Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > If the universe is shaped like a cone why does the sky look round?

Reply
Thread Tools

If the universe is shaped like a cone why does the sky look round?

 
 
Lisa Horton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-19-2004
Wouldn't the stars be concentrated more in certain areas of the sky?

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994879
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
John Popelish
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-19-2004
Lisa Horton wrote:
>
> Wouldn't the stars be concentrated more in certain areas of the sky?
>
> http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994879


From inside this model of the universe, you supposedly cannot see (or
go) outside. Light approaching the boundary connects back inside
somewhere else and so do all paths of moving objects. Besides,
whether or not you can observe to any of the boundaries depends on
where you are, inside the universe, and how far out from that point
you can observe. So, to an observer inside such a universe, there are
only very subtle clues that this is the form. The elliptical
appearance of the blobs of microwave energy coming toward us from all
directions would be one of those clues (so they say).

--
John Popelish
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Fred Bloggs
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-19-2004
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) (Lisa Horton) wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed). com>...
> Wouldn't the stars be concentrated more in certain areas of the sky?


No. All the stars you can see (with the naked eye anyway) are in our
own galaxy, which is just one of the gazillions of galaxies out there.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ed Keane III
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-19-2004

"Lisa Horton" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> Wouldn't the stars be concentrated more in certain areas of the sky?
>
> http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994879


The cone shape in the article represents something that
looks round when seen from within. The narrow part of
the cone is what you see at great distance in any direction.
It is interesting that it suggests that objects in the universe
seen at such great distances and age would not look round.
Round objects from this time would appear elliptical when
viewed now.

As for the stars being concentrated in certain areas of the
sky all of the individual stars that we can see, with the
exception of super novas, are part of our galaxy, The Milky
Way, and do appear to be more or less concentrated
depending on whether you are looking towards or away
from the center of The Milky Way.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Painius
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-20-2004
"Lisa Horton" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message... news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
>
> Wouldn't the stars be concentrated more in certain areas of the sky?
>
> http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994879


Stars... no, Lisa, the stars are too close together and clustered in large
massive "galaxies." And galaxies also cluster together on a larger and
larger scale. Where significant concentrations of galaxy clusters in
certain areas of the sky are concerned, scientists think that we are too
far away to be able to observe these areas.

Also, where your cited article refers to this cone form as a "Picard
topology," and then makes the cute allusion to it being named for a
Star Trek character, i believe the following is about the person for
whom this topology is *really* named...

http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~his...ard_Emile.html

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
I'm a fool upon a hill,
See my planet spinning still?
Sun goes down and stars arise
Warm and pleasing to mine eyes.

See my little telescope?
People say I'm such a dope;
I don't mind because I nurse
Secrets of the Universe!

Paine Ellsworth


 
Reply With Quote
 
Jaxtraw
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-20-2004
"Lisa Horton" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> Wouldn't the stars be concentrated more in certain areas of the sky?
>
> http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994879


It seems strange to me that everybody presumes that the universe is some
kind of regular, easily described shape; surely there is no reason to
presume this. Is there not as much chance that it's a complex, lumpy shape,
like the distribution of matter within it/ that defines it?

Ian


 
Reply With Quote
 
Hadji
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-21-2004
"Jaxtraw" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> "Lisa Horton" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> > Wouldn't the stars be concentrated more in certain areas of the sky?
> >
> > http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994879

>
> It seems strange to me that everybody presumes that the universe is some
> kind of regular, easily described shape; surely there is no reason to
> presume this. Is there not as much chance that it's a complex, lumpy

shape,
> like the distribution of matter within it/ that defines it?


Plus, everyone's assuming just because matter ends the universe then has to
end.

Hadji


 
Reply With Quote
 
Wayne Shanks
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-21-2004
Lisa Horton wrote:

> Wouldn't the stars be concentrated more in certain areas of the sky?
>
> http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994879

The cone of the model is a 4D cone. The cone depicted in the atricle is
that of a 2D universe.

The interesting point is that at the narrow end of the cone, one of our
spatial dimention is curled up just like the extra dimentions in sting
theory..

Does the mean that space in that region is 2D not 3D?

The question them becomes... is there a point in the universe where one
or more of the curled up higher dimention of string theory "unwind".

Perhaps the ovservable univers is just a small rejion on a 11+1 D Picard
topology, where all spatial dimentions but 3 are coiled up.

physics at lower and higher dimention might be very interesting.

Wayne Shanks
 
Reply With Quote
 
crynwulf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-21-2004
Jaxtraw wrote:

> "Lisa Horton" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
>> Wouldn't the stars be concentrated more in certain areas of the sky?
>>
>> http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994879

>
> It seems strange to me that everybody presumes that the universe is some
> kind of regular, easily described shape; surely there is no reason to
> presume this. Is there not as much chance that it's a complex, lumpy
> shape, like the distribution of matter within it/ that defines it?
>
> Ian

How can the Universe have a shape if it is everything. Wouldn't it have to
be in something to have a shape?
--
Russ Lyttle
Not Powered by ActiveX
http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec/p...phy/logos.html

 
Reply With Quote
 
Wayne Shanks
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-21-2004
Wayne Shanks wrote:

> Lisa Horton wrote:
>
>> Wouldn't the stars be concentrated more in certain areas of the sky?
>>
>> http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994879

>
> The cone of the model is a 4D cone. The cone depicted in the atricle is
> that of a 2D universe.
>
> The interesting point is that at the narrow end of the cone, one of our
> spatial dimention is curled up just like the extra dimentions in sting
> theory..
>
> Does the mean that space in that region is 2D not 3D?
>
> The question them becomes... is there a point in the universe where one
> or more of the curled up higher dimention of string theory "unwind".
>
> Perhaps the ovservable univers is just a small rejion on a 11+1 D Picard
> topology, where all spatial dimentions but 3 are coiled up.
>
> physics at lower and higher dimention might be very interesting.
>
> Wayne Shanks



HMMMM this is interesting..

Consider an electron fired down the narrow end of such a Picard topology.

At some point he diameter of the universe in the curled up dimension
will be of the same order as the electron wave packet. As the geometry
shrinks further you should get stationary states of the electron in the
curled up dimension. Electrons fired down the Picard topology neck with
different amounts of momentum in the curled up dimension will look like
different particles. (well different excited states at least).

I pretend to know little to nothing about sting (M) theory, but I would
love to hear a "brane-y" guy comment on string modes being higher
dimensional momentum confined to coiled up dimensions.

Wayne Shanks (Pitiful Experimentalist… slightly lower than Pitiful Human)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A way to transfer data from My Sky to a PC or backup My Sky data? Donchano NZ Computing 5 02-09-2010 04:59 AM
Two sky boxes with single Sky+ dish sherkhanthegreat@gmail.com Computer Support 0 09-07-2009 11:27 PM
findcontrol("PlaceHolderPrice") why why why why why why why why why why why Mr. SweatyFinger ASP .Net 2 12-02-2006 03:46 PM
Copying Movies: SKY says its legal on "MY SKY" Jones Minor NZ Computing 27 11-25-2005 08:40 AM
Blue Sky From White Sky Russell Digital Photography 5 05-30-2005 11:56 PM



Advertisments