Forget Flat Earth Theory, now we have Flat Universe Theory!

[Shell B]

Logically, if the universe is flat, I am flat as well. As this appears to be out of the question, I say nay.

[Anomalocaris]

Logically, if the universe is flat, I am flat as well. As this appears to be out of the question, I say nay.

I need evidence to confirm you are not flat. :p

[Shell B]

Logically, if the universe is flat, I am flat as well. As this appears to be out of the question, I say nay.

I need evidence to confirm you are not flat. :p

Shall I cut off my ear and send it to you?

[Anomalocaris]

Logically, if the universe is flat, I am flat as well. As this appears to be out of the question, I say nay.

I need evidence to confirm you are not flat. :p

Shall I cut off my ear and send it to you?

It's not a study of your ear that will prove your point. Dear.

[Welsh cake]

You are indeed correct that mathmatical infinities are quite possible. This cannot and never does apply to reality.

By this omission I think you've unintentionally made a claim to knowledge by arguing the negative.

I agree that the context in which chuck is trying to apply infinity as a quantitative measurement of the cosmos was impractical in a sense, but that's because the very definition of the word is unboundedness. Its usage only begs further questions as to whether the universe actually has "limits" in the literal sense. What does the universe exist in? Is it the very fabric of reality or merely a closed system within other universes? Is there an inside or outside to it? By our current knowledge the answers to such rhetoric is unattainable. It's all speculation at this point...

When I refuse to use the term 'infinity' I'm merely being pragmatic. I do the same whenever someone makes a red herring argument from absolute knowledge because it would be absurd for us to label anything as "infinite" or "absolute", regardless of whether its square bounds or causal effects are know or not because you can't get from finite to infinite, there is no "highest number". Likewise you can't reach omniscience for this reason if causes and events are still ongoing. It's implausible to correspond or correlate anything else to eternity... I doubt we'd even be able to identify it when we got to it, assuming we're actually existing within an infinite cosmos of course.

However despite my objections, I must recognise that logic alone cannot refute the concept of unboundedness, theoretically in physics it may have valid applications in cosmology; since we don't yet know the scope of the universe or indeed if there is even an end to measure to or from, infinity subsequently falls into the category of the logically unknowable, not the logically impossible.

As far as I know and believe the universe is vast, transfinite even, but infinite? I make can no assertions either way for I simply don't know.

[Shell B]

It's not a study of your ear that will prove your point. Dear.

You'll just have to take my word for it.

[Rayaan]

Apparently the universe is flat: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11810553

Forget the flat universe theory. We have a beautiful universe.

[Houston I Am]

If confuses me how anything that is infinite has a shape. So I'm just going to ignore this and go play in the mud.

No one knows if the universe is infinate in size or not. I personally doubt it, but I don't deny the possibility.
What the flat universe means is that you can't leave one spot, go in one particular direction, and eventually return to that same spot as you could on a planet like earth. It means that if you go in one direction for a long enough period of time, eventually you'll reach a point to where you can't move any further - depending on a number of factors.

The universe can not be infinite, it is expanding. Although for us in this small planet and an even smaller solar system, it appears to be infinite.

As far as being flat it makes sense. The galaxy is flat isn't it? The solar system is flat isn't it? In all probablity the universe is flat, and has to be if it started out in an explosion (big bang). Take a ball of dynomite, put a fuze, and light it up, watch the explosion and you will see that it will go out 4-5 times more than going up, basically it is flat. Put is a spin and it will be flatter.

I have no doubt that the universe is spinning just as planets spin around their sun, and solar systems spin within their galaxies, and galaxies spin within the universe.

[Anomalocaris]

If confuses me how anything that is infinite has a shape. So I'm just going to ignore this and go play in the mud.

No one knows if the universe is infinate in size or not. I personally doubt it, but I don't deny the possibility.
What the flat universe means is that you can't leave one spot, go in one particular direction, and eventually return to that same spot as you could on a planet like earth. It means that if you go in one direction for a long enough period of time, eventually you'll reach a point to where you can't move any further - depending on a number of factors.

The universe can not be infinite, it is expanding. Although for us in this small planet and an even smaller solar system, it appears to be infinite.

As far as being flat it makes sense. The galaxy is flat isn't it? The solar system is flat isn't it? In all probablity the universe is flat, and has to be if it started out in an explosion (big bang). Take a ball of dynomite, put a fuze, and light it up, watch the explosion and you will see that it will go out 4-5 times more than going up, basically it is flat. Put is a spin and it will be flatter.

I have no doubt that the universe is spinning just as planets spin around their sun, and solar systems spin within their galaxies, and galaxies spin within the universe.

You are mistaken in each of your assertions.

1. Something infinite can expand.

2. Most galaxies are visibly not flat but either spherical, ellipsoidal or irregular in shape. Only spiral and disk galaxies appears to be flat, but even in case of spiral galaxies the flatness is illusory. Vast majority of the mass of a spiral galaxy is also spherically distributed, the luminous flattish disk of stars in the middle is just a minor component of the galaxy's substance.

3. Solar system is not flat. The planetary orbits are flat. But the extended halo of cometary bodies in which the solar system is embedded is spherical. Even if it were not spherical to start with, gravitation perturbation by the planets and passing stars would randomize the orientation of the orbits in the cometary halo and make it spherical is an amount of time short compared to the age of the solar system.

4. The big bang is not like a dynamite explosion. It is an expansion of space, not an expansion of shrapnels through space. Space expands at essentially the same rate in every direction. This is easy to verify by a casual look at the temperature distribution of the cosmic background radiation, and can also be more elaborately verified using red-shifts and standard candles.

5. The concept of spinning universe is incompatible with the concept of 10^35 expansion of space in the aftermath of the big bang due to conservation of angular momentum.

[Houston I Am]

If confuses me how anything that is infinite has a shape. So I'm just going to ignore this and go play in the mud.

No one knows if the universe is infinate in size or not. I personally doubt it, but I don't deny the possibility.
What the flat universe means is that you can't leave one spot, go in one particular direction, and eventually return to that same spot as you could on a planet like earth. It means that if you go in one direction for a long enough period of time, eventually you'll reach a point to where you can't move any further - depending on a number of factors.

The universe can not be infinite, it is expanding. Although for us in this small planet and an even smaller solar system, it appears to be infinite.

As far as being flat it makes sense. The galaxy is flat isn't it? The solar system is flat isn't it? In all probablity the universe is flat, and has to be if it started out in an explosion (big bang). Take a ball of dynomite, put a fuze, and light it up, watch the explosion and you will see that it will go out 4-5 times more than going up, basically it is flat. Put is a spin and it will be flatter.

I have no doubt that the universe is spinning just as planets spin around their sun, and solar systems spin within their galaxies, and galaxies spin within the universe.

You are mistaken in each of your assertions.

1. Something infinite can expand.

If it is expanding then it isn't infinite. A good example is that there is an infinite numbers between 0 and 1. You can continue to add a number and never reach the number 1. In order to have a number 1 we have to stop somewhere and that is the universe, because we can't see the end doesn't mean one isn't there.

2. Most galaxies are visibly not flat but either spherical, ellipsoidal or irregular in shape. Only spiral and disk galaxies appears to be flat, but even in case of spiral galaxies the flatness is illusory. Vast majority of the mass of a spiral galaxy is also spherically distributed, the luminous flattish disk of stars in the middle is just a minor component of the galaxy's substance.

It is our visual perspective that galaxies appear spherical, ellipsoidal, or irregular in shape. Galaxies are flat when looking edgewise and I am not talking paper flat since there is a bulge at the center of galaxies.

3. Solar system is not flat. The planetary orbits are flat. But the extended halo of cometary bodies in which the solar system is embedded is spherical. Even if it were not spherical to start with, gravitation perturbation by the planets and passing stars would randomize the orientation of the orbits in the cometary halo and make it spherical is an amount of time short compared to the age of the solar system.

Comets are not planets and are visitors to the solar system. Most came from outside although there might be one or two that originated within the solar system.

4. The big bang is not like a dynamite explosion. It is an expansion of space, not an expansion of shrapnels through space. Space expands at essentially the same rate in every direction. This is easy to verify by a casual look at the temperature distribution of the cosmic background radiation, and can also be more elaborately verified using red-shifts and standard candles.

Actually in ways it was an expansion of shrapnels through space or we would not be here, neither would the planets. If you do a bit of research you will find that while the universe is spreading out it is not spreading upwards or downwards. I saw a picture of what they have now estimated of what the universe looks like and looking at it you think of the solar system with a bulge.

5. The concept of spinning universe is incompatible with the concept of 10^35 expansion of space in the aftermath of the big bang due to conservation of angular momentum.

Actually a spinning universe is very compatible with the expansion of space.