Can we leave the universe?

[Serenity595]

Can We Leave the Universe?

Could we reach the "edge" of the universe? And if so, could we leave its confines? These are intriguing questions in the realm of science and philosophy that I believe need answers, so I've decided to pose my theory on the subject. You may agree or disagree as you see fit. Also, if you see any incorrect science in this article, please tell me!

Alright, so we know that our universe is finite. We also know that it's constantly expanding. With the knowledge of these two facts, we can then conclude that our universe started from a single point (i.e. the Big Bang theory). From this, we can then conclude thereafter that there is indeed an "edge" to the universe. A finite system must have an end, right? Otherwise, it would be infinite.

So, now that we have deducted that our universe has an edge, the next question is: can we reach it? In my opinion, no, and that's because of the universal speed limit, and the accelerated rate at which our universe is expanding.

As you may know, the generally accepted speed limit of the universe for an object with mass is near the speed of light. So why can't said object reach the speed of light itself? Well, the postulate is that this object would require an infinite amount of energy in order to travel at such a speed. And, as we discussed earlier, the universe is finite, so it would be illogical to assume that any matter or energy in our universe is infinite by nature.

The accelerated rate at which our universe is expanding makes the goal of reaching the edge of the universe even more impossible because not only would you have to catch up with the universe's already massive expansion, you'd also have to outrun the expansion of the galaxies. As you may know, the galaxies in our universe are expanding away from each other at a rate faster than the speed of light. This is possible because the "universal speed limit" only applies to local velocities; it does not apply to comoving coordinates, such as in the case of galaxies traveling at relatively increasing velocities.

For the sake of discussion, though, let's say that you could go faster than the speed of light with some kind of mass stabilizer and an interdimensional energy core. You've traveled across thousands of galaxies to get to your destination and it seems like you'll reach the edge of the universe in no time. But even with this luxury, you still have a problem: time itself.

You see, according to theory, any speed less than the speed of light makes time go slower in your perspective while everything else relative to you goes faster. Once you reach the speed of light, time would be infinitely slow for you which means everything else relative to you passes by at an infinite speed. However, we already established that you have to go faster than the speed of light to reach the edge of the universe. This is where things get strange. Based upon a theory involving this equation:

...time would actually start speeding up once you go faster than the speed of light. This means that from your view, time outside your ship would be decelerating as shown in this graph:

So if we follow this logic, we can conclude that it would be impossible for you to reach the edge of the universe even if you could go faster than the speed of light because time itself would work against you. The faster you go beyond the speed of light, the faster you experience time. The faster you experience time, the longer the amount of time it would take for you to reach the edge of the universe.

If we follow the line of the graph shown earlier, we can also conclude that eventually it will drop to a time slowing factor of 0 (for reference, our real time is based on a time slowing factor of 1). So what would happen when that event occurs? Of course, all of this is entirely theoretical, but we could predict that since time would be slowed to a halt, time itself would no longer move forward. As far as I know, this does not violate the idea of a linear time structure, as you wouldn't regress in time, but rather, never advance.

But let's say you had some kind of apparatus on your ship that negated the effects of time dilation with travel that is faster than the speed of light. It may sound absurd, but we've gotten this far, so why not keep going? So in this scenario we finally are able to reach the edge of the universe. But the next question is: can we cross it? This is where things get wacky because you have to first understand what a universe is.

The definition of a universe is "all existing matter and space considered as a whole". This means that anything outside of our universe (assuming there is only one universe) could neither be matter nor space, otherwise it would be considered part of our universe. You may think that nothing would be outside of our universe, but that's not entirely reasonable.

First, you have to define what "nothing" is. If you think that nothing is empty space, then in this context, that would be incorrect. The reason is because scientists have found something called the cosmic microwave background or CBM. It's thermal radiation assumed to be left over from the Big Bang. I think we can all agree that radiation is still "something", and since this CBM appears to permeate throughout all of known space, then every centimeter of our universe would never be literally empty.

With this in mind, we now need to redefine nothing in this context to explain what lies beyond the edge of our universe. Well, we know that a universe consists of all matter and space. Therefore, the "nothingness" outside of our universe would be outside of space itself. So think on this: how can you leave the universe if there is nothing to leave into? You can't fly a spaceship into space that does not exist. A spaceship is physical matter and therefore requires physical space in the same way that your body requires physical space to exist. So then if you can't enter into space that is not there, what would happen if you tried? To be frank, I have absolutely no idea. It's some interesting food for thought, though.

So in conclusion, if you ever wanted to leave the universe, you'd not only have to go faster than the speed of light, negate the problems that arise with infinite mass and energy, as well as avoid the effects of time dilation - you'd also have to travel into space that doesn't even exist! But in the end, why would you want to leave? Our universe is such a wonderfully intricate and beautifully complex place to live in. Is it all that there is? I think not, but I'll leave that for you to decide on your own.

Anyway, thanks for reading! Have a nice day.

 

[Kris]

Erm... Yeah. I don't think impossible.

Get a really long stick?

On a serious note, this is more of a discussion of 'can we exceed the speed of light'.

Light is the fastest /known/ thing out there. Perhaps there is something else we can't detect.

 

[Tai_K_Yagami]

I take an interest into the final portion of your question which is "can we reach the end of the universe?" I will offer up my only opinion to that and like to think in terms of a mobius strip or a klein-bottle. We like to think there is an "outside" to a universe when really, what if the dimensions beyond the 4th don't allow us to see the universe for what it really is, "one-sided." Meaning, one never really leaves. The idea of the mobius strip is to show that if you follow through the pencil line, then you'll never find the end because there exists none. Same concept with the klein-bottle but for three dimensions. It's like the game of Pacman where if you reach the very end of a side, you'll simply enter the other side and you can imagine and his mind's eye, the end is either really long for him, or there is none to take into account at all. The very fabric of space relies on different dimensions I suppose beyond the 3rd and that means to see differently than that of the previous dimensions which allows one to sort of, visualize the mobius strip beyond the 3rd.

Now, technologically, of course, we cannot reach the end of the universe. That would, as you say, require an infinite mass and infinite energy, but if we did then it would kind of like be traveling backwards in time as it takes a certain amount of time for light to reach us which would make it impossible in the laws of physics. That's it for my spiel on this.

Well, this is my opinion on this and some of the concepts I stated may be misconstrued. If so, correct me on that.

Fun little topic Serenity! Awesome job

Edit: Also, I'm thinking entropy, dark matter, and dark energy might play into this somehow. I dunno.

 

[TI83Plus]

Serenity you're thinking of Faster-Than-Light travel as if it were a speed.
If you could travel through the 4th dimension (wormhole, portal, black hole, whatever you call it) you dont need to use any energy or mass to travel distance, in which case the FTL time speeding doesnt matter since you dont even touch that part of speed in your journey.

 

[Tai_K_Yagami]

Serenity you're thinking of Faster-Than-Light travel as if it were a speed.
If you could travel through the 4th dimension (wormhole, portal, black hole, whatever you call it) you dont need to use any energy or mass to travel distance, in which case the FTL time speeding doesnt matter since you dont even touch that part of speed in your journey.

On the matter of moving FTL speed, it may be possible to traveling through space using a so called "warp bubble" in which space-time is manipulated to an advantage to warp photons a certain way to project a spaceship across regional space. The idea is out there but tremendously unfeasible within a long period of time.

 

[Vincent2128]

[The definition of a universe is "all existing matter and space considered as a whole". This means that anything outside of our universe (assuming there is only one universe) could neither be matter nor space, otherwise it would be considered part of our universe. You may think that nothing would be outside of our universe, but that's not entirely reasonable.

First, you have to define what "nothing" is. If you think that nothing is empty space, then in this context, that would be incorrect. The reason is because scientists have found something called the cosmic microwave background or CBM. It's thermal radiation assumed to be left over from the Big Bang. I think we can all agree that radiation is still "something", and since this CBM appears to permeate throughout all of known space, then every centimeter of our universe would never be literally empty.

With this in mind, we now need to redefine nothing in this context to explain what lies beyond the edge of our universe. Well, we know that a universe consists of all matter and space. Therefore, the "nothingness" outside of our universe would be outside of space itself. So think on this: how can you leave the universe if there is nothing to leave into? You can't fly a spaceship into space that does not exist. A spaceship is physical matter and therefore requires physical space in the same way that your body requires physical space to exist. So then if you can't enter into space that is not there, what would happen if you tried? To be frank, I have absolutely no idea. It's some interesting food for thought, though.

I'd like to think that the multiverse theory is true, and the multiverses are inside another universe which lies inside another universe, but I think I'm taking the inception a bit too far.

 

[Kris]

I'd like to think that the multiverse theory is true, and the multiverses are inside another universe which lies inside another universe, but I think I'm taking the inception a bit too far.

Then what happens when multiple universes colide? If we're rapidly expanding at the speed of light, will the collisions happen? Will they be catastrphic? Will they not effect anything? Will they just pass through eachother harmlessly? Or are we on a different plane than the other universes?

 

[TI83Plus]

Then what happens when multiple universes colide? If we're rapidly expanding at the speed of light, will the collisions happen? Will they be catastrphic? Will they not effect anything? Will they just pass through eachother harmlessly? Or are we on a different plane than the other universes?

theres a nice video on youtube which can show you how the visualize the 4th,5th,6th, etc dimensions (which is where the universes are located)
and after watching it I dont think universes can 'collide'

 

[mountainboy965]

Ok, first, the theory that the universe is expanding at the speed of light is becoming less popular. Instead, a new theory that the universe is continually contracting and expanding is becoming prevalent. Think of the universe as a rubber band that stretches and and becomes relaxed.

If this new theory is correct, that means that theoretically, humans could reach the end of the universe (even if it took millions of years). What's outside of the universe? Who knows.

Next: Traveling faster than the speed is light is actually possible, without breaking science, thanks to a loophole. It's called the Warp Drive, which is something that NASA is actually spending dollars on as viable research that will someday be possible. You can read about it here. If the Warp Drive proves to be a viable method of transportation, humans could travel to the end of the universe (faster than the speed of light) in mere seconds or minutes. The interesting thing about the Warp Drive is that it doesn't break any of the laws of E=MC2, which means the laws of time and space are preserved while traveling faster than the speed of light.

The only problem with the Warp Drive? It could blow up anything that it runs through. If scientists can figure out a way to prevent the warp drive from blowing up things, then colonizing other planets will be possible within the next 100 years.

 

[rileyper]

Since the universe is still expanding from the big bang theory and Einstein's fact of relativity you may not exceed the speed of light, you'd never reach the Universe's edge; it would be like a dog chasing its tail.

also off topic but relevant video

 

[BaloneyPony]

That duck just said Satan

 

[MagicForDummies]

I am for colonizing other planets. Every planet is desolate and boring and its up to us to make it green or pollute the hell out of it. Besides, is it even possible to run out of space? Even with exponential growth it seems nigh improbable.

I don't see why we'd ever need to leave the universe... unless the universe actually runs out of resources.

 

[Serenity595]

Serenity you're thinking of Faster-Than-Light travel as if it were a speed.
If you could travel through the 4th dimension (wormhole, portal, black hole, whatever you call it) you dont need to use any energy or mass to travel distance, in which case the FTL time speeding doesnt matter since you dont even touch that part of speed in your journey.

The only problem with this theory is that it assumes that we could travel through the fourth dimension. I'm not saying the theory is wrong; rather, that it requires us to break through two barriers that may be impossible to break through at all in order for us to consider it as viable:
1) That these 4th dimension anomalies actually exist and
2) That we could physically move through them without breaking apart

Ok, first, the theory that the universe is expanding at the speed of light is becoming less popular. Instead, a new theory that the universe is continually contracting and expanding is becoming prevalent. Think of the universe as a rubber band that stretches and and becomes relaxed.

If this new theory is correct, that means that theoretically, humans could reach the end of the universe (even if it took millions of years). What's outside of the universe? Who knows.

Next: Traveling faster than the speed is light is actually possible, without breaking science, thanks to a loophole. It's called the Warp Drive, which is something that NASA is actually spending dollars on as viable research that will someday be possible. You can read about it here. If the Warp Drive proves to be a viable method of transportation, humans could travel to the end of the universe (faster than the speed of light) in mere seconds or minutes. The interesting thing about the Warp Drive is that it doesn't break any of the laws of E=MC2, which means the laws of time and space are preserved while traveling faster than the speed of light.

The only problem with the Warp Drive? It could blow up anything that it runs through. If scientists can figure out a way to prevent the warp drive from blowing up things, then colonizing other planets will be possible within the next 100 years.

What force causes the universe to contract in this theory? It couldn't be gravity.

I've heard about the warp drive and it does have merit. The huge barrier, though, is whether or not we can actually manipulate spacetime in order to warp. If the making of a warp drive were possible, however, I would assume it would take far more than a century to develop.

 

[Pyrhos]

Interesting question. If it were possible, then we would be living in a very different universe, totally different laws of physics. Also, if matter can reach the speed of light, it can and will fall apart and break down (It comes from a reason for the explanation for the Big Rip scenario). So no, I do not think it is possible to leave the universe, we would need FTL capabilities, and the our ship would fall apart, along with our bodies.

 

[TheGurw]

The only problem with this theory is that it assumes that we could travel through the fourth dimension. I'm not saying the theory is wrong; rather, that it requires us to break through two barriers that may be impossible to break through at all in order for us to consider it as viable:
1) That these 4th dimension anomalies actually exist and
2) That we could physically move through them without breaking apart



What force causes the universe to contract in this theory? It couldn't be gravity.

I've heard about the warp drive and it does have merit. The huge barrier, though, is whether or not we can actually manipulate spacetime in order to warp. If the making of a warp drive were possible, however, I would assume it would take far more than a century to develop.

It would be a lot faster if NASA's budget was increased from 0.48% of the total federal budget to a reasonable amount, like say 10% (an increase from $16B to $334B). It would also put the US far ahead of the rest of the world again when it comes to space exploration, and it's not like the US military can't take the hit (roughly half of its budget, currently sitting at 19% of the federal budget), since even after the cut the US would still be spending more than 3 times the amount on military purposes that its next closest competitor does (China, as it happens). With a global focus on demilitarization, the US would be able to kick-start a global revolution among the military powers to focus more on peacekeeping and helping with natural disasters as opposed to wars. The US economy currently relies far too heavily on the military-industrial complex, and I'm sure the reasonable people of this community will agree with me when I say that we would be far better off if all of the large military powers turned that economic system into a scientific-industrial complex. (I'm not crazy, I wouldn't suggest doing it all at once, a simple 1% change every year over the next 10 years would suffice.)

 

[JHawk]

It would be a lot faster if NASA's budget was increased from 0.48% of the total federal budget to a reasonable amount, like say 10% (an increase from $16B to $334B). It would also put the US far ahead of the rest of the world again when it comes to space exploration, and it's not like the US military can't take the hit (roughly half of its budget, currently sitting at 19% of the federal budget), since even after the cut the US would still be spending more than 3 times the amount on military purposes that its next closest competitor does (China, as it happens). With a global focus on demilitarization, the US would be able to kick-start a global revolution among the military powers to focus more on peacekeeping and helping with natural disasters as opposed to wars.

We all know that's not going to happen though.

 

[ConroD]

I'll write up an answer to this in depth when I'm sober, all I'll say for now is.. Going purely by the your points of reference and by (what i assume the text infers) what you think the fundamental laws of physic are, you don't really provide enough of a point or explanation of your question to even ask it.

Look in to M-theory, more-so string theory and multiverse theories that are dominating theoretical physics at the moment, you have based your question and arguments on laws of physics bound to our universe, when the latest evidence points toward fundamental laws being random and i quote 'unnatural'.. that is to say each universe is bound by it's own laws, and by simple reasoning we could understand them, or they could be beyond the comprehension of any sentient being that shares the space we occupy (if there is infact free-thinking species outside of our own solar system) due to an infinite pool of variables, of which we have no understanding (due to our understanding being limited by laws of our own universe, and no other).

^Strong tangent, but part of the reason why we can't leave our own universe, atleast by what we currently understand.

I'm pretty drunk atm, so there may be more flaws than viable points in all that^, but meh.. Bare with me :3.

Also, warp technology. I had no idea it could even be possible until patchy dropped a link in a thread last year and my mind was blown. P.s the speed of light isn't a constant, quantum foam and gravitational lensing are both interesting topics, look in to them because brb sleep and no more typing. ♥

Edit: Also, i haven't read any other post apart from OP so sorry if there's any repeats and stoofs.

 

[Phat_N_Masks]

So if we follow this logic, we can conclude that it would be impossible for you to reach the edge of the universe even if you could go faster than the speed of light because time itself would work against you. The faster you go beyond the speed of light, the faster you experience time. The faster you experience time, the longer the amount of time it would take for you to reach the edge of the universe.

I don't know much about physics, as I'm just getting into it, but i'll offer a thought.

The time dilation is caused by the near infinite mass caused by going faster than the speed of light right? I may have misinterpreted this wrong, but unless your spaceship is a light-second long and affects a huge part of space, couldn't you cover this distance of the universe expanding around you while time expands it? Also going into expansion, if a patch of space say as big as your spaceship were to expand exponentially because of the gravity from your mass, wouldn't something occur? If you keep expanding in that spot as big as your spaceship couldn't you "rip" space, much like ripping the center out of a tissue?

Oh yea, and the speed of light most likely isn't the fastest speed out there. We have just yet to find something faster and we cannot be so foolish to think that what we know now in the 21st century is the truth and will always be right.

 

[Mightythedj23]

So like, just got home from 6+ hour shift plus 7+ hours of school, starting from about 5 am to now, so really tired/too lazy to read every post except The opening, so here we go:

My answer? No. We can't reach the end of the universe, therefore we can't "leave the universe" for a number of reasons.

the first being the Expansion theory, which last i checked, is still under debate if it's solid fact or still a theory. Anyway it states that when the universe began, it expanded, no at a singular point, but EVERYWHERE; everything expanded; The Universe is still expanding even as we speak, so to even "reach the edge of the universe" if one such exists as it it still yet to be proven if there is an edge to the universe, we couldn't because it would basically be like, a dog chasing their own tail.


ConroD brought up the multi-verse theory; For those who dunno (i'm not even sure if you explained it ConroD) The multiverse theory states that there is an infinite number of universes that each universe's reality is any; Anything you can imagine/can't comprehend is quite possibly a universe, going by this theory.

Also, Light is not the fastest thing in the universe; Neutrinos are. They were created/studied in a lab, and were reportedly 1-6 times that of the speed of light; I talked with ConroD on this, and here's the basics of how fast that is:

If I were to send Him a text via using neutrinos, he would have received the text before i even started typing it.

So TL;DR, No, no, Neutrinos and A universe where the beings are living giant noses exists.

 

[ConroD]

Also, Light is not the fastest thing in the universe; Neutrinos are. They were created/studied in a lab, and were reportedly 1-6 times that of the speed of light; I talked with ConroD on this, and here's the basics of how fast that is:

If I were to send Him a text via using neutrinos, he would have received the text before i even started typing it.

So TL;DR, No, no, Neutrinos and A universe where the beings are living giant noses exists.

Not too long after that discovery and the discussion we had, the lead physicist in the experiment resigned and the data was deemed misinterpreted. Since then it's been a constant to-and-fro between observing and debunking. Wish they'd just figure it out already haha.