Could someone elaborate on this aphorism?

[gozpel]

To get the circumference you have to stop time at one moment.

It started -> At this point of time you have a center.

But, 1 millisecond later, your first correlation is incorrect, because everything moved and will continously do, until it wants to withdraw back.

I'm not a science guy, but I DO understand that you have a moving universe and IF you find the pinpoint of the blast, maybe only the higher scientists could measure it. But in my view, the starting point must have moved as well, so there will never "well not today" be a measure of that point.

Some old scientist, can't remember his name said: We "Milky Way" are only sitting in the gods leg, like a speck.

Our universe is just some dust, compared to the real universe which has no boundaries. I can't understand it, but I can imagine it. Universes within universes.

And don't forget, Milky Way will collide with Andromeda in about 1.5 billion years!

 

[Chiteng]

I see you haven't been here very long, so I'm going to explain one of the customs of this forum: When you make a claim that is obviously not based on your own firsthand observations or knowledge, it is entirely fair for other posters to ask you for a link to where you read/heard this claim. It's up to YOU to provide that link. Saying "google it" or the equivalent isn't good enough.

You made the claim. Now back it up.

and I see that you dont know me. Your conventions are NOT mine. and I do NOT take orders from anyone. You are free to ignore any post I make if that annoys you =)

 

[strijder20]

And don't forget, Milky Way will collide with Andromeda in about 1.5 billion years!

Really, it will?
And I used to think Earth would be gone within 4 billion years, when the sun will become a red giant...

 

[Kyriakos]

Thing is though, if the universe is vast, but not infinite, then given enough time the same objects will begin appearing again.
And i really cannot grasp the edge of a universe. I mean, in the material world, every form is seperated from other forms by space or the borders between them. In a universe you can only have oneness it would seem, thus if it is not infinite in space then the same planets, and people, will keep appearing after all the variations of matter have reached an ending. Obiously those variations are practically infinite, but not in reality infinite.

 

[strijder20]

Thing is though, if the universe is vast, but not infinite, then given enough time the same objects will begin appearing again.

If the universe keeps expanding, matter will become less and less densily concentrated and the likelihood of anything appearing is going to plummet, though.

And i really cannot grasp the edge of a universe. I mean, in the material world, every form is seperated from other forms by space or the borders between them. In a universe you can only have oneness it would seem, thus if it is not infinite in space then the same planets, and people, will keep appearing after all the variations of matter have reached an ending. Obiously those variations are practically infinite, but not in reality infinite.

I thought the border of the universe was the collection of all the farthest points light has reached.

 

[Kyriakos]

If the universe keeps expanding, matter will become less and less densily concentrated and the likelihood of anything appearing is going to plummet, though.

I thought the border of the universe was the collection of all the farthest points light has reached.

This is a model though, maybe matter does not become less concentrated at the "edge" because there is no edge. To quote some literary piece: "The universe was not infinite, but repeating".
This particular idea (which i am not sure if modern physics cover much, or negate) seems to at least give a solution to the problem of there being an "edge" of the universe: in it it is supposed that the number of variables is limited, but after they all have been ultilised in all astronomical numbers of association, they start repeating themselves, and effectively you have something not really infinite, but repeating, like a circle has no edge although it is a basic geometrical 2d form which you can draw, making a move of infinity yourself.

 

[Old Hippy]

Thing is though, if the universe is vast, but not infinite, then given enough time the same objects will begin appearing again.
And i really cannot grasp the edge of a universe. I mean, in the material world, every form is seperated from other forms by space or the borders between them. In a universe you can only have oneness it would seem, thus if it is not infinite in space then the same planets, and people, will keep appearing after all the variations of matter have reached an ending. Obiously those variations are practically infinite, but not in reality infinite.

soundes to me like the same process that happens in CFC OT...

 

[Kyriakos]

soundes to me like the same process that happens in CFC OT...

For the first couple of years people tend to think all threads are novel. Then they begin noticing the periodical nature of the topics.

 

[Ayn Rand]

What the hell is the "universe" expanding into?!

It doesn't need to expand into anything because there is no space outside the Universe. It's expanding relative to its own component parts, but is not displacing any other space-based medium in expanding.


edit: as for the meaning of the aphorism, its function is non-identification. Identifying the properties of an object or system, then claiming that it can exist without those properties, is the basis of Platonic mysticism.