Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

cthulu2016

(10,960 posts)
Wed Sep 26, 2012, 05:53 PM Sep 2012

The universe is much bigger than big [View all]

Last edited Fri Sep 28, 2012, 04:18 AM - Edit history (15)

Everyone reading this grew up knowing the universe was far too big for a human to really grasp. Hell, just the distance to the sun is already too much. (How can light take eight minutes to get somewhere?)

But some of us grew up with much smaller or larger unimaginably large universes. It was already too big to grasp in 1920, and our estimation of its size keeps growing. By 1980-1990 our estimation of the universe was so much larger than it had been that it has become, in my mind, a philosophical difference in kind, not merely degree.

Your grandfather's infinitely vast universe turned out to be just our neighborhood in a much larger universe. We went to the moon while thinking the universe was a fraction of itself.

The modern inflationary model of the universe is so big that not only could the universe not have sensibly been made for mankind, 90% of the universe is utterly unknowable to human beings. It is impossible for any information about most of the universe to ever reach a human mind, except by deduction.

How did the universe as we know it get so big? Well...

Einstein made us think some very weird and unfamiliar things about the universe (curved space, time running at different speeds, etc.) but at the same time provided a comforting sense of completeness. Einstein's universe was really pretty classical, with the universal speed limit of the speed of light providing an almost theological absolute. Nothing can travel faster than 186,000 miles a second.

And when we realized that the universe is all expanding from a central point then we know it started somewhere, as a point. That's comforting too... a real beginning. The big bang begs the question what preceded the big bang, but religion begs the question "who made God?" Either way there is a comfort to an, "In the beginning..."

And that starting point was not infinitely long ago. About 14 billion years. So we have a speed limit and finite time-line, and thus we had an absolute limit on the size of the universe.

If the big bang was 14 billion years ago and two photons came flying out of the big bang in opposite directions they can be no further apart than 28 billion light years today. That is a very long distance, and a scale beyond our real comprehension, but it is sensible. We can follow the reasoning.

Granted, we had to accept that there are things outside the "observable universe," things too far away for us to know about because they are more than 14 billion light years away. Since we are not at the very center a 14 billion light year radius from Earth is going to miss part of the universe.

But since we are not on the very edge then a 14 billion LY radius surely covered most of the universe. Our "observable universe" was most of what existed, and the invisible (to us) parts were known to be nestled over on the other side of a sphere of space no larger than 28 billion light year across and, for matter, considerably less. Two photons could be 28 billion light years apart by now but no two stars could be... stars cannot travel at the speed of light.

A big universe, yes, but with a beginning and a strictly limited size. Cozy enough.

And people readjusted and reintegrated ancient thinking into this vast but limited scientific universe and reached some psychological comfort zone.

But then science played a mean trick on us.

Nothing can move through space faster than the speed of light but we figured out from studying the thing that the space between things can expand faster than the speed of light... and it did.

D'oh!

The big bang didn't just spew stuff out into a thing called space. It created space. Space is a thing with properties, not mere nothingness.

And early in the whole process space inflated at a prodigious clip... considerably faster than the speed of light. Our two opposite-direction photons have each only carved their way through 14 billion light years of space, from their perspective, but all space, everywhere, was inflating like crazy around them and behind them so those two photons might be 50 billion light years apart... 100 billion... we don't know for sure.

And even though stars cannot move at the speed of light, or even close to it, there are (we believe today) stars much more than 28 billion light years apart! The stars (or mostly, the matter that later became stars) ended up with a lot of space in between, but they never crossed all that space.

A usual analogy is raisins in a rising cake. The cake in between the raisins is swelling up so the raisins get further apart from each other even though they are not moving through cake. (I don't pretend to really understand this, mind you. But it is our best hypothesis of how to account for observable facts.)

So though our universe is "only" about 14 billion years old, it has a radius much larger than 14 billion light years. And the part of the universe beyond our observable universe is... well, we don't know anymore. All that we can ever possibly see is just a sliver of an invisible (to us) universe of uncertain hugeness. And the whole mess seems to be accelerating... getting bigger and bigger faster and faster.

We can only see and measure with things that are limited to the speed of light so the bulk of the universe is lost to us. And the same goes for anyone someplace else in the universe. The thing is literally too big for anyone to see. (Fortunately, it isn't like the blind men and the elephant. We think the physical laws are the same throughout the universe so everyone just sees oodles of stars and galaxies. So more like the blind men and the garden hose... probably similar whichever part you're holding.)

The modern demotion of our observable universe to local news is a bit much to take because the size of our little observable corner of our universe is already a fricking joke! Beyond imagination.

We used to think our galaxy was the universe, and that the andromeda galaxy was a nebula within the Milky Way. Then we thought maybe there was us and a few other galaxies. Here's what we know today just from what we can see of our tiny visible part of the whole (mostly invisible) universe...


http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021420208

And that mess of galaxies in our observable universe isn't even all that is within our little visible bubble. There's more we can't see because there's stuff in the way, or it came into being later so the light couldn't have made it here.

Note the little square next to the moon. All those galaxies in the picture are seen in that little square. And right next to that little square is another tiny bit of sky with just as many galaxies. And so on. And we have every reason to think the whole invisible (to us) universe is just as jam-packed with galaxies as our little neighborhood.

Our galaxy, the Milky Way, has 300 billion stars in it. We now think there are hundreds of billions of galaxies, most invisible to us, each with hundreds of billions of stars. I think that is 60 Trillion Billions of stars.

What is that... like 9,000,000,000,000 stars for every person on Earth?

Even if we are the only intelligent life forms in our entire galaxy (unlikely) we are still like the old saying about New York. "If you're one in a million we've got fourteen people just like you." Except it's billions.

If physical laws throughout the universe are constant (we think so) then everything that has ever happened here has had a chance to happen an almost infinite number of other places.

Is there life out there? Yes. Is there intelligent life? Yes. Are there cats? Yes. Are there tabby cats. Yes. Are there tabby cats with blue collars and one white paw named Mister Wuggles? Sure... probably. Why not?

Since an alien tabby cat cannot travel faster than light we will probably never meet alien Mister Wuggles. The same incredible bigness that suggests that almost anything that can exist in our universe's natural laws probably does exist also means that it is possible, or perhaps even probable that those billions of other living worlds are all too far away for us to ever know anything of. (Because we do have to follow the Einstein speed limit, even if the fabric of space doesn't always do so.)

One of the few upsides of all this is that we probably don't have to worry that we humans can ever destroy the universe. If it was possible somebody out there would have already done it.

120 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I like to look up at night and think about all the photons from the Universe falling on my retina. tridim Sep 2012 #1
On a hot day I visualize a sphere the size of earth's orbit cthulu2016 Sep 2012 #3
See: Dyson Sphere. Ikonoklast Sep 2012 #7
I give a problem like that to my algebra students central scrutinizer Sep 2012 #9
QED, tama Sep 2012 #78
Thanks for this. Smickey Sep 2012 #2
I suspose there also could have been more than one big bang as well. ZombieHorde Sep 2012 #4
In fact, that seems to be a consequence of the inflationary theories caraher Sep 2012 #5
Well yea, our big bang (or whatever it is) is still banging. So it's happening now. tridim Sep 2012 #6
You know those five stripes represent the five pillars of Islam, right? Blue_In_AK Sep 2012 #8
This speculative theory as I understand it cpwm17 Sep 2012 #30
I just love how this theory expresses itself as a fractal. tridim Sep 2012 #48
I think it is almost guaranteed that our Universe isn't alone. cpwm17 Sep 2012 #31
In that context, "right now" has no meaning. GreenStormCloud Sep 2012 #110
"If it was possible somebody out there would have already done it"... bhikkhu Sep 2012 #10
Jack Chalker's Well World series covered that CBGLuthier Sep 2012 #98
way too deep Dedicated Mind Sep 2012 #11
I challenged my kids by asking musiclawyer Sep 2012 #12
to me, this photo just reinforces my own humble opinion ldf Sep 2012 #13
Orgasms RobertEarl Sep 2012 #15
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. CrispyQ Sep 2012 #22
No offense, but... eqfan592 Sep 2012 #26
Perhaps you could enlighten everyone with your wisdom cpwm17 Sep 2012 #29
I`ll take a stab at one... opiate69 Sep 2012 #36
This is what I was talking about. eqfan592 Sep 2012 #64
no worries. glad I could help and even happier I got it basically right! lol opiate69 Sep 2012 #99
You don't trust science cpwm17 Sep 2012 #39
Yes. Except there are no infinities, and if there were we could not observe them. bemildred Sep 2012 #42
"I don't understand this, so they can't either." Oy. (nt) Posteritatis Sep 2012 #44
pretty much pokerfan Sep 2012 #72
I agree 100% about there being no beginning of time. Brewinblue Sep 2012 #79
Nope, the rebounding cyclic universe idea is NOT gaining support. GreenStormCloud Sep 2012 #111
That doesn't help much cthulu2016 Oct 2012 #114
I'd be interested to get your take on one of my latest essays (reposted here): coalition_unwilling Sep 2012 #102
We're alone. lumberjack_jeff Sep 2012 #14
The Fermi Paradox isn't a "paradox" at all. EOTE Sep 2012 #17
Forget "visits". The galaxy should be saturated with radio noise. lumberjack_jeff Sep 2012 #19
Of course it's just a belief. If it wasn't, we wouldn't be having this conversation. EOTE Sep 2012 #25
Question 1) there's only one electromagnetic spectrum lumberjack_jeff Sep 2012 #27
Question number one isn't really a question, it's a statement and a specious one at that. EOTE Sep 2012 #32
Allow me to chime in bongbong Sep 2012 #49
Sure, but not radio signals sent with the expressed intent of being found. EOTE Sep 2012 #50
Yummy bongbong Sep 2012 #105
Great movie (and book). EOTE Sep 2012 #109
a) they were answers to your questions. b) "specious" means plausible-looking falsehood. lumberjack_jeff Sep 2012 #59
Specious means factually wrong, but pleasant looking. EOTE Sep 2012 #60
Your argument is undermined by the hyperbole deployed. lumberjack_jeff Sep 2012 #61
Sorry, but you're working with a lot of fail here. eqfan592 Sep 2012 #65
The "available data" includes one datapoint of a planet with life. lumberjack_jeff Sep 2012 #68
It's a baseline assumption that flies completely in the face of all probability. eqfan592 Sep 2012 #71
No it doesn't. lumberjack_jeff Sep 2012 #76
One data point? eqfan592 Sep 2012 #80
Things that science has no evidence to be possible, are assumed to not exist cpwm17 Sep 2012 #75
There is also no evidence of Earth sized planets outside the solar system cthulu2016 Sep 2012 #81
Your belief is that advanced technological civilizations would be using our technology which is in EOTE Sep 2012 #92
I'm not operating on belief. You are. lumberjack_jeff Sep 2012 #94
There is no intelligence to speak of. EOTE Sep 2012 #97
Clap louder Peter! lumberjack_jeff Sep 2012 #104
You appear to place rather a large amount of faith in your position. LanternWaste Sep 2012 #107
On the contrary, I place none at all. lumberjack_jeff Sep 2012 #108
Oh, and another thing. EOTE Sep 2012 #93
No, I was trying to sort out your gibberish. lumberjack_jeff Sep 2012 #95
If you're going to quote someone, you should actually use their words. EOTE Sep 2012 #96
Dude, you really should just stop. eqfan592 Sep 2012 #101
Some science fiction writers have dealt with that cthulu2016 Sep 2012 #45
This is one of my favorite sites: CrispyQ Sep 2012 #21
I get a weird sense when visiting that site, kind of like a fear of heights. EOTE Sep 2012 #33
A person could get lost in this website. Amazing! LuckyLib Sep 2012 #53
Excellent post, cthulu2016. Thanks. n/t pampango Sep 2012 #16
What pampango said! villager Sep 2012 #91
I (and some others I'm sure) immediately thought of this: KatyMan Sep 2012 #18
But no matter how you do the math, the answer is still 42. nt JustABozoOnThisBus Sep 2012 #20
+1 blogslut Sep 2012 #57
Yes, our metrics are useless outside of local scale/local space. bemildred Sep 2012 #23
Good observations, and I'd like to add: Amonester Sep 2012 #24
I came to this following conclusion long ago WCGreen Sep 2012 #28
Somebody who wanted to control other people invented god, I think...nt fadedrose Sep 2012 #35
I read it all, and sort of understood it... fadedrose Sep 2012 #34
The cake grew, and as it's cooling, it's getting smaller fadedrose Sep 2012 #54
That has always been a hot topic of debate. Open or closed universe? cthulu2016 Sep 2012 #62
I wondered about the light.... fadedrose Sep 2012 #66
It doesn't block the sun from us here. We're pretty close. cthulu2016 Sep 2012 #82
That's not dark matter, that's a buncha Photino Birds. Angry Photino Birds! Zalatix Sep 2012 #73
Einstein said, God does not play dice. Eddie Haskell Sep 2012 #37
When I was in high school, I used to stare up at the night sky and ponder... Speck Tater Sep 2012 #38
You hated social studies class but yet here you are on DU. There's an irony coalition_unwilling Sep 2012 #103
Those who don't learn from history... Speck Tater Sep 2012 #106
The only plausible reason I can think of why a young person like you would coume to hate coalition_unwilling Sep 2012 #112
BAck when I was in school, 60 years ago, memorizing names and dates Speck Tater Oct 2012 #113
I am so sorry. That regurgitation of trivia is so NOT what history (as coalition_unwilling Oct 2012 #117
The history I have always been interested in is... Speck Tater Oct 2012 #118
In the 1960s, this type of history (known variously as 'Social History') became coalition_unwilling Oct 2012 #120
I have always wondered if there is an end to space. RebelOne Sep 2012 #40
Our space probably does no go on and on. cthulu2016 Sep 2012 #41
and once it ends if it ends are there many others like it outside of where it ends JI7 Sep 2012 #63
More problems with the Fermi "paradox" Spike89 Sep 2012 #43
It's quite a treat to think about things like this. Alduin Sep 2012 #46
I always take some comfort from Giordano Bruno who pointed out that... Tom Rinaldo Sep 2012 #47
I'm going to hide under my desk now. nt Deep13 Sep 2012 #51
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Sep 2012 #52
What WE think of as "The Universe" is just a tiny atom in the fingernail of a giant. n/t cherokeeprogressive Sep 2012 #55
. Zygoat Sep 2012 #88
One night when I was 9 years old Canuckistanian Sep 2012 #56
K&R! The universe is estimated to have 200 Billion galaxies and growing. JaneyVee Sep 2012 #58
....Yet there are pea brains right here on earth..... RagAss Sep 2012 #67
But ... I want to meet Mister Wuggles! Arugula Latte Sep 2012 #69
Calling Morris-Thorne... Calling Morris-Thorne... Zalatix Sep 2012 #70
Well, never say never cthulu2016 Sep 2012 #84
Very cool OP thanks. rudycantfail Sep 2012 #74
is the universe conscious? Zygoat Sep 2012 #77
If it is, it is on a very slow time scale cthulu2016 Sep 2012 #85
or very fast Zygoat Sep 2012 #86
Fun stuff ismnotwasm Sep 2012 #83
What? Zygoat Sep 2012 #87
Sure, though perhaps it could have been phrased better cthulu2016 Sep 2012 #89
It can't be any bigger than the notions here... littlemissmartypants Sep 2012 #90
Your magisterial post caused me to remember a quote from coalition_unwilling Sep 2012 #100
CD nails it again. Thanks for this. n/t VOX Oct 2012 #116
Every object in our known existence has an inside and an outside. Is the universe inside something? VOX Oct 2012 #115
Or this: DiverDave Oct 2012 #119
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The universe is much bigg...