Is the universe symmetrical?
355298
from what scientists gather, the universe appears to be symmetrical on all sides when viewed from earth. this conclusion was obtained when they found out that cosmic radiation was equal and never varied more than one in ten million parts when measured from any direction in space. \n\nAlso, the distances to the stars in all directions appear to be more or less equal. So that makes the universe symmetrical from earth's perspective.\n\nI dont think we'll ever reach the edge of the universe, becoz u would hav to start travelling there at the start of the big bang, and nothing travels faster than light.\n\nnow try to answer my question on time.
158254
Universe is not exactly rotating or spinning... it is said to be constantly expanding... and sorry i don't know about the big band
316623
The most recent investigations (WMAP) about the shape (geometry) of our universe show that it is FLAT, meaning that it will expand infinitely, parallel lines never meet, etc.,.\n\nhttp://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_mm/mr_content.html
889821
Actually, solutions to Einstein's field equation indicate that the Universe can be either (1) flat, (2) positively curved (like a sphere)or (3) negatively curved (like a saddle). All three curvatures of spacetime equally satisfies Einstein's equation. Also, I believe the solution indicated that the Universe is finite, but "unbounded".\n\nCurrent data from the WMAP satellite tells us that the curvature of spacetime of our Universe is FLAT.
26073
To say universe is infinite is partly correct because nobody has ever found its corner or a boundary. But some ppl think that if u set out in one direction ina hope to get to some end/boundary one day, you might end up turning a full circle without realing so, because space has some really small and complex curves much beyond our comprehension with our present knowledge and intelligence
608005
The universe does NOT have a center. The main reason lots of people think that it must have one is because they think of the Big Bang as an explosion. It wasn't! An explosion happens inside something else, and there's no evidence whatsoever that our universe is inside anything.\n\nStart with an infinite absolute void--no matter, no energy, no space, no time, absolutely nothing. Then, somehow, the Big Bang event occurs. Only then did space come into existence. We can then say that the Big Bang happened everywhere at once. To claim otherwise we'd have to assume that there was some other "where" before the Big Bang.\n\nA geometric form without a center isn't hard to imagine. Think of the SURFACE of a perfect sphere. Where's its center? Of course, there isn't any.\n\nThe fancy words for these things that are so hard to comprehend are 'homogeneous' and 'isotropic.' The first word describes something that is everywhere the same. The latter word means that no matter where you are within that something it looks the same in all directions.
1078826
The simplest answer to your question about the universe's width is that the concept of WIDTH DOESN'T APPLY TO THE UNIVERSE.  The universe is homogenous and isotropic, big words that essentially mean that no matter where in the universe you are, it looks the same in all directions. Astronomers tell us that currently the farthest we can see into the observable universe is about 13.7-billion light years. This implies that there's some kind of edge at that 13.7-billion ly point. However, if we could move to that "edge" and look around, we'd see exactly the same thing we saw from Earth -- space extending outward everywhere for 13.7-billion light years. For the same reasons we can't say that there is any physical central point to the universe.
1184658
The universe is incomprehensibly large and, please, don't try to argue it isn't - it is - no person who has ever lived could draw a comparison between the size of the universe and ANYTHING else - there is absolutely NOTHING to measure it against.  I've read articles saying scientists are able to see to the center of the universe now - I'm sorry but that is garbage - the universe is endless.  You can not see the center of something that is endless or, infinite in size.\nI'm not perfect, I admit there may be flaws in my logic so, please, help me learn if you think you have something to add.\nSince the universe is never ending, the odds are minuscule there are no other sentient beings anywhere.  I can't even begin to comprehend how minuscule - in fact, I doubt they can be calculated - if the universe is endless they can not be.\nThis leads me to believe there are aliens in the universe.  It's possible that aliens are here and have been here for a long, long time - but it's also possibly they've never been here.  \nWhat would an alien look like?  There is no way of knowing.
440038
No I think that the alignment of the universe can answer and solve many questions and problems ,Great mathematicians have done this for Centuries and you would be amazed at there predictions and preciseness
888932
There may be two answers to this question.\n   First;The universe is spherical.expanding from  a single point.\n   It is definitely finite and will someday become extinct.\n   Seems like a big ball!!\n\n   Second;Time acts as just more than an arrow barreling inexorably in one direction.\n   Every entity in the universe has a zero  time point.\n   You,me and an atom.\n   In any direction we look into the past.\n   This would imply a two dimensional expanding sphere.\n   This would not be much fun!\n   We know the universe works.It incorporates a sort of holographic feature that allows entities to interact,seemingly in a solid sphere.\n   Two people in a room see each other as they were in the past.\n   Maybe three-hundred millionths of a second ago.\n   Because our reaction time is about one-tenth of a second,we have no awareness of this time lag.\n   To be significant to two people they would have to be about 18,000 miles apart.They would be absolutely unaware of each other.\n   This holographic trick of the universe extends to fundamental particles[The uncertainty principle] and to celestial bodies,stars,galaxies and large structures.\n  Philosophers may want to jump in here to try and hone a comprehensive configuration to this phenomenon.\n   Well I hope I did not confuse you to much. I am going to have sit down and figure out just what I said.
1033786
this is actually a common misconception about the big bang.  the universe may be something like the two dimensional surface of a sphere.  it is finite yet has no boundary and no center.  nothing exists "outside" the universe.  to quote a dead writer, "there is no there, there".\n\nread this:\nhttp://www.sciam.com/print_version.cfm?articleID=0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147
358909
There is no "outskirt" to the universe-Each point is the center, just as every point on the surface of a sphere is a center.  One of the primary engines of motion is gravity, which is a warping of space/time.  There is a "thing" we call space/time, which has certain properties, but not necessarily substance (as mass, for example).  According to current theory, at the sub-quantum level, there is a bubbling of space/time in which energy is created and destroyed, but it exactly evens out-the "zero-point" energy.  So, yes, there is a thing called space-time which allows things to exist, but no, there is no outskirts of the universe.
708914
Any cosmologist will tell you that there is NO center to our universe. Assuming that the Big Bang didn't happen inside some "thing" else--and there's not a shred of evidence that such was the case--then we're forced to say that the Big Bang happened everywhere at once; before it there was no 'where' or anything else.
865765
A very thoughtful question.\n  I think that in the normal sense of a parallel universe it can not be.\n  I do agree that every entity in the universe is isolated in time  as a zero time point and in effect could be deemed to be in a parallel universe.\n  I guess it may be a matter of definition.
172469
Think of them not as linearly parallel but Trans-dimensionally apart/separated.   See the Inflationary Theory/Model of the Universe for more detailed explanations.   ...And if you need help with the Math/Physics of it just give me a call in Universe # 91234536544232329767543.  :-)
749190
In general relativity, they do not have to be. They are always symmetric, but are only diagonal for othogonal coordinate systems. It just happens that the Minkowski coordinate system is orthogonal (even orthonormal). It is typical to choose coordinate systems that are orthogonal if possible (for example, cylindrical and spherical coordinates are orthogonal), but there are situations where this is impossible or at least difficult (the Kerr metric for a rotating black hole is one example).
873155
Of CoUrSe It Is SyMmEtRiCaL!