Maddog:
Quote:
Making this conjecture doesn't make it so. There have been other theories about the
"universe" being bigger (larger) than the "observable universe". No as yet "observable"
evidence either for/against.
|
True, but then cosmology is mostly theoretical, and evidence to back up each theory the more rare commodity.
As you know, I keep hammering on String/M-theory with its 11 to 26 "dimensions" and clashing membranes/imaginary "universes for this very reason.
And I'd rather not even go into "time reversal" again. I don't see time as an entity.
Space either. So "expanding space," (
if it really is the empty volume in which all things move, expand, etc. will be a cosmology dependent on the reification of space, which topic we all beat to death in the spacetime thread.
Agreed, no one knows what lies beyond the cosmic event horizon. Could be the Whole Balloon tho, the rubber of which our little bubble of expanding cosmos lies within. This would account for the homogeneity of the isotropic cosmos we observe with galaxies moving apart from each other as the membrane expands. But that could still leave empty space (get over it!
) within the balloon and beyond the whole thing.
There simply can be no "boundary" to space. What... a wall... of...?... and beyond that... hey, more space... no matter what may be out there floating around in it. (More Big Balloons with zillions of little expanding bubble/cosmi like ours as the "rubber molecules?")
Michael
