There is an old bit of philosophy that argues that the universe is infinite. It goes something like this:
imagine that the universe if finite. There must be an edge to the universe, a cliff or perhaps a wall. Let's say it is a wall. If you go to the top of the wall and look out, there is something on the other side of the wall. The wall divides something. So you go to the other side of the wall and explore only to eventually find another wall marking the edge of the universe. You climb up that wall and see that it divides something ... ad infinitum
It occurs to me that this is bad logic. There need not be anything on the other side of the wall. It relies on our daily experience with land being divided by walls. This need not apply to a universe. Imagine that the matter and energy ratios are such that the universe will eventually collapse into a black hole. You would then find that you have a very finite universe. There need not be anything outside the event horizon. There need not be space, matter, energy, light ... nothing can get out. The universe would be a closed finite system.
It appears that this is not the case in reality. I am just saying that the logic was flawed. My argument is flawed as well. I was just trying to get the reader to the point where they could start to imagine an enclosed finite universe without creating a monstrous treatise.
In reality, in the case of a big crunch, I believe that a vast amount of energy in the form of light from the initial bang would continue to expand out into space, or the void if I may. I also think that void, due to quantum uncertainty is actually filled with virtual particles and that these must already exist in the regions into which our universe expands. And that the void exists. But as physics progresses, I suppose we may find that void is finite. There is a lot that could be said on this topic. But this is enough for now.
No comments:
Post a Comment