My little idea about universe structure

Hi all.
I've a very strange idea about universal structure.
I think that the 3d space on which we live is the surface of a 4 dimensional
sphere.
So.. the 3d space in which we live is "finite" (and not infinite) and
ipotetically flying throught the space to a specifical direction we will
back to the starting point.
So the universe have should not have a "center".. or really the center is
located in the center of the 4d sphere that we cannot notice because it's in
a other dimension. (this can explain why no one have found the center of the
universe from which the "big bang" exploded)
This 4d sphere is expanding! so two 3d points on his surface will notice
that their distance is growing, though their angolar distance is the same.
(this can explain why all the galaxies we see are going far from us)
Finally.. can happen that the light of one star will travel around this 4d
sphere in billion of years.. and so in the sky we can see also the light of
our galaxy billions of years ago. Or if you don't like this theory, you can
suppose that the 4d sphere is expanding so quick, that in "one second" his
circumference grow more than 300000 km. (and because no one can pass the
speed of the light, no one will be able to circum-navigate this 4d sphere
coming back to the starting point)

This is just my simple idea, I would like to ask you if there is any
sperimental proof that my theory is obviously wrong.
Thank you very much

Fabio

PS: a simpler way of explaning my idea is to think to a very little 2d
creature on the 2d surface of a very big 3d expanding sphere (an huge
inflating baloon)

"» Fabio «" wrote:

Hi all.
I've a very strange idea about universal structure.
I think that the 3d space on which we live is the surface of a 4 dimensional
sphere.

Sorry for you, but you are a little late - this idea is approx. 80 years
old already. It's one of the three possibilities for the shape of the
universe, provided the cosmological principle holds.

So far, our measurements aren't good enough to decide which of these
three possibilities *really* applies to our universe.


So.. the 3d space in which we live is "finite" (and not infinite)

Could be. We don't know yet.


and
ipotetically flying throught the space to a specifical direction we will
back to the starting point.

Provided the universe isn't expanding faster than we are flying... ;-)


So the universe have should not have a "center"..

Right. Hint: no cosmologist ever said that it has a center.


or really the center is
located in the center of the 4d sphere

Well, I think calling the center of a sphere to be the center of the
surface of the sphere doesn't make so much sense.


that we cannot notice because it's in a other dimension.

Be careful with the word "dimension"...


(this can explain why no one have found the center of the
universe from which the "big bang" exploded)

Hint: no one has ever looked for such a center, because cosmologists
have *always* said (well, at least since the establishement of the
cosmological principle) that there is no center from which the BB
exploded.


This 4d sphere is expanding! so two 3d points on his surface will notice
that their distance is growing, though their angolar distance is the same.
(this can explain why all the galaxies we see are going far from us)

Yes, that's exactly the description of modern cosmological theories.
Congratulations that you found this out on your own!


Finally.. can happen that the light of one star will travel around this 4d
sphere in billion of years..

Look up "cosmological horizon".


and so in the sky we can see also the light of
our galaxy billions of years ago.

No, I don't think this is possible.


Or if you don't like this theory,

Try looking up what "theory" means in science.


you can
suppose that the 4d sphere is expanding so quick, that in "one second" his
circumference grow more than 300000 km.

Yes, that's what cosmologists think happened during the earliest time of
the universe.


(and because no one can pass the
speed of the light, no one will be able to circum-navigate this 4d sphere
coming back to the starting point)

Right.


This is just my simple idea, I would like to ask you if there is any
sperimental proof that my theory is obviously wrong.

No. Contrary to most "exciting new theories" which are posted by laymen
here, yours is quite nice and amazingly close to the point. Again,
congratulations!


[snip]


PS: a simpler way of explaning my idea is to think to a very little 2d
creature on the 2d surface of a very big 3d expanding sphere (an huge
inflating baloon)

Yes, that's one of the standard analogies used in cosmology.



Bye,
Bjoern

"» Fabio «" wrote in message ...
Hi all.
I've a very strange idea about universal structure.
I think that the 3d space on which we live is the surface of a 4 dimensional
sphere.
So.. the 3d space in which we live is "finite" (and not infinite) and
ipotetically flying throught the space to a specifical direction we will
back to the starting point.
So the universe have should not have a "center".. or really the center is
located in the center of the 4d sphere that we cannot notice because it's in
a other dimension. (this can explain why no one have found the center of the
universe from which the "big bang" exploded)
This 4d sphere is expanding! so two 3d points on his surface will notice
that their distance is growing, though their angolar distance is the same.
(this can explain why all the galaxies we see are going far from us)
Finally.. can happen that the light of one star will travel around this 4d
sphere in billion of years.. and so in the sky we can see also the light of
our galaxy billions of years ago. Or if you don't like this theory, you can
suppose that the 4d sphere is expanding so quick, that in "one second" his
circumference grow more than 300000 km. (and because no one can pass the
speed of the light, no one will be able to circum-navigate this 4d sphere
coming back to the starting point)

This is just my simple idea, I would like to ask you if there is any
sperimental proof that my theory is obviously wrong.
Thank you very much

Fabio

PS: a simpler way of explaning my idea is to think to a very little 2d
creature on the 2d surface of a very big 3d expanding sphere (an huge
inflating baloon)


A reasonable man knows that relativity is from that primitive era when
the scale of the cosmos in terms of galaxieswas not yetknown.

Any man with reasonable intelligence would recognise immediately that
your "every valid point is the center of the universe" is just an
exotic offshoot and progression of Albert's stellar circumpolar
universe,in itself it looks as dumb today as geocentricity is.

Amazing that not one person spots it even as it relates to galaxies
and stellar rotation around the galactic center,it should have brought
the relativistic epoch to a close in 1923 but almost a century later
we find that thinking like yours prevails (no offense intended).

http://www.bartleby.com/173/30.html

"There are stars everywhere, so that the density of matter, although
very variable in detail, is nevertheless on the average everywhere the
same. In other words: However far we might travel through space, we
should find everywhere an attenuated swarm of fixed stars of
approximately the same kind and density.
This view is not in harmony with the theory of Newton. The latter
theory rather requires that the universe should have a kind of centre
in which the density of the stars is a maximum, and that as we proceed
outwards from this centre the group-density of the stars should
diminish, until finally, at great distances, it is succeeded by an
infinite region of emptiness. The stellar universe ought to be a
finite island in the infinite ocean of space."

If you wish to remain looking that bad then be my guest but I assure
you that you would be a complete numbskull to dismiss the notion of
galaxies as Albert did ,he has the excuse in 1920 that galaxies have
yet to be discovered,you have none.

see my comment at the bottom,

"» Fabio «" schreef in bericht
. ..
Hi all.
I've a very strange idea about universal structure.
I think that the 3d space on which we live is the surface of a 4
dimensional
sphere.
So.. the 3d space in which we live is "finite" (and not infinite) and
ipotetically flying throught the space to a specifical direction we will
back to the starting point.
So the universe have should not have a "center".. or really the center is
located in the center of the 4d sphere that we cannot notice because it's
in
a other dimension. (this can explain why no one have found the center of
the
universe from which the "big bang" exploded)
This 4d sphere is expanding! so two 3d points on his surface will notice
that their distance is growing, though their angolar distance is the same.
(this can explain why all the galaxies we see are going far from us)
Finally.. can happen that the light of one star will travel around this 4d
sphere in billion of years.. and so in the sky we can see also the light
of
our galaxy billions of years ago. Or if you don't like this theory, you
can
suppose that the 4d sphere is expanding so quick, that in "one second" his
circumference grow more than 300000 km. (and because no one can pass the
speed of the light, no one will be able to circum-navigate this 4d sphere
coming back to the starting point)

This is just my simple idea, I would like to ask you if there is any
sperimental proof that my theory is obviously wrong.
Thank you very much

Fabio

PS: a simpler way of explaning my idea is to think to a very little 2d
creature on the 2d surface of a very big 3d expanding sphere (an huge
inflating baloon)

this is an old idea,I think from steven hawking,
and the 2d creatures are
called flatlanders,and if they look far enough away,they might see their own
back,but this is in the 3e spatial dimension not in the 4e,as you
stated,(don't forget the spatial)so,you
did'nt understand it quite well,
it might be a true theory,but it is not yours!
once I was reading a book of roger penrose,and what happened,when I read the
newspaper afterwards I saw an article of a building engineer in the science
collum,
he stated ,that
a particle knew beforehand,when he can choose 1 out of 2 ways,he choose the
one which was not blocked ,so he knew before hand which way was blocked and
which was not, (QM)
this building engineer put it forward as his own
theory,but a few hours before I read the same thing in rogers penrose's book
from about 1970,so,I called that newspaper ,that they better first check
things out before they put it in their paper,
they were a bit ashamed,when I sent them a copy of those pages+the title and
author of the book,
so nothing new under the sun,
I quess,

marten

located in the center of the 4d sphere that we cannot notice because it's
in
a other dimension. (this can explain why no one have found the center of
the
universe from which the "big bang" exploded)

Everything is expanding away from everything else. There is no origin for
the
big bang because that very point is now every point in the universe.

That's right, isn't it?
Paul.

"Paul Neave" wrote in message
...
located in the center of the 4d sphere that we cannot notice because
it's
in
a other dimension. (this can explain why no one have found the center of
the
universe from which the "big bang" exploded)

Everything is expanding away from everything else.

This is factually incorrect.
Everything is not expanding away from
everything else.The Andromeda galaxy
and the Milky Way are approaching
each other, for example.

There is no origin for the
big bang because that very point is now every point in the universe.

Close enough.