Can you mark the location of the inner-core-point of this universe ?

[TagliatelliMonster]

Taking this into consideration the place which is right in front of your eyes is the center of the universe.

Correction: the center of the observable universe.

But, as the center point is thin/subtle enough to look with human physical eyes. Which is best possible way to see it ?

There is no "seeing". There is only logic.
You factually stand at the center of the observable universe as you observe it. By necessity.
You can only see objects upto a distance of 13.7 billion lightyears in all directions. Not because there is nothing beyond that horizon. Rather because light beyond that simply didn't have the time to reach us.

If you can only see X lightyears in all directions, then wherever you are, you will always stand at the center of that observable bubble with a radius of X lightyears.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

First of all, to spread things/stars out --- there needs to be an empty-space. Therefore, this empty-space was created even before this big bang happened.

The big bang is what creates space continuously, by expansion.
The universe = space.

What do you think is the centre of this empty-space ?

Impossible to tell.
And every observer stands at the center of his own observable universe bubble, with a radius of 13.7 billion lightyears.

 

[tayla]

Considering this universe a "Big-Ball".
And, perhaps there's a possibility that this universe may have began from this inner-core-point and spread all around.

Can you mark the location of the inner-core-point of this universe ?

I have watched many videos of well-known physicists about the origins of the universe. There are various ideas. I have no reason to choose one until someone provides enough evidence. I doubt they can ever learn about certain questions.

 

[joelr]

First of all, to spread things/stars out --- there needs to be an empty-space. Therefore, this empty-space was created even before this big bang happened.

What do you think is the centre of this empty-space ?

Our "space" is spacetime and that is what is expanding. It does not need empty space to expand into. It could be expanding into more spacetime or something we do not understand.

It expands equally in all locations but on a local scale we do not notice it because the expansion is very small. Local galaxies are actually headed towards us. Over vast distances the expansion accumulates so if you look 6 billion light years away the expansion is greater. At 10 billion light years it's greater because each small amount of expansion in between adds up. But if you went to a location 10 billion years away then you could also consider yourself at the center there as well.
At any location the regions the farthest away will be expanding the fastest. So from Earth a galaxy 10 billion light years away is expanding fast while our local galaxies are barely expanding away from us.
If we went 10 billion light years away to that distant spot then those local galaxies would be barely expanding but Earth would now be expanding away very fast.
So all locations become the center.

Spacetime is made up of quantum fields which have energy disturbances that happen far too fast to observe at the quantum scale around 10^-16.
When energy is added to any field you can create the particle associated with the field. Without the energy/particle the fields do not interact with anything.
Around 10^-34 cosmic strings might exist or gravitons but the laws of quantum physics begin to take over spacetime at that scale and there is no meaningful existence beyond this. Unless a new physics takes over.

But to "see" something you have to bounce a photon off it and have it hit your eye. Objects smaller than a photon cannot be seen anymore. Electron microscopes can provide pictures of things a bit smaller but that is the limit of "seeing" in that sense.
Dark matter would also be invisible

 

[chinu]

Our "space" is spacetime and that is what is expanding. It does not need empty space to expand into. It could be expanding into more spacetime or something we do not understand.

It expands equally in all locations but on a local scale we do not notice it because the expansion is very small. Local galaxies are actually headed towards us. Over vast distances the expansion accumulates so if you look 6 billion light years away the expansion is greater. At 10 billion light years it's greater because each small amount of expansion in between adds up. But if you went to a location 10 billion years away then you could also consider yourself at the center there as well.
At any location the regions the farthest away will be expanding the fastest. So from Earth a galaxy 10 billion light years away is expanding fast while our local galaxies are barely expanding away from us.
If we went 10 billion light years away to that distant spot then those local galaxies would be barely expanding but Earth would now be expanding away very fast.
So all locations become the center.

Spacetime is made up of quantum fields which have energy disturbances that happen far too fast to observe at the quantum scale around 10^-16.
When energy is added to any field you can create the particle associated with the field. Without the energy/particle the fields do not interact with anything.
Around 10^-34 cosmic strings might exist or gravitons but the laws of quantum physics begin to take over spacetime at that scale and there is no meaningful existence beyond this. Unless a new physics takes over.

Okay.

But to "see" something you have to bounce a photon off it and have it hit your eye. Objects smaller than a photon cannot be seen anymore. Electron microscopes can provide pictures of things a bit smaller but that is the limit of "seeing" in that sense. Dark matter would also be invisible

We all dream tonight. We see objects/things in dreams.

Do humans have inner eyes ? what you think about this ?

 

[joelr]

We all dream tonight. We see objects/things in dreams.

Do humans have inner eyes ? what you think about this ?

When a photon hits your eye that is just the beginning. There are all sorts of electrical processes, nerves, dendrons and neural pathways that happen and they create an image in your mind. But your brain makes images without photons hitting your eye. If you daydream very intently you almost see the image. With a hallucination you do see the image. So we know our brain creates images and while we sleep it's very reasonable to assume the brain creates these dream images as well.
So adding the idea of an inner eye seeing other dimensions could be redundant. The brain can create scenes without input from an inner dimension.
Is there other dimensions we can access in altered states or whatever? Maybe, I don't know?
But dreams and drug experiences don't have to suggest alternate dimensions.

Sure it would be cool. On the Atheist Experience youtube show last Sunday a caller was proposing some experiments to do with DMT to see if they really communicate with beings. All we can do is try to look for evidence and confirmation.

 

[chinu]

When a photon hits your eye that is just the beginning. There are all sorts of electrical processes, nerves, dendrons and neural pathways that happen and they create an image in your mind. But your brain makes images without photons hitting your eye. If you daydream very intently you almost see the image. With a hallucination you do see the image. So we know our brain creates images and while we sleep it's very reasonable to assume the brain creates these dream images as well.
So adding the idea of an inner eye seeing other dimensions could be redundant. The brain can create scenes without input from an inner dimension.
Is there other dimensions we can access in altered states or whatever? Maybe, I don't know?
But dreams and drug experiences don't have to suggest alternate dimensions.

Sure it would be cool. On the Atheist Experience youtube show last Sunday a caller was proposing some experiments to do with DMT to see if they really communicate with beings. All we can do is try to look for evidence and confirmation.

Source # Do blind people dream in visual images?
Evidence suggests that people blind since birth do indeed dream in images, but we do not know exactly what they see.

How possible ?

 

[joelr]

Source # Do blind people dream in visual images?
Evidence suggests that people blind since birth do indeed dream in images, but we do not know exactly what they see.

How possible ?

It's the same answer really. Maybe consciousness can tune in to other dimensions and exists outside the physical brain and all that. But a more mundane answer also could fit. In other words blind people still have the same highly evolved brains that fire electrical impulses with or without sight. Even without sight the image producing parts of the brain could still create blobs of light like described in the article. It's not a wild leap to have that be possible.

The article is saying if a person never develops the actual skill of seeing and processing images even in dreams they just seem to see blobs of light. This makes me lean more towards the physical brain being more important and seems to lean away from the idea that we have this fully separate consciousness beyond the brain that can travel to other dimensions and such. I would be interested to see what a DMT trip would be like for a person who has never seen.

 

[Bourne]

Considering this universe a "Big-Ball".
And, perhaps there's a possibility that this universe may have began from this inner-core-point and spread all around.

Can you mark the location of the inner-core-point of this universe ?

No, and if the big bang were real one could retrace all mass to the center or zero point.

 

[Bourne]

Source # Do blind people dream in visual images?
Evidence suggests that people blind since birth do indeed dream in images, but we do not know exactly what they see.

How possible ?

Epigenetics from the parents. Google the mouse and cherry blossom experement

 

[gnostic]

Considering this universe a "Big-Ball".
And, perhaps there's a possibility that this universe may have began from this inner-core-point and spread all around.

Can you mark the location of the inner-core-point of this universe ?

There are no “inner-core-point” in the universe.

There is no “centre” of the universe.

When astrophysicists and the Big Bang cosmologists talk of universe’s expansion, the universe was once very dense and infinitely hot, so many people often misunderstand this, thinking that there might be a centre.

There aren’t any centre.

Imagine a balloon completely deflated, and imagine the surface of that ballon is the entire universe at the beginning...EVERYTHING. The volume is smaller, and so is the surface area.

When you start blowing into balloon, it is still same balloon...I didn’t replace the balloon with a different balloon...except that it is expanding, the volume of balloon have expanded, and so have the surface area of the balloon.

The balloon is the same balloon. The only differences are, the balloon was deflated (thus initial state), so the surface area of balloon is small, but when the balloon was increasingly inflated, the balloon expand, stretching the balloon and increasing the surface area.

The universe is the same universe whether it be as singularity (initial state), or in its current state with all its galaxies, stars, planets, etc.

But of course, the universe is much complex than the balloon. Unlike the balloon, the universe is still expanding after 13.8 billion years.

No one know if the universe will always continue to expand, or that universe will eventually start contracting. No one know.

My point is that there are no centre of the universe and no inner-core-point, because everything in the universe are part of the universe.

 

[MNoBody]

kind of reminds me of the floating man problem

 

[Bourne]

There are no “inner-core-point” in the universe.

There is no “centre” of the universe.

When astrophysicists and the Big Bang cosmologists talk of universe’s expansion, the universe was once very dense and infinitely hot, so many people often misunderstand this, thinking that there might be a centre.

There aren’t any centre.

Imagine a balloon completely deflated, and imagine the surface of that ballon is the entire universe at the beginning...EVERYTHING. The volume is smaller, and so is the surface area.

When you start blowing into balloon, it is still same balloon...I didn’t replace the balloon with a different balloon...except that it is expanding, the volume of balloon have expanded, and so have the surface area of the balloon.

The balloon is the same balloon. The only differences are, the balloon was deflated (thus initial state), so the surface area of balloon is small, but when the balloon was increasingly inflated, the balloon expand, stretching the balloon and increasing the surface area.

The universe is the same universe whether it be as singularity (initial state), or in its current state with all its galaxies, stars, planets, etc.

But of course, the universe is much complex than the balloon. Unlike the balloon, the universe is still expanding after 13.8 billion years.

No one know if the universe will always continue to expand, or that universe will eventually start contracting. No one know.

My point is that there are no centre of the universe and no inner-core-point, because everything in the universe are part of the universe.

So where did the big bang happen if not at the beginning which would logically be the center

Or does logic not matter

 

[MNoBody]

only a finite universe would have a center

 

[Bourne]

only a finite universe would have a center

Why would a cyclical universe not have center

 

[MNoBody]

Why would a cyclical universe not have center

could have expanded that idea a bit more I suppose...
an infinite universe would not have a center, since it is infinite.
boundaries imply a circle ideally which then has a center, but where does one begin in an infinite universe [which is probably a misnomer,so we can call it a working title]

 

[Bourne]

could have expanded that idea a bit more I suppose...
an infinite universe would not have a center, since it is infinite.
boundaries imply a circle ideally which then has a center, but where does one begin in an infinite universe [which is probably a misnomer,so we can call it a working title]

The mass in the universe is not infinite as it has been measured.

 

[MNoBody]

The mass in the universe is not infinite as it has been measured.

ok, so how much then.....?
Gee whiz..... no matter what they have said on the matter, wait a while and they will find out they were off, yet again.

 

[Bourne]

ok, so how much then.....?
Gee whiz..... no matter what they have said on the matter, wait a while and they will find out they were off, yet again.

The measurements do not matter as the void that matter expands into may already be used up. We can not know from here as everything we see is billions of years old

 

[MNoBody]

The measurements do not matter as the void that matter expands into may already be used up. We can not know from here as everything we see is billions of years old

the limitations of our senses [technology] do not define the boundaries of the phenomenology, only the boundaries of our current awareness.