Is there anything beyond space?

[Warik]

hmmmm, i think our laws of pghysics only apply to the 'universe' and that reigion expands, but outside of it its a whole new ballgame

But doesn't the universe = everything?

I do not believe anything exists outside of the universe with the exception of God or the mind - I haven't decided which is in fact the entity that exists outside of the universe yet. =)

-Warik

 

[danielson]

well they've mapped the universe apparently, and its 10X19 metres

they even got some fucked up picture of it too.....


im sure their is so sort iof scientif evidence to support it anyhow....

 

[saint808]

We invented time... hell we invented all our measurements... so everything we know could be in fact wrong.



Rich

 

[MuSuLPhReAk]

Funny...I had asked my astronomy teacher the exact same question and the answer was, "U would only be able to understand with complex physics formula's". Got into computers instead so I never found out

 

[Warik]

Funny...I had asked my astronomy teacher the exact same question and the answer was, "U would only be able to understand with complex physics formula's

In other words... "U would only be able to understand with complex physics formulas that I don't know and I don't want to look like a dumb shit trying to explain."

hehe

-Warik

 

[Bodhidogma]

if the universe is infinitley big, then is must also be infinitley small, yes?
therefore, wouldnt that mean that atoms are NOT the smallest particles of matter and all science based on this is not exactly correct?

dont mind me. i am high as a kite.

 

[danielson]

therefore, wouldnt that mean that atoms are NOT the smallest particles of matter

they aren't

 

[HappyScrappy]

if the universe is infinitley big, then is must also be infinitley small, yes?
therefore, wouldnt that mean that atoms are NOT the smallest particles of matter and all science based on this is not exactly correct?

dont mind me. i am high as a kite.

LOL.
good point - if it had a fixed size, then it would be feasible to say that in comparison to infinite size, it is the same as zero. but since it has a changing, infinitely large size, it fails that possibillity, b/c as large as you want to make it, it can always be larger - but it is non negative, and non-zero - so we have a baseline and then scale up - we just don't know where the "up" part of the scale stops.

 

[saint808]

now does any of this matter? What is our purpose here and does it lie in figuring out everthing? Will our answers be given to us or we will go on never to know?



Rich

PS... my head hurts now

 

[Bodhidogma]

LOL.
good point - if it had a fixed size, then it would be feasible to say that in comparison to infinite size, it is the same as zero. but since it has a changing, infinitely large size, it fails that possibillity, b/c as large as you want to make it, it can always be larger - but it is non negative, and non-zero - so we have a baseline and then scale up - we just don't know where the "up" part of the scale stops.

do we just use atoms as the base simply because microscopes wont allow us to see anything smaller, and we do need something to work with? (i dont know this for sure, it is just an ignorant assumption).