What could be outside the observable universe? What could be

>>19269234
space whales

>>19269234
more universe. what the hell else could there be, and why does it matter, we probly wont get outside the galaxy for 1000 years, what about the nearest star, or solar system?

>>19269251
114 years at light speed to the nearest star I think. Outside of the galaxy is actually tens of thousands of years.

>>19269234
It's creation, once you become God you can play with it.

I think I am gangstalked

More universe.
Unimaginably more universe.

>>19269263
114 years at light speed to the nearest star? Nigger, proxima centauri is 4.25 light years from us.

>>19269264
You should probably kill yourself, that stops it.

>>19269275
Sir, isn't the nearest star our fucking sun?

>>19269285
I knew you couldn't resist pulling this exact comment from your ass.

You know full well that by nearest star I meant the nearest star to the sun, you impotent cockgoblin, you.

>>19269234
>What could be outside the observable universe?
The exact same shit we see in the observable. Why do you think it would be different just because we can't see it?

There is no dead space, there is no void. There are more stars, more nebulae, more galaxies, more planets, more of the exact same shit we see here - just out of sight from this spot.

>>19269263
Nearest star is about 4.5 light years away. The known exoplanet with the best chance for being habitable is approximately 12 light years away.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nearest_terrestrial_exoplanet_candidates

lame

Not even any image replies. Try harder, faggots.

>>19269275
>>19269302
Fuck I with our current tech.
I'm so used to sci-fi and ftl theories I fucked up.

Sorry my dudes

>>19269305
No worries. It's taking us more than 50 years to go .006% of a single light year (54.6 million km - the shortest distance from Earth to Mars). The tiny number of light years is deceptive to how far that actually is.

OP, were you meaning to ask what's outside of the actual universe? In that picture, the grey circle is boundary of the observable universe with all the the black circle being the whole universe.

Controversial Statement: I believe that the Milky Way Galaxy IS the Universe and all other Observable Galaxies are, themselves, other Universes.

>>19269234
'''fate'''
later time exists outside of the Universe

>>19269234
I imagine it either loops back on itself, or it is generated as it is observed like a videogame.

>>19269285
durr hurr

>>19269303
you want satellite images, telescope cgis?? what kind of pics you want?

>>19269302
you get the idea, uhm what about the tech to get there, afraid not try again tho

>>19269333
technology to do this isnt in our grasp, think before you type, this isnt science fiction

>>19269400
not if we travel at the speed of light as these guys think we can

We are in a old ass Macintosh

>>19269234
it probably loops back around somehow.
or simulation

Surely something cannot go on forever /x/

If the universe is constantly expanding then it must be expanding into something.

What does that something look like?

I need Microsoft paint artists renditions asap

I thought there was some sort of nuclear option to travel and 0.4% the speed of light but the option was banned for some reason.

0.4% or whatever it was seems pretty fucking fast, couldn't we send some dudes on suicide missions to see whats going on?

Our 'universe' is probably a very small part of a much larger structure, but as to what that might look like I couldn't even imagine.

Idk
More universe
I don't think the true creator of the universe is there
I believe he/she/it (guessing here) may be in the star constellation Orion
A lot of ancient structures form that constellation or its belt
Idk
God could be anywhere

i always thought of it as our solar system/universe to be like atoms if u will for some thing else some thing bigger.

Aliuns

Proof god exists. It's a shame we can never see it.

>>19269251
T. Atheist

>>19269409
>or it is generated as it is observed like a videogame
what makes you think this

>>19269234
It's just unobservable currently. More pretty stars that're constantly expanding. Check out google sky and snoop around, it's very similar to what's already seen

>>19270234
Just pause life, and set the render distance up. It'll cost us a few fps but it'll be worth it

>>19270234
Not him, but if we are just fucking around here it makes some sense, but the simulation theory is just a replacement for classical religion.

Anyway if we are in a simulation it fits a few of the things we do here in our simulations.

Space is a barrier or a kill field for us to stop us from exploring too far, instead of return to the play area flashing we die before we can get anywhere.

And to answer your question directly, why would the simulation masters use culling?

Because no matter what, no matter the resources you have it's always easier to render less of it right?.

Another example would be that atoms act the same as the placeholders we use, we can't make everything in video games out of tiny detailed atoms so we use polygons, in the "real world" it may be way more intricate than atoms and they are just using them for the sake of saving resources

Anyway everything I just wrote didn't make any sense and I sure hope you didn't read it.

>>19269240
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DPhFpZW5a8

Additional Instances of the Multiverse.

>>19269452
Technology to do what? Travel to another star? Sure it is, just not with living passengers, and not in any timespan that is useful for humans. Voyager will probably reach a star eventually.

>>19269460
Even traveling the speed of light will not get us beyond the observable universe, if Expansion is true, that is.

When I was little I recall seeing a show about this topic on PBS. Basically, they were saying that as you go further and further space just becomes pure black. Devoid of matter and endless, just waiting for the matter of the universe to expand into it.
That's always the theory that made sense to me, and the only problem is that our brains simply can not fully comprehend the concept of infinite.
Now however it has become fashionable to compare the universe to an inflated balloon. I just think that's lacking in terms of an explanation because a balloon still has an edge.
Yes, I know I'm missing the point of the balloon theory to a degree and we can go round and round about it but I just don't like that theory.

>>19270431
>Basically, they were saying that as you go further and further space just becomes pure black. Devoid of matter and endless, just waiting for the matter of the universe to expand into it.

Space was created in the Big Bang, as was all the matter. Did they explain how space managed to get out there before the matter contained therein? Do you remember any names or show titles? Are you aware of how this contradicts the current understanding of BB+Expansion (I ask so I don't waste time trying to explain it to you if you already know).

>>19269366
That's dumb, you're bumb for thinking that. 0/10

>>19270533
>you're bumb for thinking tha

funny how allways people who reply with this kind of message allways mistype "dumb" or "stupid"

Other 3rd dimensional universes. Each of them is a 4th dimensional universe's own collection of particles, such as our own nano particles.

>>19270130
According to the current laws of the known universe, three dimensional space should look like a doughnut-shaped balloon. Imagine having a fairly inflated version of that balloon. Now, put a grid of 3x3 dots on ir. If you inflate the balloon further, each dot gets father apart at the same rate, relative to each other. It's not as if the universe is growing like a patch of grass on fresh dirt, but more that the space in between stuff is getting bigger for someone.

>>19270135
It's called project Orion, and was theoretical at best. It involves literally riding around on the blast wave of a nuclear explosion. You'd need to design a vehicle capable of surviving several thousand nuclear blasts, something we can't even manage on earth, much less in orbit.

It also creates a giant exhaust trail of radioactive crap. Most people don't want that shit falling from the sky.

>>19270505
Yeah you don't have to explain, I get it. I just don't like it. It feels inelegant to me.

Anyway, that show was so long ago I don't remember much about it. I've spent time looking for it too because obviously seeing an old show with outdated theories can be fun in a morbid curiosity way.

File: roflcopter-2.jpg (29KB, 1350x778px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 1350x778px

>>19270505

>>19269234
What you can't yet read using your hability to consume Information, the universe is limitless, perception is what is limited

>>19269234
Just a fuck ton more void and a fuck ton more space shit
>A giant glass wall revealing the universes true creator?
Think of the universe like the surface of an inflated balloon, if you go in one direction long enough you'll end up back where you started, and as space (the balloon) expands it takes longer to complete the journey

>>19270533
Any counter-arguements to it?

>>19270623
>if you go in one direction long enough you'll end up back where you started
That's exactly the part of that theory that I feel falls short. That's fine for a finite object like a planet.

>>19270653
the definition of the word universe

File: 1454393631408.jpg (604KB, 2048x2924px) Image search: [Google]

604KB, 2048x2924px

Think of the universe, existance made up of these vibrations, oscillations.
Imagine the waves of magnetism, and its polarity.

Now think of black holes.

Now try to conceptualize that what it beyond the observable universe is in comprehensible,
Becuase the edge of the universe has infinite polarity, infinite resistance, so that if you were to travel to the very edge of it you would be repelled or just skid along the surface of the barrier.

There is no amount of energy save all the energy in the universe to break past this barrier. Which would be pointless becuase the universe would be destroyed once the barrier is breached.

Beyond the barrier is simply incomprehensible becuase what ever is beyond this universe simply cannot be apprehended in any sense of the word, becuase the barrier keeps all that is known and can be known within its confines.

>>19270598

Nice ROFLcopter

>>19270668
So you're saying that there can't be a multiverse because the English word "universe" exists.

Can I have that in actual math, please?

>>19270275
i read it and enjoyed your contribution to the thread :)

>>19269234
Death and nothingness. Pure black matter.

What are the chances that the universe is shrinking towards us? It could take billions of years until we'll find out.

>>19270275
People believe in simulation theory becuase science is based on models
When the quantum post mosernist approach became more and more valid we started to question if this reality itself is a model.

Science has also come to a point where we have to use machines to take precise measurements or detect things beyond what our senses can detect. Which enforces a need for codepence in science. Which lead us to ask if this reality is dependant on something else.

>>19269234
It's more universe.. the observable part is simply the fact that our observing selves are where we are in space. If we were billions of light-years to the right or left, etc.- that observable universe bubble would simply shift to be centered at where we were now located. It's because conscious observers are fractal-like "discharges" of black holes. We pop into and out of existence at an infinitesimal rate in a seemingly frozen in time universe- a metaphor to the bubbles boiling off of the bottom of the pot of water on a stove, except consciousness bubbles and the stove is black holes.

>>19271041
This is where chaos theory points, you cannot explain conscious human culture and all the madness and infinite complexity within our minds without our minds being black hole fractals.