Universe 250+ Times Bigger Than What Is Observable 506
eldavojohn writes "The universe is only fourteen billion years old so we are unable to observe anything more than fourteen billion light years away. This makes it a bit difficult for us to measure how large the universe actually is. A number of methodologies have been devised to estimate the size of the universe including the universe's curvature, baryonic acoustic oscillations and the luminosity of distant type 1A supernovas. Now a team has combined all known methods into Bayesian model averaging to constrain the universe's size and their research is saying with confidence that the universe is at least 250 times larger than the observable universe."
Re:Speed of Light? (Score:5, Interesting)
It is, but oddly enough that does not bind the expansion. Space can be expanding faster than c and I believe the inflationary theory says just that.
how big? (Score:3, Interesting)
But crazy conjecture aside, does this talk of the 'full size' of the universe mean that the article even had its starting premise wrong?
Re:I'm confused. (Score:5, Interesting)
The key idea is that of inflation: general relativity allows for the distance between points to increase faster than the speed of light. Alan Guth's theory for inflation proposes that this in fact occured in the early universe, and the theory is now backed up by observations of fluctuations in the microwave background radiation (among others), where microscopic fluctuations were "frozen in" due to the rapid expansion. The consequence of this inflation is that much of the current universe is not within our 14 Gyr lightcone.
As a side note, the big hub-bub about dark energy is that it appears (based on current observations) that our universe may be entering a second inflationary period. Fortunately, the timescale for this is on the order 100 Gyr, so it will be unlikely to effect our lives directly.
Re:What does that even mean? (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't think he's referring to the edge of the "observable universe". The article states that the universe is 250x the size of the obserable universe. Hence, the universe itself, outside of being observable, has a limited size. That naturally leads to a question of "what happens a the end".
Numerous analogies have always been used to describe this. Most have already been brought up in this thread (circles, etc). The most famous is that of a balloon. To a 3d observer, a balloon's surface is of limited space. To the ant though, the surface of balloon is endless.
That observation never quite sat with me though. It works for an ant - incapable of reason, but swap out the situation for a PERSON sitting on another circular surface (like, say, a planet), and we have figured out quite readily that our surface is unending but finite - it's obvious - go in another direction and you end up circling back.
By the same token, you can't just easily dismiss a perceived infinity of the universe via analogy as a meaningless question. There must be a logical mechanic behind it. Either the universe literally ends with a wall (highly unlikely), it truly is infinite, or, there is some mechanism by which you "double back" and circle back to your previous position. Just personally, I've never seen a truly convincing mechanic for explaining just how the last one would work. The infinity mechanic makes more sense. Not that I'm saying that the universe is definitely infinite. I'm just saying that before I truly embrace that ideas I need a working model of how it would work as perceived infinity, outside of an analogy or "it just works that way".
Original summary is entirely wrong. (Score:4, Interesting)
The submitter obviously did not read his own links. While the universe is only 14 billion years old, the _observable_ universe is > 90 billion light years across.
This is due to expansion, which stretched the wavelength of the light coming towards us, so redshifting those galaxies. It also makes those galaxies appear to be moving away from us at many multiples the speed of light, although they're not really moving at all, space is expanding.
An explanation [scienceblogs.com]
Re:What does that even mean? (Score:5, Interesting)
Not if you live in the one dimensional space curved in a 2nd dimension defined by the circle you can't.