Quote: thing @ April 17 2008, 12:04 AM BSTjust to correct the last bit 'Universe' = everything that exists.
Therefore, there is no next one as far as the definition goes.
No, that's not right at all.
Universe = everything that exists within our universe.
We don't know the nature of the universe, so this allows for 'within our own universe' if it turns out there are more, or 'within THE universe' if it turns out there is only one.
Quote: thing @ April 17 2008, 12:13 AM BSTNo that's jism on a night vision camera
Yours too.
Quote: zooo @ April 17 2008, 12:10 AM BSTI love thinking about space!
It's more than a little terrifying.
Space is amazing.
But then, when you look at anything in nature it's profoundly amazing.
I wish I knew the answers so much.
Quote: ian_w @ April 17 2008, 12:13 AM BSTNo, that's not right at all.
Universe = everything that exists within our universe.
We don't know the nature of the universe, so this allows for 'within our own universe' if it turns out there are more, or 'within THE universe' if it turns out there is only one.
Ah, interesting argument that.
As far as I understand it I was referring to the definition of the word Universe - that being ''everything that exists''.
if you define it as ''everything that exists within everything that exists'' (as it were) then that's a catch 22 isn't it.
I think what I should have said is that the Universe is ''everything that exists, full stop'' i.e. whether we can see it, detect it or know about it - just everything.
I'm fairly sure that is the literal definition but I'll check with Lang. Pro neighbour tomorrow.
Interesting point.
Quote: zooo @ April 17 2008, 12:10 AM BSTI love thinking about space!
It's more than a little terrifying.
It's also wot you'd get it you cracked open my head.
Quote: thing @ April 17 2008, 12:22 AM BSTI think what I should have said is that the Universe is ''everything that exists, full stop'' i.e. whether we can see it, detect it or know about it - just everything.
It would get bloody confusing with that definition though if it turns out there are more universes.
"So, Prof. Scientist, when you talk about the universe, do you mean THIS universe, or this universe and all the others?" 
I see your point though, as in the term 'universal' type thing.
I'm going to bed now. I've got married had a threesome and toured the universe. Not bad for a Wednesday/Thursday really. Auf Wierdersen.
Quote: roscoff @ April 17 2008, 12:34 AM BSTI'm going to bed now. I've got married had a threesome and toured the universe. Not bad for a Wednesday/Thursday really. Auf Wierdersen.
Good night.
No, I mean it really was!
Quote: Aaron @ April 17 2008, 12:25 AM BSTIt's also wot you'd get it you cracked open my head.
Well you beat me then, my empty space has imploded into a singularity.
Quote: ian_w @ April 17 2008, 12:32 AM BSTIt would get bloody confusing with that definition though if it turns out there are more universes.
"So, Prof. Scientist, when you talk about the universe, do you mean THIS universe, or this universe and all the others?"I see your point though, as in the term 'universal' type thing.
I'm not a Prof or scientist although I do have a certificate for swimming a width (small pool).
Aha! Unus - the latin hence prefix uni - meaning one - hence there is only one Universe by definition.
Latin vertere, means 'to turn' hence ''to turn into one'' however you might have viewed it. The whole point then being a bringing together, a unification of description.
still a good point though cos if there was another big bang somewhere else - further away like north of Leicester or something - then we would have ,in effect two similar things according to our understanding but only one description which,essentially, means one. It would, in our terms of understanding, be another thing like our universe but, according to the definition of the word we already use, already be a part of it.
Never mind the Stella, I'm gonna have another puff of this stuff!
What about the multiverse, eh? 
Quote: Badge @ April 17 2008, 12:59 AM BSTWhat about the multiverse, eh?
Good point! hoooeeeeewwwwwwwwwwffffffff! That's better.
Now.
How many verses in the national anthem.
First to answer gets a kiss. 
Quote: thing @ April 17 2008, 12:55 AM BSTI'm not a Prof or scientist
No n n no! It was just a made up scenario for an example. I wasn't calling you prof scientist, which might well have sounded sarcy.
still a good point though cos if there was another big bang somewhere else - further away like north of Leicester or something - then we would have ,in effect two similar things according to our understanding but only one description which,essentially, means one. It would, in our terms of understanding, be another thing like our universe but, according to the definition of the word we already use, already be a part of it.
That's exactly my point. This meaning is outmoded in that sense, because it becomes much too ambiguous/vague/confusing, as with my imaginary Prof. Scientist bit. According to string theory it's totally possible we are just one in a billion or so universes and the big bang is very far from being a unique event. Things would then get very sticky when we are calling a billion (or so) universes THE universe.
Quote: Badge @ April 17 2008, 12:59 AM BSTWhat about the multiverse, eh?
Multiverse would probably be the term, but how long could we keep on going up to make sure we covered everything?
Why not just say 'everything' to mean everything? And the universe meaning the universe 'as we know it' (Jim)?
Ian, you have to think about it that the term universe is collective of everything. We just only know about our specific corner of it right now. Any further discovered collections of galaxies orwhathaveyou would still be in the universe. We just don't count them as such, because we don't know anything about them yet. We can only comprehend and categorise what we know, so upon further discoveries, the universe as we know it now will expand to include those new discoveries. Kind of like, how our understanding of the world changed and expanded to include new landmasses as they were discovered.
Of course, we'd then have to come up for a new term to describe our own collection of galaxies, that which we currently know as the universe. But the universe itself wouldn't change. If that makes sense?
The concept of endless space, for me, is just mind-boggling. As is the idea of 'nothing'. Nothing at all. Anywhere. Utterly incomprehensible.
Quote: Aaron @ April 17 2008, 10:20 AM BSTIan, you have to think about it that the term universe is collective of everything. We just only know about our specific corner of it right now. Any further discovered collections of galaxies orwhathaveyou would still be in the universe. We just don't count them as such, because we don't know anything about them yet. We can only comprehend and categorise what we know, so upon further discoveries, the universe as we know it now will expand to include those new discoveries. Kind of like, how our understanding of the world changed and expanded to include new landmasses as they were discovered.
Of course, we'd then have to come up for a new term to describe our own collection of galaxies, that which we currently know as the universe. But the universe itself wouldn't change. If that makes sense?
I agree. That's why I was careful to put the universe 'as we know it'. In this way there is a clear distinction between everything we know and everything there is, so by saying universe we are not saying everything that exists/ever existed etc, as was the original point, and neither are we making assumptions (very important with modern theoretical physics) that what we know is all there is to know. The weakness of gravity for example may soon lead us to the conclusion that it must have travelled across other universes/dimensions to lose so much of its strength. This is a very strong theory, which we could not examine by narrowing the meaning of the universe to everything.
The concept of endless space, for me, is just mind-boggling. As is the idea of 'nothing'. Nothing at all. Anywhere. Utterly incomprehensible.
Me too. Mind-blowing I would say. That's why I love physics so much. I am burning just to have the slightest idea of what the feck it's all about.
the most interesting experiment EVER - is happening in Cern in June 2008 where scientists are hoping to recreate conditions present at the time of the big bang. some are genuinely concerned that creating black holes on earth might be the end of....earth:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/broadband/tx/universe/