Simplest Understanding of the Universe

  • Thread starter Thread starter JeremyL
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Universe
JeremyL
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
I'm not smart and know nothing of cosmology or physics but I seek an understanding of reality. I'm looking for the simplest explanation for the universe I can find so that I actually understand it. Is the following factual at all?

The universe is constantly changing physical matter and energy.

This matter and energy occupies space and changes over time.

Therefore, the universe is matter/energy occupying space/time.

However, sometimes the matter and energy that we perceive appears to exist in a non-random form.

This is illustrated by the sight of a whole spiral galaxy.

To explain this phenomenon, we created the physical/scientific laws of the universe.

Therefore, the overall universe, as far as we currently know, is the following:

Physical matter/energy occupying space/time subject to natural physical/scientific laws.
 
Space news on Phys.org
I wouldn't say we "create" physical law. The universe behaves as it does and we observe it. It *tells* us what the laws are.
 
bapowell said:
I wouldn't say we "create" physical law. The universe behaves as it does and we observe it. It *tells* us what the laws are.

Right, but we created the analytic statements via language which we think best describe how the universe seems to behave through our observation.
 
JeremyL said:
I'm not smart and know nothing of cosmology or physics but I seek an understanding of reality. I'm looking for the simplest explanation for the universe I can find so that I actually understand it.
This will be difficult (probably impossible) since even very very smart people with decades of training and experience in physics and cosmology don't claim to understand our universe ('reality').

If you just want "an understanding" of reality, then that's easy ... everybody has that. It's what enables you to successfully navigate the world of your experience. However if you want to "actually understand" reality in some sort of generalized objective sense, then, afaik, nobody has that (though lots of talented people are working on it). The thing is that, apparently, there's lots of stuff going on outside of, or underlying and fundamental wrt, our direct and instrumentally augmented sensory apprehension of our universe (of reality).

Nevertheless, you can learn (at least some of ... maybe a lot of) what cosmologists and astrophysicists and physicists have learned and have to say about our universe.

You might make it a hobby to read stuff posted at PF and similar sites. Read some textbooks. Read some journal articles. Etc. If you stick with it, then you'll be increasingly fascinated.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...
Back
Top