Have cosmologists determined the total mass of the universe?
Mass is the resistance of some physical object to momentum changes.
It means that we have to know the total resistance of our universe to momentum changes from the Big-Bang until now.
But maybe not the total answer is important, because if space/time dynamical structure has a fractal-like shape then some butterfly-effect can change very quickly the "character" of the universe.
there is no way to ever measure the mass of the universe
since even it's limits are unknown
it's like asking how many demons will fit on the head of a pin
even the mass of the visible universe (which is not the whole universe) can never be acurately measured
if the universe is infinite then the total mass of the universe = infinity (exactly)
btw. the question of what is the total size of the universe can never be answered either
But in general theory of relativity, it is crucial that we know the total mass of the universe in term of its density for the values of omega.
The mass of the universe will be known accurately when the dark energy dark matter
problem is sorted and gravity quantised to the planck length.Then we will have an accurate theory of gravity that will allow us to use experimental data to calculate the mass of the universe.
sure we will
Well, you sure are a confident SOB given what I suspect is quite a limited education. If you believe in the "big Bang" and relativity (which I assure you is valid) then the "whole universe" is the "visible universe". Now I will admit that we now know of no way to measure it accurately but the assumption that such a thing can [size="+1"]never[/size] be done is a rather extreme statement.
For your edification, go take a look at
Have great fun -- Dick
and this coming from a guy called 'Dr. Dick" ???
I earned my MS Degree in Electronic Engineering - with emphasis in semiconductor physics
I've also studied a broad range of sciences through the past 20 years
including cosmology - with emphasis on BBT and Superstring Theory
what's your degree in?
Boy, am I impressed!!!
Have fun -- Dick
I had no idea the Supreme Being was named DoctorDick
what is it like having omnipotent knowledge of the universe?
first of all anyone who claims to KNOW anything about the universe is a crackpot
even George Gamow (co creator of BBT) never claimed to have absolute knowledge of the cosmos
he simply developed a theory based on the work of Alexander Friedmann and George Lemaitre - which was supported by the discovery of stellar redshift by Edwin Hubble in 1929 and finally the discovery of CMBR in 1963 by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson
BBT is not the theory to end all theories - there are very many unanswered questions, and many other interpretations of CMBR and redshift
any number of ad-hoc theories could be developed from the same data
including infinite steady state models
who the hell are you to assure anyone of anything?
the only thing human beings can ever be sure of KNOWING is that nothing is KNOWABLE
everything in human experience is either perceived or imagined
Does reality has its own independent existence? If you say yes then you are just like what Einstein used to believe when he was pondering the mystery of the universe.
yes, I do very strongly believe that reality has it's own independent existence
in my opinion, human exploration and discovery are completely subjective to human perception and philosophy - but these perceptions and philosophies never alter true reality, but only perceived reality
Einstein was very good at asking the right questions, and never hesitated to use intuition as an instrument of exploration
But if yo want to calculate the mass of the observable universe...
perhaps you can do a gross estimation; for example, the mass of the Virgo supercluster is estimated to be around 1015 solar masses
Virgo supercluster seems a standard sized supercluster. Then suming this mass for all the total known superclusters... The estonian Einasto published a catalogue of superclusters some time ago, but I'm not sure if more superclusters have been discovered since the publication of the catalogue. And I don't know also the mass of the voids, the huge voids between superclusters. Anyway don't seem that the voids have to have very much mass. I will try to look tomorrow to all these things and I will give my estimation of the mass of the observable universe
PS: Thid spage gives for the Great Attractor, the famous supercluster in direction our galaxy cluster is heading to, of 5*1016 solar masses
BTW, voids take up about 98% of the volume of the universe, according to this other webpage
This article of nature says that voids contains approximately the 20% of the total mass of the universe
by current cosmology about 99% of the mass of the visible universe is unaccounted for (i.e. invisible) dark matter was invented (theorized) to make up for the missing mass
it's anyone's guess if dark matter exists, if the visible universe is 1% of the total universe, or just one of infinite regions in a boundless universe
how can we ever know?
the fastest propulsion system we've got is only capable of 0.0027% c on a good day
at this velocity (8000 m/s) it would take 37475 years to travel 1 lightyear
(1 lightyear = 9 460 730 472 580 800 m)
if the visible universe is 20 000 000 000 lightyears across
it would take 749 496 535 072 588 years to travel it's diametre
or 374 748 267 536 294 years to travel it's radius
assuming we were at it's centre, which is highly unlikely
just so that we could get a view of the next visible universe 20 000 000 000 lightyears further distant
who has that much spare time? just to validate a theory
I need help
Given that the radius of the observable universe is 47 billion of light years(that is, our particle horizon is 47 billions ly away in proper distance), then the volume of the observable universe is: 4/3*pi*r3=434672 billion of ly3
Given that cosmic voids occupy an 98% of the universe, then the total volume of the cosmic voids in the observable universe is 434672*98/100=425978 billion ly3
But i need to find the volume of the Virgo supercluster to keep on with the calculations, but i'm having a hard time tryng to find it. Anyone knows the volume of the Virgo supercluster?
The following extract from Yahoo search engine when I typed in "Size of Virgo supercluster."
The nearest large scale structure or arrangement of galaxies found is the Local Virgo Supercluster of galaxies, centered at z = 0.004 ( 24 Mpc) and extending all the way to us (overall size ~ 50 Mpc). To study the Virgo supercluster, a Virgo-centered supercluster coordinate system has been proposed (see Appendix in Vallée, 1991c), improving on the earlier system of de Vaucouleur.
The bad news is that i'm still unable to determine the volume of the Virgo supercluster. The Virgo supercluster (aka local supercluster or Coma-Virgo supercluster) has a pancake shape, with a diameter of 200 million of ly, but i'm unable to find the height of the pancake. I'm unable to find the height of the cylinder.
The good news is that this article
says that an experiment performed by the balloon-borne telescope Boomerang estimated that the mass of the visible universe is of 100 trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion tonnes
according to Big Bang Theorists, the visible universe is 13 000 000 000 years old
so it's radius would be 13 000 000 000 lightyears since the light would require that much time to travel from it's point of origin
when you use the term 'Billion' i presume you mean an American Billion (1 000 000 000)
a European Billion is 1 000 000 000 000 (1 million squared)
1000 Million is called a Milliard
so the visible universe is 13 Milliard lightyears radius, according to BBT
I have to say that according to WMAP results is 13.7 billion years old. According to the LUNA experiment is 14 billion years old
No, because there are parts of the universe that are receding faster than light. The locus of the points that are receding exactly at the velocity of light is called the Hubble sphere. The particle horizon is beyond the Hubble sphere
Separate names with a comma.