The universe is round, please give the most convincing answer, is it okay?

The universe was formed 25 billion years ago. The matter in the big ** moves in all directions. And because of the gravitational force, it is said that the universe is round.

The universe is not a round ......

Because the circle is a two-dimensional figure, and the universe obviously cannot be described in terms of circles.

In addition, the universe has another characteristic, which is "finite and unbounded". In other words, if the three-dimensional space of the universe is described as a sphere, it can be said that the universe is a sphere, but this is derived by compressing the three-dimensional space to two dimensions, so in fact the universe cannot be a sphere.

In fact, current research believes that the universe should be a five-dimensional space, and of course, we cannot use our traditional geometric methods to describe the shape of the universe

The universe is round! The circle here is not two-dimensional, so it should be a three-dimensional membrane observed by a 4-dimensional observer. Just as we are a three-dimensional observer, we call it a circle in two dimensions. Two points that are far apart in 3D may appear close to a 4D observer.

In this way, from the first connected universe, it is a three-dimensional plane of a four-dimensional sphere, and from the open universe it is a three-dimensional membrane as seen by a four-dimensional observer.

Others, I think it's basically meaningless!

You can say that the solar system is round, the Milky Way is round, and the total galaxy is round. But the universe is round, and I'm afraid few people dare to say it.

I can't imagine that there must be a space for the universe, and what would this space look like?

Just look outside the universe and find out.

I advise you not to think about it, you will go crazy.........There are so many questions for us to answer, leave those to the astronomers.........

We can do the same, but who can prove it?

Who proved that the Nobel was not yet taken by him

The universe is not round, it is a vast void, when the big ** is generated, if the universe is round and there are edges, there will be stars, it is a sudden new, then we have not found the dawn so far, if it is not a new one, or black, then it is not the edge of the universe is boundless.

The universe was corrected 25 billion years ago, and the great ** was generated. The matter in the big ** moves in all directions. I think the universe is boundless. If it's not right, please point it out, thank you.

I dare to say that the universe is round, and that everything has to be guessed and then demonstrated?

Because the universe is boundless! And that's all humanity sees! So it's round!

The universe is not infinite and there is a space to accommodate the universe.

The universe is infinite, boundless, and certainly not round.

The universe is boundless.

The universe is boundless, so how can it have shapes?

What about 13.7 billion years ago, let's say 14 billion years ago? Did it exist 14 billion years ago?

First of all, to understand the concept of the universe, we call the sum of all matter, energy, space and time, including our world, the universe, that is to say, the concept of time is defined on our universe, and with our universe there will be time, if our universe does not exist, obviously there is no time.

According to Hawking's theory, our universe was born 13.7 billion years ago, that is to say, our universe appeared 13.7 billion years ago, and according to the above statement, we can know that time also appeared 13.7 billion years ago; How can we say that there was no universe before 13.7 billion years ago, and therefore no time, since there was no time? Not to mention 14 billion years ago.

So, 13.7 billion years ago is the beginning of time, at least the beginning of time in our universe. As for whether there are other universes, and if so, what is the time of the other universes? None of this has anything to do with us, we exist in this universe, and even if there are other universes we can't relate to them (which is obvious by the definition of the universe).

So we can say that there was no time before 13.7 billion years, and therefore there was no such thing as 13.7 billion years ago.

Our so-called four-dimensional universe is composed of space-time, of course, it does not deny the existence of multidimensional space, there are three conjectures: 1. The universe is a one-off, that is, the universe began to expand 13.7 billion years ago, and there is no limit, 2. The universe is reciprocating, and after expanding to the extreme, it will shrink to a point the size of a peanut and then expand again. 3. After the universe expands, it will return to the limit, and after the contraction, it will be gone, and I personally think it is the second conjecture.

The concepts of before and after are abstractions of the present universe, and if there is no present universe, there is no time and space, so there is no concept of before and outside.

That's because 13.7 billion years ago, time was meaningless, and when it was big, it was like reshuffling everything. And the so-called time is i because we have to remember how long it has been experienced. It is a yardstick for our current universe.

It doesn't involve any of the previous ones. Time is just a yardstick in this universe now. Maybe the previous one didn't have this ruler.

There is no universe either.

In general, the cosmic greatness is the destruction of the previous world. The beginning of our world. And time is for us. So not 13.7 billion years ago.

Hawking can only start his research from the moment when all the stars and matter are now (the so-called big **), because Western philosophy has failed to break through the ideological barrier of "nothing is infinite" and has handed over the problem to theology.

So Hawking should say: My doctrine or thought is limited to 13.7 billion years.

Just like "Zhuangzi Tianxia" said: Outside the Liuhe, the saint exists and does not care. ＂

There's a big logical problem here. When the universe was in the big **, it took 13.7 billion years to have what we don't understand it that way, and the light 13.7 billion light years ago only reached the earth after this period of time

The so-called 13.7 billion years ago was a zero-dimensional space! That is, meaningless! Since it is meaningless, it is nothing, (including matter, dark matter, dark energy, antimatter and immaterial)!

You should explore why there is no such thing as a "starting point" before 137!

Who can be sure that the age of the universe is 13.7 billion years, and Hawking is only an approximate calculation, unless he comes up with actual proof, I think Hawking's sentence means like your mother gave birth to you, you call it the universe, is your mother still called the universe? Your mother conceived you 20 years ago, and what were you twenty years ago? Nothing is nothing.

You can search the encyclopedia"Universe"It says that there are many small universes in a big universe, and each place in each universe has different energy, there is positive energy, there is dark energy, and there is no energy. Just like math has positives, negatives, and zeros.

So yin and yang complement each other, energy is balanced, relative stillness, and reaches eternity, science does not say that. It is not said that there are only two universes, yin and yang. Science simply says that energy in the big universe will be transferred, expanded, and consumed between many small universes.

The big ** of the universe is the collision between any two universes, resulting in the destruction of the original two universes and creating a new cosmic cycle. Maybe one day it collides with another universe** and creates a new cycle.

So energy has always existed, and the state of matter in the universe has existed. When the energy is consumed, the state of matter in the universe does not exist. There is no more water, no light, no more living things, etc.

But the universe is space, and the universe is time, if the space of the universe does not exist, and time exists eternal. The universe would exist in an immaterial state, such as space without water, without light, and without living things. The existence and non-existence of material energy is a theory of relativity.

Because a single microbial spore can slowly evolve into a larger organism, and eventually everything on Earth exists. And species will become extinct. So everything in the universe is evolving between existence and disappearance.

Therefore, the eternity of the universe is not the balance of energy, but whether there is energy or no energy, existence or disappearance, the literal meaning of the universe is infinite space, and the literal meaning of the universe is infinite time, which together is the three-dimensional space that exists or does not exist, and with the addition of the time axis, it is the eternal universe. The meaning of the word universe created by the ancients is what Einstein later called time and space.

In 1929, the American Edwin Hubble observed the spectral redshift of distant galaxies and came to the conclusion that the universe is expanding, and the farther away from us, the faster the galaxies leave us, and thus obtained a theory, that is, the grand cosmology.

After that, according to this theory, the universe must have been created by a point and began to expand. This point is the starting point or occurrence point of the universe. At present, people have figured out almost everything after 10 -43 seconds after the occurrence of the universe, but the occurrence of the universe itself, that is, why the universe is large, has not yet been figured out.

As a result, various theories and hypotheses have been formed.

At present, the latest hypothesis or theory is to combine the universe with the theory of quantum vacuum, and it is believed that the instability of the quantum vacuum (called Minkowski vacuum) leads to the materialization of vacuum energy and the formation of our existing universe. When a quantum vacuum evolves into a Minkowski vacuum, it can only occur at one point. According to the quantum vacuum theory, the energy density of vacuum zero-point energy can reach 10 94 g cm3, which is much higher than the highest energy density of 10 13 g cm 3 (that is, the energy density of the atomic nucleus), and a very small range of vacuum energy is enough to form our universe.

Regarding the generation of matter in the big **, the theory of non-conservation of cosmic symmetry proposed by Tsung-Dao Lee and Yang Chen-ning in the last century and proved by Wu Chien-shiung has been able to perfectly explain the phenomenon of matter in the universe. There is no need to import matter from other universes.

So, is the universe eternal? No, even the steady-state universe is not eternal. Does the universe die? Yes, whether the universe is open, steady, or closed, it will die.

If the universe were closed (positive curvature), it would be infinitely reincarnated. It ends with one great contraction and is reborn or reincarnated by another great **. Since there are no signs of a gradual slowdown in the expansion of the universe, it is not known when it will contract.

If the universe were in a steady state (also called straight, with zero curvature), then it could die from a "heat death". It has been calculated that when all the matter capable of forming stars (and their planets) forms stars (and their planets), all the low-mass stars "die" from black dwarfs, all medium-mass stars "die" from neutron stars, all massive stars "die" from black holes, and all black holes "die" from quantum evaporation because there is no matter to swallow up, if protons are able to decay, the universe will fall into complete darkness and dead silence in 10 110 years; If the protons do not decay, this time is extended to 10 122 years.

If the universe were open (negative curvature) and the distance between matter would be infinitely farther away as the universe expanded, its lifetime would be much shorter than that of the steady state universe, and it would enter dead silence earlier (compared to the steady state universe). But there is no specific time.

If the universe is the answer, then civilization is the problem.

Whether there are other universes is an open question. If anything, there is something in these universes. About a year ago, Musk Tegmark published an article in the American journal Science about what would happen if the universe was infinite.

He considered several different types of universes, universes that share the same laws of physics as we have, and universes that don't have the same laws as us.

This kind of thinking leads to some strange conclusions, for example, if there are infinitely many universes, and these universes have exactly the same laws as our universe, then there will be some other universes, some people who are exactly like you, who live exactly the same life as you. Now you don't have to take it too seriously, although there are these speculations, but we have no way to verify them. When people start to think about what causes the big **, the idea becomes even more bizarre, and one view is that there is actually another dimension of space, in which there are four-dimensional thin films moving around.

The idea is that two of these films collide with each other to create a large **. So if your point of view is persuasive, people will follow your point of view!

Q2There is evidence that there are more than three dimensions, but my question is: if there really is another dimension, how do we detect it?

I believe that mathematics is the basis of research, but I still wonder if you can give me an explanation that I can mentally accept. This will also help me understand several other cosmic issues.

A: For a number of theoretical reasons, many people believe that gravity would be the only driving force from one dimension to another if there were other dimensions. So, you won't see an object cross dimensions, but on a very small scale, you will feel their gravitational pull.

If this is the case above, then the mathematical theory you mentioned can be explained as follows: Newton's laws of gravitation state that the gravitational force between objects is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. As it turns out, this stems from the number of spatial dimensions we have; Just as the intensity of light is inversely proportional to the square of the distance (because the area of the ball increases with the square of the distance), so does the weakening of the gravitational strength.

Now let's say you're in four-dimensional space instead of three-dimensional space, and so on, the gravitational pull you experience will be inversely proportional to the cube of the distance.

How do you measure these? The theory suggests that human beings have long-term research development in each of the three dimensions that we are familiar with, but the research development in the fourth dimension is relatively limited. Therefore, in order to understand the relationship between gravitational force and distance in the inverse square law, you must measure the gravitational force between two objects with extremely small distances.

This has already been done, and as a result, the gravitational force no longer changes with distance after the distance is as small as a meter. Still, people continue to explore.