# What Shape Is the Universe? A New Study Suggests We’ve Got It All Wrong



## IDontThinkSo (Aug 24, 2011)

t4u6 said:


> https://www.quantamagazine.org/what-shape-is-the-universe-closed-or-flat-20191104/
> 
> *What Shape Is the Universe? A New Study Suggests We’ve Got It All Wrong*


A flat Universe wasn't exactly a popular perspective not so long ago. A curved or hyperspherical universe is the most likely ontological solution to something that cannot have a begining or an end. Nothing intrinsic nor extrinsic to the existence can suppress the existence so it is quite necessary that the whole chain of event is bitting its own tail forever. Given no other consistent option, the shape of the universe must prevent objects from drifting away. Otherwise, as the history loops, the mass of the universe would be growing infinitely with infinite antecedent, which is not consistent. Yet the Universe cannot allow superfluous mechanisms to fulfill a function as it couldn't pre-plan itself. Hence the more economical scenario dominates, which is why the Occam's razor is working so well. The Universe is unlikely to get a superfulous force to restrict the drift, when a curved space is enough. Everything eventually goes back to its starting point, no matter how straight the path is. In a curved space, the horizon is a surface, which covers the whole sky. At some point things are getting weird, because we aren't observing space anymore. Furthermore, the way light travels to cross the Earth necessarily gives a deformed perspective of how dense the universe is far away (hence far earlier), because precisely, the observer is a crossroad for all that light, which is supposedly going straight, thus supposedly crossing against at the antipode (or one of the antipodes) of the hypersphere. Ontologically speaking, an expanding universe is as ridiculous and bigoted as a flat Earth conference. I can only bet that with the new generation of telescopes will be revealed more and more galaxies, too well formed and too early. But it will take some time before the academics drop their beloved big bang theory in a flat anthropomorphized universe that is much more easy to process than the geometry of a curved universe that couldn't have a begining, hence a creator.


----------



## BigApplePi (Dec 1, 2011)

Surreal Breakfast said:


> It's shaped at least 75% like a wheelbarrow being eaten by seven frogs sitting on a tuffet.



What is this speculation on the shape of a universe we know little about and have zero control over? What if we knew? What would we do with this information? Punt? 

I say I'm having trouble fixing what I want for dinner and you are getting on with shaping the Universe? What universe? "I think. Now what" - Descartes.


----------



## Surreal Breakfast (Oct 24, 2008)

BigApplePi said:


> What is this speculation on the shape of a universe we know little about and have zero control over? What if we knew? What would we do with this information? Punt?
> 
> I say I'm having trouble fixing what I want for dinner and you are getting on with shaping the Universe? What universe? "I think. Now what" - Descartes.


You know what they say, "a bamboo is as close as Miss. Trout to marshmallows".


----------



## BigApplePi (Dec 1, 2011)

Surreal Breakfast said:


> You know what they say, "a bamboo is as close as Miss. Trout to marshmallows".


If they're going to say that, I'm going to search for more theys.


----------



## Lucan1010 (Jul 23, 2018)

This isn't even a new idea, this is what I was taught in Astronomy class several years ago.


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

TacoTach said:


> This may be a noob question, but does it even make any sense to talk of a "shape" of the Universe? Doesn't the concept of a shape assume some external environment around it? So if the universe is all that exists then it's not contained into anything because there's just nothing outside of it, so there's no point in talking of a shape.
> 
> Of course that's assuming there's no multiverse. If it turns out there is, then forget everything I just wrote.


This is a major problem with the bridge (or lack thereof) between scientists and laypeople; scientists use common terms with esoteric meanings and fail (especially in popular science publications) to define and explain the jargon. I have a degree in astrophysics and even I don't know what the hell "curved" space or universe means. They don't explain shit and neither do the textbooks I've seen.


----------



## RTX2080Ti0 (Oct 12, 2019)

If the universe is actually closed, we may have more of them. There may be an infinite amout of universes everywhere. Some of them are paralel. This means there are infinite number of humans, infinite amounts of LIFE. We can do it!


----------

