Is the universe infinite?

Well, is it?

Yes/No.

yes

no

i dont think so

however, i do think theres more than once universe

>>6
The universe is by definition one.

>>7

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse_%28science%29

>>8
Is that physics or science fiction? (tl;dr)

>>6
It's pointless believing such a thing unless you have a proper scientific founding in how a Multiverse is even possible, or if it has been generally accepted by the scientific community.
Up to then it's pretty much more of a fantasy, equivalent to that of belief in, say, Christianity.

One thing for shore , the universe is big

>>10
Welll..... if you think about it from the perspective of inflationary cosmology, it is plausible, if not unavoidable.

See, when the universe went through a stage of expansion known as the "Inflationary Period", everything was in a state of false vacuum.  From the false vacuums, supercooling occurred, exponential expansion occurred (false vacuums have negative pressure, causing its effects to beat out gravity), and then false vacuums decayed.

The thing about false vacuum decay, though, is that the halflife of the false vacuum is much, much than the rate of expansion.  So as every false vacuum starts to decay, there are still splotches of false vacuums.  These splotches of false vacuums "fall" off the universe kind of like how drops of water fall off of icicles.  From that new drop of false vacuum, a new universe is created.

If the energy of that false vacuum is enough to beat the inward effects of gravity, then that false vacuum will create a new universe through the same ideas that created the original false vacuum in the first place.

Rinse, repeat.

I did a little math on the side for how many universes were potentially created from our universe's "time = 0", and the number that I got was 4^10^17 universes created.

Booyeah.

NEGATIVE PRESSURE

To answer the question about whether the universe is infinite: It's finite in size, but if you go straight forever, you will never reach an end.  The way that I was taught it was that it's kind of like a Mobius Strip.

>>14

Non-orientable?

>>9

Well, I'm not clear on the specifics, but apparently the idea is taken seriously by a number of scientists.

Then again, so is "Intelligent Design," so...

>>16
Intelligent design is not taken seriously by any scientists. But I guess 0 is a number.

>>17
I should note that someone with a "PhD" in christian education from patriot bible university is not a scientist.

-int+inf=universe

>>17
>>18

Point taken.

I don't care what Aristotle said....

>>21
But what does.... what does.... he have to do with.... I don't.. I don't know anymore.... Momma?

most likely space is bended thus rendering it's infinity

but you know...
it keeps expanding itself since big bang...
I think someday it will reach a limit and go backwards or something

agree?

That's what they say, more or less.  You wouldn't happen to be a troll, would you?

Space is not infinite, the universe is still expanding and you can't expand infinite. Although there is no center or edge to the universe, think of it as a happy huge inner tube.
>>4Z6dI0Q5
Your right, Relativity says that once the universe gathers enough matter and the rate of annihilation goes down we'll all suddenly get flung around as space time quickly retracts like a rubber band.

if space is not infinite then there must be an egde to space. I wonder what this edge would look light, or if it would even look like anything....

>>27
It's posts like these that make me hate coming here..

Space is curved.  If you go straight through the universe to the supposed "edge", you will eventually find that you're not really going straight.  It's next to impossible to actually know that you're going in a non-straight direction, though; the curves are stretched so far that it's as if you're going in a straight direction for infinity. 

>>28
Are you saying that we would perceive space as infinite, rather than it actually being infinite?

>>29
Pretty much.  If we had the technology (and could see beyond the cosmic horizon which would require telescopes that don't rely on light or electromagnetic waves) we could potentially define the shape of the universe. 

I don't think that will happen for a long, long while.

>>25
no I'm not a troll. haha

>>26
But say. do you think that once space-time retracts it will once again expand?
and then retract, expand, retract and so on?

>>31
Yeah, it most likely would.. but it wouldn't be the same as putting a baby in a blender and using future technology to put it back to its original state.

It would be more like making a baby out of absolutely nothing.

I hope the universe is in a cool shape and not just a sphere.

Pretty much infinite yes. It is ever expanding at the speed of light. More confusingly, everywhere is the centre of the universe!

>>34
Proof?

>>34
You're so inaccurate it's not even funny..

The universe isn't expanding at the speed of light.  The universe expansion speed is dependent on distance.  Local space is expanding at an unnoticeable speed.  Distant space, on the other hand, is expanding at an exponential rate.  If you look far enough, the universe is expanding at the speed of light.  If you go even FURTHER, the expansion rate is many, many times faster than the speed of light.

>>36

stupid question:
does that means that things at distant space ar bigger than here?

>>37
Not at all.  Like I said, local expansion is very, very tiny and is unnoticeable. 

I'm feeling really keen, for some of that good ol' green

Marijuana MUST be legalized.