No it's not, black is only there when nothing else is, it's nothing, that's like saying nothing is something because it's a word for nothing making it something!

There's a fundamental difference between "black" and "nothing".

Black is a shade.

Gah, black isn't a shade because it's not a colour. It's just a lack of light, when you see black there is no reflection or light being emitted.

no, but, arggh, you win.

Shows how much you know:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tints_and_shades
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black


I think you missed the point of my post.

"Black" is the colour/shade we see in the absence of reflected light.

"Nothing" is the absence of anything.

thankyou!

That post deserves some rep+ :tard:

Fair play OH, you bested me...again. Tit.

okay, think about it. if the universe would be endless, there would be an endless amount of galaxies and stars. if so, the space would be white, cause every direction you would look into space should be filled with a star or galaxy or anything, but it isn't. space is black filled with a huge, but not endless amount of glowing material. it's called the Olbers' Paradox. there are other reasons too, why the sky isn't white, but the current idea of physicists about space is, it's finite as there is a finite amount of space, filled with a finite number of stars, each with a finite life-span.

The current idea from physicists is that they have no idea whether the universe is finite or infinite, but they acknowledge that the observable universe is finite and about 28 billion parsecs across.

Scrabface: That would only be true if the universe was of infinite age too. The observable universe is smaller than the actual universe because we can only see stars whose light has had time to travel to us - anything further away than 14 parsecs and the universe hasn't existed long enough for the light to reach us.

It's weird that, here's a little related rhetorical question for you all. If we only see things like planets as they were millions of years ago (I'm talking distant planets) then if an alien life form had a super powerful telescope that could zoom into say Europe, would they actually see Pangaea as it was when dinosaurs roamed it?

thats a very good point, but what im saying is, space is endless, maybe not the universe, but they are two different things, perhaps i have been misunderstood.

What do you mean? Space as in nothingness? This I suppose would be correct since Space is just an absence of atoms isn't it?

we can only see stars that are in our "horizont" its like when you look at the sea and you cant see further than your line of sight,the horizont is the end of our line of sight... or something like that


edit: this is what i found at a croatian site : http://www.bug.hr/bugvideo/svemir-beskonacan/1764.aspx



edit: i think someone requested a pic of gliese so here it is:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...e_581_d-v1.jpg

yes, i just mean the darkness, you know, just space on its own, thats what i mean is infinite.

I think your definition of a universe is askew, then.

Also, if the universe is forever expanding then the darkness beyond the edge of your universe will eventually be home to balls of rock and this process will continue forever.

If the universe is infinitely expanding then whatever's outside it must be infinite.

Unless there's nothing outside it.

But then what is it expanding into?

...This hurts my head.

That's the thing OddHunter, can our brains comprehend the end of the universe? Are we built to process that info?

We're built to warn other monkeys about wolves.

there was nothing,it was only matter and anti matter that caused the big bang

I think you're using the term 'the universe' to mean 'That part of the universe that has matter in it'. 'The universe' actually means everything; including the dimensions of space and time.

Before the big bang, there were no dimensions. There was no up-down, left-right, yesterday-tomorrow. It wasn't just matter that expanded with the bang; it was spacetime itself. Thus, if the universe isn't infinite, it implies that there is some sort of 'edge' beyond which you cannot travel. Precisely what form that edge takes is impossible for our puny human brains to imagine, but that doesn't mean it can't exist. The same is true of most of quantam physics, after all.

here is a pic from wiki that show that it isnt quite infinite

That doesn't prove anything of the sort. All it shows is the timeline of what we can see from Planet Earth.

Also, I edited your post to make it actually readable without stretching the screen. Hope you don't mind.

i dont mind ;) sorry for that big screen,i had an issue with my connection and i copied the links and something went wrong.... happens,anyhow that dark energy is probably the thing at the edge of the universe,mabe there are more than one universes,mabe there are millions of em,if you watched that vid i posted you would know what i meant :)

From being an adolescent, I have been confused as to how anyone could possibly suggest that there is another universe. If the universe comprises of everything that exists, then surely this "other" universe must become part of the "genuine" universe?

Times were simplier then.

well,that...i... dang i have nothing to say,mabe later i get a thought or two...or mabe its just a huge space with lots of balls and those balls or cilinders or (our universe)whatever we call universe,mabe the actual thing is outside our universe where there are more of em in an even bigger space.....

i just had the temptation to make an immature dirty joke then, i think i'll pass.
i just got confused and shit.
just think about this, if space (not the universe) was not infinite, im not saying it is, then what would be out side of it? dark, white, land, oddworld, (obviously not but, you know)?

You're on the wrong forum.

i dont know mabe pure nothingness,empty space with no matter or anti matter,just empty....

yes, thats what i mean is infinate, thanks scrab.

We understand that's what you are talking about. We're just saying that the physics don't back up your view. Try actually reading my previous posts to understand how I see it.

Also, just posting images with no context is less than useful. What are you trying to say?

well that would be like a big boundary of our universe as for what you were saying i understand...hmm could you imagine that when 1 second passes on earth that a 1000 years pass on a distant galaxy, creepy

If I translated your previous post correctly I think you've got the wrong picture...that picture cannot map the whole universe...firstly because we cannot map the whole universe yet and secondly that picture suggests that galaxies are evenly spread right up to the edge of the universe which we all know can't be the case.

Prove to me that that isn't the case.

Simple, the Universe is supposedly still expanding, so for galaxies to form in the new space, it would take millions upon millions of years and by then, there is 'more universe'

No-one here has considered that maybe we're wrong about how everything works.

mabe,but mabe not,till we dont reatch the edge of the universe we can just make teories about what is beyond our universe,mabe infinity