Is the Universe Open, Closed, or Flat?

[PassatAmnesiac]

When you finsh getting informed on epistemology, I invite you to take my quiz (which is announeced in the toe forums page, at the top), which is preciselly eabout the amin theires, tools and thought of epistemology.

I saw that, however I did not see any directions. I was wondering whether I am supposed to give my own definition or a text book one. I see that the average score is zero. Does that mean that people are not doing it right?

[Guille]

I saw that, however I did not see any directions. I was wondering whether I am supposed to give my own definition or a text book one. I see that the average score is zero. Does that mean that people are not doing it right?

I think it means that out of those that have taken it and submited, whcih are very little, probably, haven't answered the questions correctly or at all. But this is the problem with the quiz: that the answers I introduced as proper ones are very formal, so maybe you can have another point of view and it will not mach. But it doesn't matter, because it was my first quiz. It was the first of a sequence of quizes that I'm planning to make. I know now how to make quizzes with multiple choice questions, so most quzies will be fully mutiple cjhoice or partly, and I believe that will draw more atention.

Now coming back to the subject, don't you think that it is absurd to believe that the universe is flat, because if it were, then the planets, we, or anything which is spatially expanded, would be mostly out of the universe, right?

[PassatAmnesiac]

the flat concept does not make too much sense to me. when I think of flat I think of a 2d plane. however we live in the 3d world from what we can tell. I think most people would agree (lets leave out space/time at the moment). the thing that gets me is that lets picture the flat universe laying horizontile. it doesn't matter if its open or closed its just really huge either way and you can't see the end even if there is one. now what happens if you try to move vertically? wouldnt you reach the end of the universe almost immediately? i think this is what you mean. or it is completely 2d where where 99.99999 percent of everything would be outside the inverse which i think is even more what you are getting at.

so yes i completely agree with you. i think human nature wants to assume that the universe is a sphere and some aspects of it make sense but over all the universe having a specific shape is just reallly hard to comprehend. iv'e often though about whether it is a kind of spiral shape or calabi-yau shape.

[Guille]

the flat concept does not make too much sense to me. when I think of flat I think of a 2d plane. however we live in the 3d world from what we can tell. I think most people would agree (lets leave out space/time at the moment). the thing that gets me is that lets picture the flat universe laying horizontile. it doesn't matter if its open or closed its just really huge either way and you can't see the end even if there is one. now what happens if you try to move vertically? wouldnt you reach the end of the universe almost immediately? i think this is what you mean. or it is completely 2d where where 99.99999 percent of everything would be outside the inverse which i think is even more what you are getting at.

so yes i completely agree with you. i think human nature wants to assume that the universe is a sphere and some aspects of it make sense but over all the universe having a specific shape is just reallly hard to comprehend. iv'e often though about whether it is a kind of spiral shape or calabi-yau shape.

If it were a calabi-yau shape, out of so many there are (but not infinite, I read) which will it be and why? Maybe each universe is a calabi-yau shape, and there is 1 universe with each different calabi-yau shape each, and all the calabi-yau spaces in it are of the kind of which it is. That is plausible.

[curlinpw@netzero.net]

the universe -
infinite number of "univi" (is this correct plural?)
think of ours as being in a state of positive or negative
the one next to us in the opposite, and so on and so on,
hence the "feeling" that there may be parallel multiple univi,
ebb and flow at the edges of each.

[baudrunner]

I actually believe that the Universe is as I've described it in

http://www.toequest.com/forum/showth...=9748#poststop

which means that it is both closed and open depending on the scale, or scope, of one's definition, that is to say, our Universe, or the entire Universe..?

[michellemfry]

I thought it to be open with no physical or practical barriers to it's continued expansion. It could continue to expand forever.

Recent experiments have shown it to be flat. The geometry is Euclidian and the space is flat. It is flat if there is just enough matter for it's gravitational force to bring the expansion associated with the Big Bang to a stop in an infinitely long time.

Flat is between open and closed. I guess we shall see what the universe thinks is an infinitely long time.

[michellemfry]

A Multiverse or Universe(s) is not one of the options. I could only blindly speculate on what that might mean for expansion's end. Does anyone have any good ideas on the shape of a Multiverse??

[RAJAN]

There can be only one universe because of gravity, which is the base of creation.Even if separate another physical universe is formed everything will be united to one because of the attraction of gravity which is the only force.

[Guille]

There can be only one universe because of gravity, which is the base of creation.Even if separate another physical universe is formed everything will be united to one because of the attraction of gravity which is the only force.

Maybe you would like to know that latelly (actually not so latelly, greek scientists already knew it) we came along a force called electromagnetism, and mor recently the strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force. So gravity is NOT the only force. And 'gravity is the basis of creation', where did that come from? Gravity doesn't create mass, and doesn't create time or space, it curves these. And definatelly I my mother didn't give me birth because of gravity. Gravity needs spacetime to exist, for it is just the curve of these, so the if there are two separate universes and no spacetime in between there is no gravity interconnecting them. Nothing else that you say impplies there is only one universe. By the way, if you think gravity must be the union of the universes then there is a way: black holes end up as white holes in other universes.