particles; they can't get arbitrarily close together. A better way of phrasing all this would be that a finite volume can only contain a finite mass.

 

[Atlas3]

This is not correct. What we are calling "particles" are not really point particles; they can't get arbitrarily close together. A better way of phrasing all this would be that a finite volume can only contain a finite mass.

mass and particle are not the same thing. I don't mean discovered particles in my thoughts, or charged particles that cannot become close. More of an substance of ether in what i was thinking. I don't know the definition of point. I really cannot describe what i think the size of infinity is. To me it does not exist a countable finite size when considering infinity and particles. They don't have to be a part of something.

 

[PeterDonis]

More of an substance of ether in what i was thinking.

The matter and energy in our universe is not a continuous "substance". It comes in discrete, quantized pieces, which are what we were calling "particles" in previous posts. And a finite volume can only contain a finite number of such discrete, quantized pieces. That is the physical fact, and it is why a finite volume can only contain a finite mass.

 

[PeterDonis]

Thread closed since the OP's question has been answered.