… and we can see stars 13.4 billion light years away in one direction (hubble deep field image) how far can we see in the other directions? If it turns out to be similar distances is that not too handy as it would put us near the centre of the universe.

Edit: apparently there is a hubble deep field south image which shows galaxies around the same distance away as those in the other image.

Hmm I think some folk are making stuff up.

We can see the same distance in all directions – we’re not in the centre of the universe as there is no centre. It is a bit odd to get your head around, but space itself is expanding, it’s not that everything is expanding into empty space.

The usual analogy is a balloon – if you were standing on a giant balloon as it was being blown up, every other point would be rushing away from you at the same speed – but you aren’t at the centre of the balloon.

Now try to convert that analogy from two to three dimensions without your brain popping out of your ears 🙂

The universe is a hypersphere.. think of a sphere, but with every point on the outside edge being joined up to it’s opposite point on the sphere. So it’s got size, but no edges. It’s like that because gravity bends it that way.
In a sense, you are at the centre of the universe. How does that make you feel?

Scared!

we can see stars 13.4 billion light years away

You should’ve gone to specsavers mate……..30 billion light years

If I’m standing in a balloon and it get’s blown up, yes every point of it would be moving away from me. Some bits of it would be closer than others depending on where I was in the balloon when it started being inflated. I was watching the horizon thing on before the big bang and found it quite interesting that they didnt really know what the hell was going on. I liked the expansion/contraction idea though.

Space is not only queerer than you think, It’s queerer than you CAN think.
I read that somewhere & i reckon it’s true!

I am of the opinion that if something ever gets so complex that it’s not understandable then it’s wrong.

I am of the opinion that if something ever gets so complex that it’s not understandable then it’s wrong.

Try reading a book on quantum electrodynamics – if that was wrong then this computer wouldn’t work, yet it’s very, very odd.

as old as your mum.

We are the centre of our own field of view, not the universe.

The only thing that can solve this is the opinion of an erstwhile yet omniscient medical professional.

Quincy, M.E.?

But you can’t qualify any other point as more the centre of the universe than here

or there

anyways I like all the space piktures. They r cool. even if they do colour them in.

If I’m standing in a balloon and it get’s blown up

Youre either A) going to have a high pitched voice (if its helium)

B) going to have a headache due to the pressure

C) going to go deaf when it goes pop

I’m not trying to say we are or are not at the centre of the universe. It’s just the 13.7Bn yrs old and we can see 13.4bn light yrs in each direction that doesnt sit well. Either the speed of light is incorrect or there is a lot more universe out there than we can see and the universe is a lot older or any number of other explanations. I also likeed the idea that invoking infinity was giving up.

There is a lot mroe universe out there than we can see – we can only see about 2% of it.

Bw, more like Doogie Howser MD.

It depends if the universe is expanding symmetrically in every direction from the point at which the big bang occured.

Heres some nice long words with some graphs that have numbers on and stuff 😆

The universe according to Wiki

The only thing that can solve this is the opinion of an erstwhile yet omniscient medical professional.

Don’t you ever tire of your persistent smartarse comments about TJ Flashheart ?

I appreciate that it gives you something say when you clearly struggle to formulate any opinion about anything, but why not try something new ? 💡

if there is a lot more out there than we can see – another 98% or whatever – and it all started expanding at the same time – how does that work if the universe is 13.7 bn yrs old and we can see 13.4 bn light years away?

Ernie, why not type another essay instead. Someone might even read it.

The other 98% is dark matter and/or dark energy. Being dark, we can’t see it 🙂

CFH – if you’re just going to start your childish bickering and trolling i suggest you do one.

ben cooper – prove it.

Ben, is there a Higgs Boson link there, now we can (sort of) see it?

but how much can you weigh? does it matter where you are? that’s the invisible shit right there. that those freaky wierdos are trying to find in a big tunnel or something. That must have an effect on speed and SBZ your numbers are very unspecific. Have you been reading newspapers? if they find the higgs-boson I will definitly sleep at night knowing the missing mass of everything has been found

because we can only see those objects that are 13.7 bn years old, and therefore 13.4 bn light years away. What that says is the age of the “visible” universe.

ben cooper – prove it.

Well, one proof is to look at how galaxies spin. Basically, they are spinning too quickly – they should really be flinging themselves apart. But the fact that they’re not means there’s a lot more mass there that we can’t see holding them together. You can even work out how much mass there is and where it is by looking at the speed of rotation at various distances from the centre of a galaxy – galaxies should rotate like water downa plughole, but they really rotate a bit more like a spinning plate.

well look mikey, is it in HD? or I don’t wanna know.

we can only see those objects that are 13.7 bn years old, and therefore 13.4 bn light years away.

Does that allow for expansion ?

What does dark energy do then?

Just using SBZ’s figures. I’ll read up on it properly when I haven’t had a beer or two.

For the record, I would have assumed that the two figures would be the same.

What does dark energy do then?

Sod all 🙂

Quite a few theories about the creation of the universe require that there’s a certain amount of matter/energy (which are, of course, interchangeable) in the universe. The “flat universe” theory, for example. But calculations of galagtic rotation curves etc only accounts for some matter/energy, so it can’t all be in the form of matter, some of it must be in the form of energy. And it must be a form of energy that doesn’t interact with anything, or we’d see it.

Just reading a short history of nearly everything by Bill Bryson which covers this on a nice layman level. I think the explanation is that where ever you are in the universe will deemed as the centre

So they’re just making shit up. Thought so. I would like to come back in 1000 years and see where the human race had got to with this stuff.

Dark matter is the term used to describe the “missing” mass of galaxies and their surrounding gas clouds, which turns out to be five times greater than the visible amount of matter should suggest.

the Higgs Boson, on the other hand, is the particle that gives objects mass. As atoms are 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999 % etc empty space, theoretically everything should have no mass and solidity.