Imagine the universe and everything we know about it. All the stars, planets, solar systems, galaxies, galaxy clusters, groups of clusters, and so on. It's a fact that everything is moving relative to factors we are constantly exploring in a quest to understand the origins of the universe. The age-old question of whether the universe is finite or infinite has had us all puzzled. I have been thinking about these subjects and lately have begun to read more about them in an attempt to educate (and possibly bias) my mind.
Some theories are widely popular and accepted, while others are not so popular and often rejected by the scientific community. Being a non scientist myself, my thinking is somewhat simple and maybe even naive. I believe everything in the universe is connected somehow. Everything is affected by whatever it encounters, big or small - its environment, temperature, even the timing. Completely random, taking the path of least resistance, much like water does on earth.
In the quest for a theory unifying general relativity and quantum mechanics, the workings of the cosmos could be compared to the inner workings of a living being. In my mind, I imagine us (the earth, solar system, galaxies, our known universe) to be an internal part of something living. Just consider what this means. Everything in our known universe is microscopic inside another living thing, which is part of a world, solar system, galaxy, universe of its own. On and on, bigger and bigger. Also, consider the reverse direction, looking inward towards single celled organisms, atoms and molecules. On and on, smaller and smaller. It's like looking in a hall of mirrors. Never ending in any direction. This is my analogy of the finite vs. infinite universe question. No matter how simple it may seem, its implications are staggering, don't you think?
The infinitely big most definetely becomes the infinitely small.
I applaud your quest and desire to understand the cosmos and its workings. The model you propose is an old one, probably thousands upon thousands of years old. I remember having somewhat the same musings when I was much younger, so I understand where you're coming from. However, if you seriously look into the subjects you employ in constructing your view---cosmology, relativity, unification of the fundamental forces (not quantum mechanics and relativity, by the way)--- AND, read up on the current state of scientific knowledge (the universe has been shown to be finite), I think many of these questions will be answered or at least have a finer more understood edge. Go for it Sunny. I don't think you'll be disappointed.
Thank you Minnesota! Just recently I've begun to read "The Big Bang, The Creation and Evolution of the Universe" by Joseph Silk. I also have "A Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawking. I have an intense desire to learn more. I'll admit, my analogy hints of science fiction. But consider Johannes Kepler; in Joseph Silk's book, I learned Kepler indulged in wild and mystical speculations. Kepler's persistence in pursuing these mystical notions nevertheless led to his discovery of the laws of planetary motion. All I'm saying is we need to be open minded to all possibilities. My enthusiasm makes me curious to explore and get answers that will lead to more questions in the search for knowledge. Thank you again, Minnesota, for your encouragement!
I've been thinking about the same thing about our universe actually being very small and inside living being, so small we may never be able to locate it. Or why inside a living being? Maybe it's right next to you and so small you can't see it but when a person on a planet in that universe is comparing himself to his planet, the planet is huge. Maybe our universe is a tiny point inside an alien body or an alien body's world.
Posts: 6497 | Location: Grayson, Georgia, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Jusork, YES! I agree with all of your suggestions as definite possibilities. What's to say it can't be possible? The implications are enormous, leading to infinity, which is so far beyond our comprehension, yet isn't it awesome that we can even have the awareness to ask these questions? Totally blows the mind!
Minnesota, I admit I'm no scientist, and my tehcnical terminology is not the best. When I spoke of a unified theory, I was quoting Stephen Hawking from his book, "A Brief History of Time", Chapter 4, The Uncertainy Principle, page 61. The last paragraph of the chapter reads, quote, "We do not yet have a complete consistent theory that unifies general relativity and quantum mechanics, but we do know a number of the features it should have." This is my reference, I hoped to use it as an intelligent source. You spoke of the unification of the fundamental forces not being quantum mechanics and relativity, so please bear with me if I was misinformed. I'm still very new at this, but we all must start somewhere! I will continue to read and learn more so as to be able to speak more knowledgeably. I have a "passion" to understand as much as my mind will allow me to comprehend.
Sunnycat - you are correct that one of the biggest problems in theoretical physics is unifying quantum mechanics and relativity. Equivalently, this is called the search for a quantum theory of gravity.
Basically, we can do a decent job of describing all the forces (and their fields), except for gravity, quantum mechanically by using mediator particles (gauge bosons - photons for electromagnetism, gluons for the strong force, and I've forgotten those for the weak force, but they are known).
We are searching for a quantum theory of gravity because it is the missing link to a unified theory (Grand Unified Theory or Unified Feild Theory).
