Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SamB110 t1_j1lx5fa wrote

Reply to comment by PhilosophusFuturum in Is the Milky Way... Normal? by cciccitrixx

Can you explain your points further? Are we far from a “universe core” that makes it like we’re in the sticks?

15

FlyingSpacefrog t1_j1lzzg0 wrote

I don’t understand what the other guy was saying. But under most commonly accepted models of the universe, there is no center to the universe. The Big Bang happened everywhere all at once, and the universe appears to be infinite in size.

If you’re talking about the observable universe, which is just the portion of it that we can see because light has had time to reach us, then we are at the exact center of the universe simply because light travels at a constant speed and we can see the same distance in all directions.

28

ProTechYoNeck t1_j1n31ey wrote

There seems to be a bit of a calculation. If the universe is still expanding infinitely, then there has to be a "center" that it is infinitely expanding from. Take for instance a quilt, if it kept getting longer in all directions, it'll still have a center. Hope that makes sense.

1

AuntJ25 t1_j1n3q6a wrote

not really because we think the universe is expanding equally at all points rather than expanding outward from a single point, so the “center” could never exist

14

ProTechYoNeck t1_j1n4lzn wrote

So for visual sake, you have a grid of 9 dots and all dots expand and overlap each other infinitely?

1

AuntJ25 t1_j1n59t2 wrote

sort of, universal expansion is weird and we’re not even sure everything is relative everywhere

6

ProTechYoNeck t1_j1n5ii5 wrote

So how can you so confidently say no when you don't even understand it yourself?

−3

Sotam1069 t1_j1ngz8k wrote

Because no one understands it, but some things make more sense than others. You ok buddy?

6

ProTechYoNeck t1_j1nhiko wrote

Makes sense and what is are two different things. If you want to discuss what something probably is and theorize from there then sure, but to dismiss without giving some type of information that would contest it in some nature is not what science in any field is about. So yeah I just fine, just not to hyped of on the current climate revolveling around science.

−2

CREEPER2925 t1_j1nhaf0 wrote

The general accepted idea is that everything happened everywhere at once, but were not sure if thats true. (Also its kinda hard to visualize that I think)

2

ProTechYoNeck t1_j1nhzfd wrote

That's why I gave a rough hypothetical to give some type of direction as to what did happen. Something that is above us naturally will be difficult to comprehend on some level, but if we can critique the information we have now, it will give insight to new comers who are looking into working on discovering these answers.

0

Drew_pew t1_j1o78ri wrote

No, that is incorrect. Imagine if the earth was expanding like a balloon. Which point on the surface of the earth would be the “center” of expansion? None would be, the universe is hypothesized to be similar

1

ProTechYoNeck t1_j1obx96 wrote

The balloon would still have a center... you can still pin point the center even if you can't feel it. What you just explained is exactly what I proposed, like a room. If you could float in the room you could be in that center while it expands. The issue with trying to explain this in a different way is that it doesn't seem possible with our current understanding. If one just said that the universe is infinite, then I can see the argument that there isn't a "center" but to be infinite and expanding... if it is theoretically infinite because it's ever expanding that's fine but then you're right back at the same issue of it having a "center" to be ever expanding from, whether you see it or not.

0

Drew_pew t1_j1ocmpd wrote

No, you’re misunderstanding my analogy. In the balloon example, the surface of the balloon is the universe. The center of expansion is nowhere in the universe in that analogy. Another way to say it would be: can you point to the location in the universe which is the center of expansion? Can you go there (if you could teleport)? The answer to both questions is no.

Also I’m not sure what you were saying about an infinite universe so perhaps we agree, but there certainly is not a center to an expanding infinite plane.

2

ProTechYoNeck t1_j1odkm2 wrote

Ok so saying this balloon is a perfect circle with no nipple, the surface of the balloon would be the universe and the space on either side of that surface would be nothing right?

1

Drew_pew t1_j1odug6 wrote

Yup, exactly. The idea of the space on either side being “nothing” is extremely hard to fathom for me honestly, but it’s the only way to interpret an expanding finite universe (that I know of).

2

ProTechYoNeck t1_j1og0fg wrote

I mean unless the distance between the opposite sides of the surface is a number between 1 to 0 which can be infinite.

I get what you are saying. I'm still skeptical of the current idea being presented here. There are still anomalies that are seen in the cosmic microwave background that stands either for or against the current model but, it's still up for debate.

I appreciate your willingness to discuss the topic in a civil manner. Only thing I'll leave you with is to continue to question the way the data is being interpreted. It might lead you somewhere you might not have thought about

2

Morgen-stern t1_j1m0uoa wrote

We’re not far from the core because no such thing exists, but the Milky Way does exist in the largest known galactic void. Our void isn’t like some of the other huge ones where there’s like 60 galaxies for billions of light years, it’s just less densely populated than other regions of our observable universe

19

SamB110 t1_j1m22bg wrote

I didn’t know that about the void, but figured there was no true “core” or at least one that we know of.

5

alejandrocab98 t1_j1omucn wrote

Basically there’s regions with galaxies clustered much more closely together to the point they all touch

1