How much of the universe is visible to us? 90%?95%?

>>7647513
We don't know

If the universe is infinite, 0%

The observable universe is visible to us. We don't know what is beyond the observable universe because we can't observe it.

File: image (55).jpg (9KB, 247x247px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 247x247px

>>7647513

If we use a tortograph, the evidence and the data shows that we do exist and not that we don't.

:\

daily reminder that the earth is the center of the observable universe

>>7647560
SIMPLY EPIC

>>7647560
Except it is generally accepted that the universe is homogeneous and isotropic, leading to no favorable center of the universe.

That's a good question we probably barely scratch the surface of what's visible to our little ape brains and fish eyes. To vast to perceive

>>7647577
No, he's entirely correct, the earth is at the exact center of the observable universe. Learn some physics.

>>7647593
>Learn some physics.
logic*

>>7647595
Physics and logic. Mostly physics. The Earth is at the center of the observable universe because light can only travel so fast, so our observable universe is a growing sphere around the earth. That's physics, and logic. Don't get all autistic on me.

Scientists have found that around 4% of the universe is visible and next year around 0.001% will be visible.

>>7647519
Umm, what. You realize the universe is continuously expanding and speeding up in expansion. It will be impossible to view anywhere near 90% of the universe given what we have accomplished so far. We can view, most likely, less than 3%.

>>7647513
0%

Just saw it on 60 minutes. It's 5%

>>7647513

120%

>>7647548
Really?
You're in a boat in the middle of the pacific ocean, just water in every direction all the way to the horizon.
You actually think that it's just a coincidence that you're in the center of it all and the water must end at the horizon?

>>7647758
But that's what light does. We see stars and the space around us as light travels towards our position, meaning that from our perspective, yes, we are the center of our universe.

>>7647694
WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING TO HAPPEN NEXT YEAR THAT BLOCKS OUT 99.975% OF WHAT WE CAN SEE?

File: 11973751_p0.jpg (86KB, 466x650px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 466x650px

>>7647670
There is an aspect of physics involved that expands the implication of the question, but I more meant that this can be resolved only with basic logic and a complete ignorance of the field of physics as a whole.

If you're on the outside of a sphere, obviously you're the center of the whole of your observations. Don't even need to think about having a finite resolution by which you can observe in any direction, nor redshifting or acceleration of space's expansion.

It might have sounded pedantic, or obnoxious, but this is something that bothers the living fuck right out of me. It's a major problem for our entire species that people would rather reserve forming any working conclusions simply because they aren't part of a field or don't have an authority figure to ask. It's as bad as skimming the intro to a wiki article and assuming you're an expert, both are a failure of the capacity to use available information and intelligently control for error or deficits in that information.

Broken and thensome.

I think someone used the Kepler data and found that the observable universe is at most 1/250 of the universe, with no lower bound. So, we can see at best 0.4% of the universe and at worst, an infinitesimal portion (i.e. 0%) of the universe.

x/unknown = unknown

>>7647767
Fucking urbanization.

>>7647879
Dang, that got real.

>>7647769
I get ya, good point.

>>7647761
swoosh