Is the Universe Infinite?

If the Universe was anything else but infinite it would be very difficult to comprehend ....because
then the space/time/energy/matter continuum
must have had a beginning......and you and I know
that is an impossibilty....since nothing really begins,
....only changes.
0n the other hand, our Universe could be one of a myriad finite Universes, all expanding together giving the illusion of an infinite Cosmos.
And, come to think of it , it may not be finite or infinite......it may be something in between
these "human" categories.
(All kidding aside, folks, all the above is intended to illustrate the infinite limitations of our comprehension of the Universe we find ourselves in)
At any rate, I like Bo Go Wo 's position
on the matter best.

You have spoken truly!

Alikimr, I'm inclined to think that the universe is neither infinite nor finite. It is something ELSE, something inconceivable to us. The observable universe will continuously expand for us as we expand our empirical experience of it, but our abililty to always think of more about it is "boundless": I can't imagine our coming to the end of questions and interpretations. What could possibly determine that, other than our extinction?
Ah possibly some kind of total mystical enlightenment might do that. I do not mean by that the acquisition of answers to all possible questions; I mean the letting go of all questioning because of a higher perspective.

Useless speculation for purposes of debate only:

Infinity is nothing less or more than the infinitesimal turned inside-out. That's when, as written by BoGoWo (which sounds like a good name for an undiscovered subatomic particle)

JLN:
Once again, I agree with everything you say....with a slight hesitation on the"mystical" enlightenment you referto. What's wrong with just
an awareness developing from a better understanding of the holistic dimension of reality
that is all around us, where the whole of so many things is greater than the parts? Perhaps you are identifying this phenomena differently by calling it
mystical?
But why would we let go of all questioning.? That aspect of a "higher perspective"
is characteristic of many fundamentalist religions
even today.

based entirely on speculation:

I think *our* universe is finite. I think it has edges at which the rules of physics we rely upon stop working. Beyond that, nullspace.

I think nullspace isn't empty, just not reactive in ways that work for us.

I think nullspace was what caused the big bang. A ripping of nullparticles into their subcomponents, all of which make up our universe.

I like to think it isn't even that uncommon an event in the mega-grand scheme of things.

Is a ball finite? Does a ball have a beginning and an end?

A ball has a finite volume.

My football had a definite end.


Stoopid dog!

And what about the surface? Is there a beginning and an end on the surface of a ball?

If you decide there to be, yes. Pick a spot on the ball and you have a finite number of directions to go until you come to an end.

Hmmm, good answer McGentrix!

I would say "yes".

Though the beginning is arbitrary.

But start at any spot on a globe and travel in one direction and you'll eventually be treading on your own footprints.

Unless you're in a wheelchair.

Alikimr, I know the term, "mystical" has taken a terrible connotation, ever since the likes of Shirley Mclaine. It means--as you've guessed--more or less a kind of (extra-intellectual) realization (notice I dropped your "understanding") of "the holistic dimension of reality" (notice I dropped your "that is all around us" because it includes us).
By letting go of all questioning because of a" new perspective", I was suggesting a kind of epistemological revolution which sees questions as extremely limited and irrelevant regarding meta-cosmological matters, not because of the adoption of ideologies proscribing thought and questioning. This revolution may even be a transcendence of language and intellect as we know them. The major problems with fundamentalist religions is their intolerance and their lack of the unifying functions of mystical practices. They promote alientation and hatred toward other religious views. Mysticism, as I mean it, promotes compassion and integration.

explain Pi if infinity does not exist, please.

explain 'anything' if infinity does not exist.

we are in the process of transition from nothing to everything; without infinity, we can not approach 'everything'; therefore a finite universe will always be incomplete. It will not fully 'occur'!

How can a universe finite or otherwise be "incomplete"? One can as easily ask "what is the definition of everything" and why would it have to contain Infinity as its superset of Perfection? And what is infinity? It is NOT a magnitude; it is no magnitude at all. How can LAWS even exist in such a dimension because it is in effect a non-dimension.

In regard to pi; please denote whether you are discussing the Infinity of the Universe or the infinity of a Ratio. The two are definitely not the same! Aside from that, it would be the greatest error to presuppose that mathematics - presumably our most exact discipline - MUST be exactly the same on all planets containing creatures who practice it. One thing remains indisputable; you cannot use words as if they were members of an equation.

my version of the Big Bang, is that it was the beginning of an event in which nothingness, in a violent upheaval, becomes everything; but it is currently in process, and has not finished 'happening' yet.
When we finally reach 'everything' (including infinity), the system will begin to collapse toward nothingness, again.

[when the event is 'complete', the missing 'dark matter' that physicists have been searching for, will all be in existence, and the universe will be 'complete'.]

BoWoGo,

What you're describing is what many physicists have believed for the last fifty years, or so. The problem is that nasty little bits of evidence keep croping up to muddy the water and call the model into question. First, there doesn't appear to be enough mass in the perceptual universe to cause closure. Second, rather than slowing, universal acceleration appears to be increasing. Both of these two objections to the model have been dealt with, but not really in a convincing manner.

This model also tells us nothing about whether the universe is finite, or infinite. The Big Bang could be either a singular singularity (finite), or only the latest in a long series of cycles between "Big Bang" and "Big Crunch" (infinite). Given the problems cited above, it would appear that the universe is finite. The universe came into being and in the future will return to a motionless state where the universal temperature is absolute zero, and time (a measurement of change) will cease.

On the other hand if the model you like is flawed, perhaps another more adequate model can/ought be constructed. That's the way of the scientific method, and its done pretty good so far. How does Dark Matter/Dark Energy fit into the equation, or do they? The classical model is akin to a gemetric sphere, what if the universe is someother geometric shape? What effect do the multi-dimenstional figures at the Planck level, the very foundations of our universe, have on the perceptual universe? Black Holes, especially very large ones, may result in singularities at their "core", and those singularities might theorectically give birth to other universes that are beyond our kin. The answeres are to these questions and others (some not even formulated yet) will almost certainly go a long way toward answering the question of whether the universe is finite, or infinite.

My personal belief is that the universe is infinite, that infinity = zero, and that there are an infinite number of universes existing within that infinite zero.

Asherman:
After your excellent treatise on the subject in question, why do you knock your admirable physics on the head with such an obvious
mathematical error......that infinity=zero? I know you don't mean that literally.....so what can you possibly gain in harbouring such a viewpoint?