The enigma of what lies beyond our observable universe

[Rorisang]

The observable universe, the vast expanse we can see with our telescopes, stretches about 93 billion light-years in diameter. Yet, beyond this cosmic horizon lies a mystery—what's out there in the unobservable realm? Let's explore this enigma ..

The Observable Universe - Our ability to observe the cosmos is limited by the speed of light. The observable universe contains galaxies, stars, and cosmic structures that emit light, and the most distant objects we can observe are nearly 13.8 billion years old.

Cosmic Horizon - The edge of the observable universe is known as the cosmic horizon. Light from objects beyond this horizon hasn't had time to reach us since the Big Bang. This means there's much more out there that we can't see or detect.

theory : The Infinite Universe - Some cosmological models suggest the universe is infinite. In this scenario, the cosmic horizon is an arbitrary limit based on our observation capabilities, and the universe extends infinitely beyond what we can see.

Theory: The Multiverse - The concept of a multiverse suggests that our universe is just one of many universes, each with its own physical laws. These universes could exist in a vast cosmic landscape, beyond our observational reach.

Theory: Cosmic Bubble Universes - In the context of inflationary cosmology, our universe may be just one "bubble" in a cosmic foam of universes. These bubble universes could have different properties and may be inaccessible to us.

Theory: Advanced Civilizations - Beyond the observable universe, there could be advanced extraterrestrial civilizations that have developed technology beyond our comprehension. They might be responsible for phenomena we can't explain.

The nature of what lies beyond our observable universe is one of the most profound questions in cosmology. While we have theories and concepts to speculate, it remains an area of active research and exploration. We're limited by the tools and methods at our disposal.

 

[RobbyQbit]

The observable universe, the vast expanse we can see with our telescopes, stretches about 93 billion light-years in diameter. Yet, beyond this cosmic horizon lies a mystery—what's out there in the unobservable realm? Let's explore this enigma ..

The Observable Universe - Our ability to observe the cosmos is limited by the speed of light. The observable universe contains galaxies, stars, and cosmic structures that emit light, and the most distant objects we can observe are nearly 13.8 billion years old.

Cosmic Horizon - The edge of the observable universe is known as the cosmic horizon. Light from objects beyond this horizon hasn't had time to reach us since the Big Bang. This means there's much more out there that we can't see or detect.

theory : The Infinite Universe - Some cosmological models suggest the universe is infinite. In this scenario, the cosmic horizon is an arbitrary limit based on our observation capabilities, and the universe extends infinitely beyond what we can see.

Theory: The Multiverse - The concept of a multiverse suggests that our universe is just one of many universes, each with its own physical laws. These universes could exist in a vast cosmic landscape, beyond our observational reach.

Theory: Cosmic Bubble Universes - In the context of inflationary cosmology, our universe may be just one "bubble" in a cosmic foam of universes. These bubble universes could have different properties and may be inaccessible to us.

Theory: Advanced Civilizations - Beyond the observable universe, there could be advanced extraterrestrial civilizations that have developed technology beyond our comprehension. They might be responsible for phenomena we can't explain.

The nature of what lies beyond our observable universe is one of the most profound questions in cosmology. While we have theories and concepts to speculate, it remains an area of active research and exploration. We're limited by the tools and methods at our disposal.

I misunderstand why we think/know the observable stretches 93 billion light years diameter and yet the most distant we observe is 13.8 billion years old?

 

[Rorisang]

I misunderstand why we think/know the observable stretches 93 billion light years diameter and yet the most distant we observe is 13.8 billion years old?

The concept of the observable universe can be a bit complex. The observable universe is indeed thought to have a diameter of about 93 billion light-years, but this doesn't mean that objects within it are necessarily that old. The reason for this apparent discrepancy is due to the expansion of the universe.

As the universe expands, objects that were once closer to us can move further away over time. Light from these distant objects takes a long time to reach us, and because of the expansion, the universe has stretched during that time. So, the light from objects that are currently at the edge of our observable universe had a shorter distance to travel when it was emitted, but the universe has expanded during the journey, making it appear as if they are much farther away.

The 13.8 billion-year age you mentioned is the estimated age of the universe, which is the time that has passed since the Big Bang. It represents the age of the oldest light we can currently observe. However, objects that are currently at the edge of the observable universe may have been much closer when their light was emitted, allowing us to see them, even though they're now much farther away due to the ongoing expansion of the universe.

 

[RobbyQbit]

The concept of the observable universe can be a bit complex. The observable universe is indeed thought to have a diameter of about 93 billion light-years, but this doesn't mean that objects within it are necessarily that old. The reason for this apparent discrepancy is due to the expansion of the universe.

As the universe expands, objects that were once closer to us can move further away over time. Light from these distant objects takes a long time to reach us, and because of the expansion, the universe has stretched during that time. So, the light from objects that are currently at the edge of our observable universe had a shorter distance to travel when it was emitted, but the universe has expanded during the journey, making it appear as if they are much farther away.

The 13.8 billion-year age you mentioned is the estimated age of the universe, which is the time that has passed since the Big Bang. It represents the age of the oldest light we can currently observe. However, objects that are currently at the edge of the observable universe may have been much closer when their light was emitted, allowing us to see them, even though they're now much farther away due to the ongoing expansion of the universe.

Thanks astronic. So, hypothetically, if I was still here observing in 93 billion years time (or maybe less if that's a diameter) would I be seeing light from that distance (even though that light source has since moved even further away)?

 

[Rorisang]

Thanks astronic. So, hypothetically, if I was still here observing in 93 billion years time (or maybe less if that's a diameter) would I be seeing light from that distance (even though that light source has since moved even further away)?

Hypothetically, if you were somehow still observing 93 billion years from now, you would not be able to see light from objects that are more than approximately 46.5 billion light-years away. This is because the observable universe is limited by the age of the universe itself, which is currently estimated to be around 13.8 billion years. Light from objects farther away simply wouldn't have had enough time to reach you, given the finite speed of light. Objects beyond this distance would be moving away from us faster than the speed of light due to the expansion of the universe, making them effectively beyond our observable horizon.

 

[Classical Motion]

Does the light from a star at the edge of our universe shine out beyond the universe?

 

[billslugg]

The edge of our visible universe is located at the point where the recessional velocity is c. If you were at that spot, you would see a universe equally in all directions. Every observer sees the edge of the universe equally in all directions. To each observer, they are at the center. Each observer sees a slightly different edge thus each observer sees a different universe.

 

[Classical Motion]

If what you say is true, then no matter how much we improve our instruments, our observation range is set and limited. And the same limit for all observers.

What happens when someone spots something much farther away than that limit? You know they will.

 

[billslugg]

We have already seen the limit, it is the CMBR. It is identical for every stationary observer. Moving observers will see an anisotropy, just as we do..

 

[rod]

The cosmology calculators show comoving radial distances for objects based upon their redshifts. This is not the same as the light time distance or look back distance determined using the redshift that is reported to the public and used by space.com articles for example. When you reach redshifts of 1.4 or larger, space is expanding faster than c velocity in cosmology using Einstein GR and the FLRW metric, no option here otherwise distances will start to fall apart IMO. The CMBR is said to be redshifted about 1100 today so the comoving radial distance from Earth (today) is some 46 billion light years away from our position on Earth. That is why various reports show our Universe diameter some 92 or 93 billion light years across. Using the volume of a sphere, seeing 13.8 billion light year radius is about 1.1 x 10^31 cubic light years volume, areas we should be able to see from Earth today. Using comoving radial distance of 46 billion light years radius (CMBR), is more than 4 x 10^32 cubic light years.

Tomorrow evening (Saturday), shortly after 2000 EDT, Io will show its shadow moving across Jupiter. "■ The shadow of Jupiter's fast-moving moon Io crosses onto the eastern edge of Jupiter's face at 8:07 p.m. EDT, followed closely by Io itself 20 minutes later. Io's shadow leaves Jupiter's face at 10:17 p.m. EDT, followed by Io 19 minutes later.", https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-news/observing-news/this-weeks-sky-at-a-glance-october-20-29/

Using my telescopes and weather permitting, I am 100% confident I can see Io at Jupiter in my telescopes vs. objects with large redshifts at their comoving radial distances today where an enormous volume of space is claimed to surround us, and all manner of evolutionary ideas are presented.

 

[Atlan0001]

Certain horizons are intrinsically an extended expanded part of the point . . . of a piece with the point. Beyond that, relativity, the local finite, I've read again and again, predicts its own breakdown.

Two ships many kilometers apart at sea will measure their distance to the horizon to be exactly the same distance to the same horizon as if it were two horizons for two ships the same measurable distance from each ship rather than just one horizon. The two ships are both inside (of a piece with) and outside (distant from) the horizon. There is an indefinite infinity of ships, an indefinite infinity of horizons, an indefinite infinity of horizon universes, everywhere and when relativity breaks down. Doesn't change the fact of that timeless cosmological constant of the set's Horizon (the closed up to Horizon, Horizon set of them all . . . ever spontaneous in its being), though.

 

[Classical Motion]

Once emitted, light has a discreet quantum length. That length can not be changed with motion OR expanding space. This is because the time at the beginning of that quantum length, is the same time as the end of that quantum length. A block of the same time.......for you sci-fi folks.

The only thing that can change with motion OR expanding space.......is the space, the duration, between these discreet blocks.

If you change your measurement discernment from frequency math.......to duty cycle math......things start to fall into place. Light has an intermittent sawtooth waveform, not a sinewave. It strobes and blinks. And it transfers an electrical ramp and a magnetic ramp to the sensor/detector. And our detectors ring.....and vibrate to that ramp. And we get frequency.

 

[Classical Motion]

We need a non ringing, a non reacting sensor....... To separately measure the quantum length AND to measure the space duration between the lengths............to see true light.

 

[Atlan0001]

We need a non ringing, a non reacting sensor....... To separately measure the quantum length AND to measure the space duration between the lengths............to see true light.

I have no idea what you are trying for, but who knows, you might have had something if wasn't for all that other light pouring and crowding into the frame(s) from everywhere complicating, distorting, the frame(s) with complexity and shaping it to a cone . . . shaping frames to cones of past/future(s). The histories, both past and future, add up, and subtract from, in the physics.

 

[Classical Motion]

OK. What I am getting at is that the only thing we have to observe the stars with is light. And that our concept about light is wrong. Therefore our concept of the cosmos is wrong.

Attach an antenna to a function generator. Feed it with an AC signal and tune it in with a portable radio. The radio needs CW and AM function modes.

Now change that AC signal into a precision fully rectified sine. Did you notice any change at the radio? Now AM modulate it. Any change? That is a DC emission. Amazing isn't it?

Now, how would you like to see a quantum of light? My instruments are to slow for light, but I can show you a radio quantum.

Set the generator to a one shot mode. Now inject just 180 degrees of that signal. You might need a digital capture scope to see it at the radio. We put 180 in at antenna........and get 360 at radio.

That is one quantum of radio. One EM quantum. And it is NOT a wave.

 

[Atlan0001]

Now, how would you like to see a quantum of light?

A quantum of light (microcosm), as I see it, is an isolated frame of coordinate spacetime (macrocosm).

 

[Atlan0001]

The riddle is, "The enigma of what lies beyond our observable universe." The first and foremost solution to the riddle is that everything that does not make contact with our detection instruments, including optical instruments, is beyond our "observable" universe.

After that comes analysis and deductions, or as Arthur Canon Doyle's Sherlock Holmes put it, "Deduction and Analysis."

One of the entities beyond our observable universe is, of course, black holes. We analyze and deduce regarding any black hole not from its undetectable interior but from its [locally relative] detectable external setting. One thing we never see is anything ever going straight into a black hole but being drawn spiraling into a superconducting ring of vortex round and round the horizon of a black hole eventually, supposedly, to end up swallowed by the black hole.

Few, if any, people picture a black hole's horizon, especially a supermassive black hole's horizon, as being the ring-wormhole-like horizon of an expanding universe. A universe that just keeps on expanding (zooming!) out, getting larger and ever larger in its expansion, for anything running in the grain, running with the grain, in the ring-wormhole-like horizon until it is deposited in that universe existing "beyond our observable universe.". What comes out that Planck Big Bang Black (White) Hole Horizon into that expanding universe on the other side may not be what went in . . . certainly not anything less than pitch black hot fired in the furnace of the Planck Big Bang Horizon.

 

[Atlan0001]

So many astronomers and physicists still don't get it, you can't observe SPACE . . . and TIME is spontaneous real time moment. SPACETIME is the universe, via hologram emission simulation, dealing in photo-frames / photons:

Klein bottle - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The illustration appearing above and in this above article is how they are looking up and out macrocosmically into SPACETIME and down and in microcosmically to the Planck Horizon from the Hubble and James Webb, and Euclid, telescoping (beyond a certain point) microscopes. They even often describe that naked singularity of distant point-Horizon as if it were two separate horizon universes (one the so-called Big Bang) when they are one and the same Horizon spaceless and timeless if you realize what you are looking at (distantly down and in toward and to the Planck Horizon), perfectly illustrated by the macrocosm curve-back and into the micro-microcosm of the "Klein bottle."

The three scopes are resolving the "quantum" so close to the Planck Horizon (so distant inside the atoms inside us, too), so to speak.

I wonder when they will get it, when it will hit them, what is right before their eyes, in the eyes of their scopes, to observe and their detection equipment to detect.

 

[Atlan0001]

From what I see in the news from the three scopes, at least, we are on our way to observing multiverse split screen views of universe and universes. Many in one. Many from one.

 

[Gibsense]

I misunderstand why we think/know the observable stretches 93 billion light years diameter and yet the most distant we observe is 13.8 billion years old?

If we assume an n-sphere of radius 13.8 billion light years then the circumference would be in the order of 86 billion light-years (comparable to your 93). This suggests that our universe is unbounded, finite but expanding.

 

[E.B.E1]

The observable universe, the vast expanse we can see with our telescopes, stretches about 93 billion light-years in diameter. Yet, beyond this cosmic horizon lies a mystery—what's out there in the unobservable realm? Let's explore this enigma ..

The Observable Universe - Our ability to observe the cosmos is limited by the speed of light. The observable universe contains galaxies, stars, and cosmic structures that emit light, and the most distant objects we can observe are nearly 13.8 billion years old.

Cosmic Horizon - The edge of the observable universe is known as the cosmic horizon. Light from objects beyond this horizon hasn't had time to reach us since the Big Bang. This means there's much more out there that we can't see or detect.

theory : The Infinite Universe - Some cosmological models suggest the universe is infinite. In this scenario, the cosmic horizon is an arbitrary limit based on our observation capabilities, and the universe extends infinitely beyond what we can see.

Theory: The Multiverse - The concept of a multiverse suggests that our universe is just one of many universes, each with its own physical laws. These universes could exist in a vast cosmic landscape, beyond our observational reach.

Theory: Cosmic Bubble Universes - In the context of inflationary cosmology, our universe may be just one "bubble" in a cosmic foam of universes. These bubble universes could have different properties and may be inaccessible to us.

Theory: Advanced Civilizations - Beyond the observable universe, there could be advanced extraterrestrial civilizations that have developed technology beyond our comprehension. They might be responsible for phenomena we can't explain.

The nature of what lies beyond our observable universe is one of the most profound questions in cosmology. While we have theories and concepts to speculate, it remains an area of active research and exploration. We're limited by the tools and methods at our disposal.

We're also limited by the short evolutionary time, as a species we are still in our infancy and our total accumulated knowledge up to this point of our evolution is in my opinion meagre to say the least.
i believe that we only know a small, very small amount of what is still out there to be learned and understood and unless the operators of UFO's UAP whomever, whenever or wherever they're from decided to make themselves known to us and give us the knowledge they've accumulated which i wouldn't even like to guess how many millennia of evolved advancement they've got on us, their technology is like magic to us, amazing and I'd give both my legs and arms to be able to comprehend and understand the scientific knowledge they obviously have

 

[Atlan0001]

What mankind thinks of is a vast orderly expanse of "observable universe" is but a many worlds' discreet quanta real "hologram" of unreal universe. Beyond this discreet quantum of observable universe exists a chaotic infinity of local-relative discreet quanta . . . of local-relative observable universes only discreetly observable from center . . . th infinity of center-points. Spooky action at a distance. The breakdown of relativity. The buildup of an infinite complexity and chaos of local relativities, of discreet quanta, at distance. The building infinity of complexity and chaos applicable everywhere 'there' is, but not 'here', everywhere 'here' is.

 

[Gibsense]

ebe1 said: "Cosmic Horizon - The edge of the observable universe is known as the cosmic horizon. Light from objects beyond this horizon hasn't had time to reach us since the Big Bang. This means there's much more out there that we can't see or detect."

Supposably the expansion of space restricts our observation beyond "the observable universe". As space expands then distant galaxies retreat from view with ever-increasing speed. As the space between grows the recession increases up to and beyond the speed of light.
The recession is faster than the speed of light BUT neither we nor the receding galaxy(s) are travelling through space; it is just that the space between is increasing.
There is no good reason (yet) why the universe beyond should be different. However, the growing awareness of massive structures of various designs might challenge this view.
PS. apologies to all for forgetting how the quotes work....

 

[Gibsense]

To find advanced civilisations we do not need to migrate to any other universe. This one is big enough and old enough to have some/many.
Perhaps you are looking to consider UFO/UAP phenomena. Who knows, engaging with minds from another universe or dimension combination may be easier than travelling within our own universe!

 

[Helio]

Supposably the expansion of space restricts our observation beyond "the observable universe". As space expands then distant galaxies retreat from view with ever-increasing speed. As the space between grows the recession increases up to and beyond the speed of light.

Rob noted that we are limited to the point when the universe suddenly became transparent, which we see today as the CMBR. This happened when the cooling of space due to expansion reached a temp. of about 3000K. This caused the free electrons to suddenly become trapped by the nuclei (H & He). This converted the plasma into a universe of atoms. Light at this moment no longer was scattered to and fro by the sea of free electrons, thus producing a transparent space.

This was a prediction that came from the BBT (Alpher and Hermann in the 50's, IIRC [Added: 1948 they envisioned it. This was only a few months after the Alpha-Beta-Gamma paper on H & He formation. Apathy, however, shut their CMBR detection idea and program down by 1953.]] making it very favorable, along with a couple dozen other independent lines of evidence that supports it. No evidence has been found to falsify it. But it's a theory, not a law. Time will reveal more, but it's highly unlikely, at least, that the BBT will get scrapped.

Seeing regions of space that are traveling faster than light is allowable because light in regions moving faster than c will simply travel into regions that are not moving faster than c. Imagine a star in a region of expanding space one second after it has a velocity of c (relative to us). The light only has to travel for one second to reach a region of space that is not traveling away from us at c, thus it will continue on to reach us.

The recession is faster than the speed of light BUT neither we nor the receding galaxy(s) are travelling through space; it is just that the space between is increasing.

Yes. Some claim everything is expanding but my understanding is that gravity cannot be ignored, thus the tiny expansion that takes place, say, in our solar system is easily countered by the Sun's gravity to hold its family together.

There is no good reason (yet) why the universe beyond should be different.

Yes. The principle of homogeneity was a major assumption by Einstein and other cosmologists. The CMBR reveals just how right they were. IIRC, the anisotropy isn't found until we look at better than about 1 part per 100,000.

However, the growing awareness of massive structures of various designs might challenge this view.

But, over billions of years, thankfully, the anisotropy did allow clouds to fragment to form stars, stars to form galaxies, galaxies to form in clusters, etc.

PS. apologies to all for forgetting how the quotes work....

Use the "reply" button, not the "quote" button.