Assuming the universe is 13.7 billion years old

>>8873745

There's nothing to see beyond the edge of the observable universe. There's probably stuff there; but the universe isn't old enough for its light to have reached us.


The radius of the observable universe is actually 46.5 billion light years. I know it seems like it should be 13.7 billion light years but the expansion of the universe has stretched things out.

>>8873745
There wouldn't be absolutely fucking nothing.

And if we ever find something beyond that, then we have to rewrite fucking history and all research we have made for years all over again.

>>8873745
If we did this, we'd see god creating the universe

>>8873745
time existed before the big bang, you can't be looking before time.

>>8873745
Is it a total vacuum, does space even exist beyond that or do we hit an invisible wall?

>>8873745
>the universe has an origin

Can something come out of nothing?

>>8873778
>There's nothing to see beyond the edge of the observable universe
https://www.universetoday.com/83167/universe-could-be-250-times-bigger-than-what-is-observable/

>>8873778
what if we were a planet thats just on the edge of the universe and not in the middle of it?

>>8873745

You can't see past the big bang, if there is anything "before" we have no access to it.

>>8873980
>we have no access to it.
why can't we just walk out to it?

>>8873963
Every planet is in the center of it's own observable universe. There can be planets beyond the edge of our observable universe which have not yet been able to see light from our sun and vice versa.

>>8874139
then shouldn't new stars be popping into view every now and then?

As Terance McKenna used to say, if you are willing to believe the big bang theory, then there aren't many things in the world you aren't willing to believe. Using that logic, of course you would be, why not.

>>8874180

Yes for some but they don't actually pop in to view, you need something like the JWST to see it, there are also stars that are so far away that the space between them and us is expanding faster than the speed of light and thus we will never be able to see.

>>8874180
Because of expansion it's the opposite, we're losing view of stuff at the edge all the time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zO2vfYNaIbk

File: 800px-Eagle_nebula_pillars.jpg (73KB, 800x789px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 800x789px

>>8874180
>>8874203
Stars don't just pop into view from nothing though. Hydrogen clouds give off light and it takes billions of years for those to pull together into stars. The light from the hydrogen clouds reaches us before the light from the star because it came first. If you look close to the edge of the observable universe you can see the first hydrogen clouds forming; then if you stare at those for a few billion years you might see a star gradually taking shape.

>>8873953

I don't know, back in my high school Algebra days I was thinking to myself 0 = -1 + 1
1 = Matter
-1 = Anti-matter