Infinite Matter in a Boundless Universe

In a boundless universe, can both an infinite amount of matter and an infinite amount of empty space exist?




I believe so. Infinity is a non-finite concept and it cannot be compared in exactly the same way that finite numbers can be. The infinite matter and infinite space in this scenario would have boundaries in three-dimensional space, but would be limitless in volume. A simple version of this scenario is portrayed in this Flash applet.

Update

Thanks for the feedback, everyone! Sorry for the late response and lack of updates, I've been busy and haven't had time to work on the blog.


@Evan
That's an interesting idea... I hadn't thought about multiple universe theories combined with this theory. I will look into multiple universe theories such as many worlds interpretation for future posts.

@ItsmeDontErase
I am working on a post on infinity that I think you'll enjoy! It might raise some debate...

@Bill
I will definitely read The Black Hole War and research string theory. Thanks for the suggestions!

My "Constant Matter" Theory

What is space? We can define it as the lack of matter. If this is true, then in order to not have space, you would need to have matter. If we decide that space is a lack of matter, that it is nothing but an idea to represent this, we can then assume that the universe is boundless; that we have infinite space and only a certain amount of matter.

Thus the real question is not "Where did space come from?" but "Where did matter come from?"

Now, I believe the most probable answer (the one with the least apparent flaws) would be: Matter has always existed in some shape or form.

Now this does not have to fight against other theories. With very little effort, we can adapt other theories to fit this one. One example of this is the Big Bang theory. If we decide that the model presented in the Big Bang theory is not the initial conditions of the universe itself, but an endless cycle, it fits with the theory that matter has always existed.

The Big Bang theory as a cycle could be shown, in simple terms, as follows:

At one point, all matter was compressed by forces of attraction (such as gravity and electromagnetism) in one region of the universe. These forces acted upon the massive object with such power that its center became highly unstable. This could have caused a chain of reactions, creating an explosive, outward force, throwing the matter that made up the massive object across the universe. As time continued, this matter was attracted back towards each other, until they all met again and the force combined them into this "super" object again. The forces of attraction cause the center of this object to become unstable again, and explode, restarting the cycle.

Now, does this mean that there is a center to the universe? That this object would reform and explode in the same place each time? Not necessarily. If this explosive force could be created without ALL matter merging in one place, then this cycle could occur in different places each time. It could even be that there are multiple smaller "super" objects following this cycle in distant regions of the universe.

This perspective, thus, does not allow the expansion of the universe in terms of boundaries, but the expansion of the universe in terms of distance between matter. Thus the only piece of the foundation of the Big Bang theory that does not fit with this "Constant Matter" theory is the idea of the metric expansion of space.

This is the general version of my theory. I am probably not the first to think of an idea like this, but I have not heard of any very similar ideas... I am constantly working on and expanding this theory. Please let me know what you think. It would be nice to hear some constructive criticism. More on this to come.

Alex Dawson

P.S. I'll try to break up these big blocks of text with some images next time.

First Post

Thanks for visiting, but The Android's Lair is still under construction. It will be up soon.

Until then, why not go to my website:
http://www.alexdawson.ca/