My hypothesis is that the universe is actually a series of spacetime bubbles that are created by gravity. When black holes start eating enough matter they become super dense and with every atom they become more dense until they start to eat entire galactic superclusters and eventually they merge with other black holes until the effect of gravity becomes so strong that it literally rips a hole in space-time. When this happens it becomes a new Big-Bang. I think of this multiverse as being like the structures of a sponge. Each new Big-Bang creates a new bubble in space-time that is interconnected with the universe that caused this new Big-Bang. This would explain the rapid expansion of the universe from a single point. Eventually in a future so far that we can only express using very large exponents, all the matter in our universe will merge due to gravity and eventually the process will repeat itself and as our universe dies a new one will be born.

We are still left with question of where did all the matter/energy come from to start the whole process. The complete vastness of our still growing universe is so large that it can't really be understood in anything but mathematical terms that lose all meaning to humans.

This has made my day Megaly better, thank you

[removed]

Xenophobia is a fear of foreign people and cultures.

No I don't feel any fear of black holes. They're just dense mass with a gravitational pull that light can't escape.

I don't know if you're strange, but I don't have any such feelings. Perhaps I'm the one that's strange for not having those feelings.

The multiverse is a popular trope for those who grapple with the cosmological constant. Perhaps there are some other ways to try and poke holes in the cosmological constant also that don't include the anthropic principle?

Ironically, the anthropic principle hints at the non-physical nature of existence. I don't believe physical existence has ever been proven by science anyway? Form exists, but breaking things down to their most basic fundamental atomos/physical structure leads to the Higgs Boson, which exists without mass.

Leading us back to the nature of consciousness again. But apparently, it's scientific heresy to speak of such things, unless of course you are a quantum physicist who has studied Hebrew or Sanskrit.

This guy 4th dimensions. I still don't get the whole tesseract construct. Too much for my quasi hairless ape grey matter to compute.

If you want something to listen to in the car, I can strongly recommend Michael Annis' Space Rocket History podcast.

https://www.podbean.com/pa/dir-vf26u-26e5f

Incredibly detailed, his episodes cover the entire human space program in chronological order. If your podcast player doesn't list all of his episodes (405 to date), his website hosts his whole archive.

For instance, the entire Apollo program spans episodes #98 through to #380. Most episodes are 40 mins to an hour long.

There is yet another idea based on string theory. It proposes that the universe has more than 4 dimensions, but the additional ones are "rolled up" to quantum size. It would be possible that different sets of four out of ten dimensions exist, with different ones rolled up. These universes would be "perpendicular" to ours and thus unobservable.

A less technical perspective is that we - as four dimensional beings only capable of perceiving or measuring three dimensional spacetime, it’s pretty much impossible to comprehend higher dimensions. Maybe it’s trite, but if you see our perspective of space time as a flat piece of paper and a higher dimensional construct as a pencil, when that pencil breaks the paper, paper-beings are only capable of measuring or observing the circular hole spontaneously emerging from the paper, they have no understanding of the object, no framework to comprehend what a pencil is, it’s shape or function.

Anyway with this in mind it’s entirely possible for a multiverse of infinite possibility around us, without being easily measurable or observable/comprehendable. This doesn’t have to venture into woo woo metaphysics, things just are this way, there’s some things we simply can’t understand because of what we are.

Nothing. The Big Bang explains features of the "observable universe", like the cosmic background radiation and the original elemental abundances. It says nothing about what what is beyond our range of observation.

If there were an already existing universe within our range of observation, we would expect to see stars older than the ones we see. The age of the ones we see max out at a bit after the Big Bang.

[removed]

There are way more theories than experiments, because theory only needs a blackboard, or a pad and pencil, while experiments cost real money. Science makes progress when experiments invalidate theories until there can be only one.

I’m fascinated with the idea of infinite universes but to bad the idea only exists in science fiction

MEGA SPACE

Lets get all Byzantine with it, just keep adding stuff on to space until we've got 'Supreme August First-rate Senior Space of the West' ;P

Things don’t need evidence to be true or false. When something is, it simply is.

[removed]

The light from the sun comes to us from far enough away that even at the earth-moon distance it’s reasonable to model the rays as parallel. They’ll be illuminating the earth-moon system in a roughly similar way, but from our perspective inside that system on a rotating earth the position of the sun on our horizon doesn’t correlate to the overall position of the sun with respect to both.

This might be somewhat different than what your asking, but I think each universe is infinite but not the way you'd think. If there would be a multiverse, each universe is infinite, basically the infinite numbers between 0 and 1. Every universe is like this.

[removed]

Your right. I was thinking of loop like a repeating sequence. I dont kniw why it was stuck in my head vs an actually loop shape

I know there’s a Spider-Verse. I saw real footage in the Marvel documentary

Vsauce Michael has a video about this.

Not a moment-by-moment resource, but “A Man On the Moon” by Andrew Chaikin is a really good book on the Apollo program with lots of good background information. It’s the basis for HBO’s “From the Earth to the Moon” miniseries.

Apart from that the sun and moon are really far away and that you can clearly see why the moon phase is what is it because of how it is orientated in relation to the sun, just because the sun is setting for your perspective doesn't mean the moon is is going to be looking "down" on the sun