A Miracle!!

[leo-rcc]

Well if it doesn't manifest in this universe there is no way of knowing something exists outside this universe, let alone collecting data from it.

[Violet]

Why would there be no way of knowing that...? And why couldn't we collect data on it?

[leo-rcc]

The Universe comprises everything that physically exists, the entirety of space and time, all forms of matter and energy, and the physical laws and constants that govern them.

If you can measure something in our universe it is by definition not outside our universe but just an unknown part of the Universe. A universe is all encompassing.

[Violet]

The Universe comprises everything that physically exists, the entirety of space and time, all forms of matter and energy, and the physical laws and constants that govern them.

You mean... it comprises everything within its boundaries?

If you can measure something in our universe it is by definition not outside our universe but just an unknown part of the Universe. A universe is all encompassing.

Perhaps... but could we perhaps one day measure with tools outside of the universe? Would I be correct in assuming that you are using 'universe' to refer to what others might call a multi-verse.... or the like? Because then I can see how you would call it 'all-encompassing'...

However, since everything is inside of it... nothing is outside of it. In which case the 'universe' does not encompass nothing, and therefore it is not all encompassing... because at least 'nothing' is outside of it. See, once you make something 'big?' enough to encompass everything: nothing is outside of it. Note, nothing IS outside of it

I don't see how a universe even can be all encompassing... hell, i don't even see how nothing is not a thing (it contradicts its own existence, and everything has to include nothing, but there is always more nothing 'outside' of it...). I feel we still need more data to be certain that there is nothing outside of our universe

[Tiberius]

somethings are outside the realm of science.

How do you know that somethings are outside the realm of science? It sounds quite reasonable to make this statement, but when you sit down and think about it, surely it's simply an assumption isn't it?

If something is outside the realm of science it must also be outside the realm of the Universe and therefore cannot make any meaningful sense and so cannot be. Q.E.D.

Both statements are assumptions. In materialism, the assumption is that there is nothing outside empiricism / the realm of science. It is also an assumption (not an argument) to say that being outside the realm of the Universe cannot make any meaningful sense. As far as I was aware, you were a supporter of string theory and multiverse theory, both more fantasy than science at the moment, and the latter being literally "outside the universe" (since it states there are multiple universes). So according to your argument, these make no meaningful sense and so cannot be?

[leo-rcc]

The Universe is defined as everything that exists, has existed, and will exist. Should we discover what is regarded as the multiverse if does exist, it just means the universe is much larger than we imagined. The Universe is everything, there is no outside the universe, it is the universe.

[Tiberius]

I think you are perhaps confusing reality with the universe. The universe (according to one multiverse theory) is but one of many universes which contain their own laws of physics. Others say each universe is a membrane and universes are created when two membranes collide. When speaking of multiple universes, the word "reality" is perhaps a better word for talking about "everything".

From wikipedia:

The word Universe is usually defined as encompassing everything. However, using an alternate definition, some have speculated that this "Universe" is just one of many disconnected "universes", which are collectively denoted as the multiverse. For example, in bubble universe theory, there are an infinite variety of "universes", each with different physical constants. Similarly, in the many-worlds hypothesis, new "universes" are spawned with every quantum measurement. These universes are usually thought to be completely disconnected from our own and therefore impossible to detect experimentally.

[Violet]

I use that same definition of universe myself... I take it you are not using the definition as a sort of container for existence... and rather the existence itself? What is your take on non-existence then?

True Adrian, but if you'll note: How can you know that the word l use to identify 'chocolate' is not the same word you use for 'orangutang'... so when I say "Do you want some chocolate", you interpret it as "Do you want some orangutang?"

Definitions can vary Reality might be a better word for 'everything'... but it's all just words

[leo-rcc]

I think you are perhaps confusing reality with the universe. The universe (according to one multiverse theory) is but one of many universes which contain their own laws of physics.

Is it a theory or a hypotheses?

[Meatball]

How can you know that the word l use to identify 'chocolate' is not the same word you use for 'orangutang'... so when I say "Do you want some chocolate", you interpret it as "Do you want some orangutang?"

Definitions can vary Reality might be a better word for 'everything'... but it's all just words

Definitions can vary, but that can also be incorrect. I think a discussion relies on the assumption that one party is not a fucking lunatic who makes shit like this up.