What is the name of that which exists beyond the Universe?

  • "The Universe is commonly defined as the totality of existence" but that is more of a philosophical position. Empirically we know (or believe) that it is of finite size some believe it is expanding others that is (or will be) contracting.

    As we gain knowledge about distant places, our scope of area has expanded from Planet, to Solar system, to Galaxy, to Universe. In the same way we continue to find smaller and smaller building blocks, from Elements, to Atoms, to Quarks.

    It is reasonable to assume, that the same gains in knowledge the removed the burden from Atlas, will find the edge of the Universe, and something that is beyond that edge.

    What is the name of that which exists beyond the Universe?

    Naysayers, who may claim that there is "nothing" beyond universe, are reminded that their beliefs are no less strong than, those who claimed that "nothing" was supporting the Turtle or the Elephant who like Atlas also supported the world. Lack of knowledge does not mean lack of existence.

    There is nothing beyond the universe.

    If there would be something "beyond" the Universe, that would be (part of the) Universe as well.

    This question appears to be off-topic because it is about philosophy. What's more, it does seem to cause discussion rather than seek for an answer.

    "Universe" is a latinic word, and it means "contains everything". Thus, I would call this "logical contradiction". :-)

    Observable universe, or the whole shebang? -different questions.

    This question appears to lack a basic understanding of the definition of "universe" ... which is strange, because the definition is *in the question !*

  • TildalWave

    TildalWave Correct answer

    8 years ago

    By definition, the capitalized word Universe denotes everything there is, so even if we one day discovered we're just a part of a Multiverse, all the parallel universes of it would still be parts of the Universe as a whole, where Multiverse would just describe its nature. Or, if some yet undiscovered regions of it would defy our current understanding of its physical laws and constants as we know them, all of it would still be a part of the whole Universe. So it really doesn't matter, if beyond the known universe, there are regions of honey, milk and chocolate biscuits and all of it is carried by a giant tortoise. All of it would be the Universe, the physical universe as we can observe, the honey, milk, chocolate biscuits and the tortoise. The lot. All of it. The whole shebang.

    Notice that I use capitalisation here, i.e. you can have more than one universe, but they're all a part of the Universe. Without capitalisation, it's just any domain, a particular sphere in physical or metaphysical sense, and only a part of the whole Universe. Sadly, this capitalisation is often neglected or used inconsistently, as is often the case with earth vs the Earth (the top soil vs the planet), sun vs the Sun (any star with planets vs our Sol), moon vs the Moon (any natural satellite vs our Luna), even galaxy vs the Galaxy (any galaxy vs our Milky Way). For example, observable universe is a sphere, a region of space, within the Universe.

    The beauty of this naming convention is, that we already know the name for (but not necessarily of) everything there is, even if we don't know or can agree on what all that encompasses, or what laws govern some regions of space, time, or some other, yet unknown existence of it. It is universally true regardless of anyone's beliefs, even if they choose to call all of it by other names or attribute this existence to a sentient being, super being, or God. We're all a part of everything there is - the Universe.

    *"sun vs the Sun (any star with planets vs our Sol)"* Are you saying that a star without planets is not a sun?

    @AndrewThompson That's correct. A sun is any parent star around which a planetary system revolves. A star without planets isn't a sun to anything, so it cannot be called a sun. It would be like calling all men parents, yet not all are.

    I think your first statement is wrong. As I recall from a talk with Stephen Hawking from the 80s, `universe` has been redefined to be `anything that we were in causal connection with in the past, are in causal connection right now and ever can be in causal connection in the future`, pretty sure it was in this talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKQQAv5svkk not sure what time at, will post in more detail if I rewatch it ;)

    @DrCopyPaste Please read all of my answer. You'll see that I'm not even discussing much how anyone defines "a universe", I'm trying to answer the question up top and explain what's the difference with "the Universe". A universe can be anything you want it to be. The Universe is everything it is, where adding to it that it also "was" and "will be" is just semantics. I would also like to remind you that Stephen Hawking is not necessarily even trying to explain (and by no stretch of imagination trying to define) _the Universe_, but _a universe_ that has an effect on us in one way or another.

    sorry, I am no native speaker, I never heard of that distinction in the capitalized and non-capitalized word. Can you maybe point to an article about that, as the wikipedia article does not seem to make that distiction (after what you wrote `this Universe` should actually be `this universe`right?)

    BTW I was answering the question in a generalized sense, and not exclusively from the astronomy point of view, like it might seem now after the migration. The question was originally posted on space.se tag. As much as I like astronomy, it will always be interested in a physical universe, which, as much as we know might not be _all there is_. And FWIW I'm not a native speaker either, but I do speak quite many European languages, and they all make this distinction, albeit they might use other words, like Cosmos.

    yea, but its quite weird why other languages would use two different words for it and in English you are required to attach the proper article or watch for capitalization when written :)

    English is weird. :)

License under CC-BY-SA with attribution

Content dated before 7/24/2021 11:53 AM

Tags used