The Shape of the Universe ?

It's Lamborghini Countach-shaped, of course.

quote:

Especially the "What is the shape of the Universe?" question........which somebody thinks he is close to solving!! - concise answers only, please!

round - where to I collect the prize money?

regards,
mat

ps if they really want to get technical then 'spherical'

If the universe has a shape, ie defined by outer limits, then what's on the outside of the universe?
Matt.

Doughtnut (Ring) shaped.

quote:

If the universe has a shape, ie defined by outer limits, then what's on the outside of the universe?
Matt.

Everything else of course.

If the universe is a doughnut, I would like to be on the outside of it...

quote:

Doughtnut (Ring) shaped.

I am obviously a genius as I hadn't watched the programme when I made the comment.

quote:

Originally posted by JamieWednesday:
If the universe is a doughnut...

...how big is the copper with the big mug of tea eyeing it up in the cafe.

It started off fairly uniformly spherical, but it seems to have gone pear shaped as I got older.

Best Regards.
Mark Dunn

The shape of the universe depends on firstly identifying what you consider to be a boundary, or where something stops, and then deciding whether that boundary is visual - the extent that light can travel, or if any waves at all at any spectrum can travel outside of - so deciding on what you call a "wall" might be cause for further argument. Also, we view it from the inside and generally regard a "shape" as being a view from outside, and we don't know what attachments there might be to the outside.

There was one theory that the universe was cylindrical, and with attachments, I think it probably looks like a big cock & balls. If it was my creation, that's what I'd do - mainly because I'm pathetic and immature.


The kid that drew that knob on the roof of his parents house was actually making a sign for alien intelligence to illustrate that we are advanced enough to know the shape of the universe. He's a clever kid, that one. Obviously a budding astronomer. Erich von Däniken should be all over it

Erich von Däniken would say it was a landing strip.

quote:

If the universe has a shape, ie defined by outer limits, then what's on the outside of the universe?
Matt.

nothing

So, nobody else saw the programme?

Any one recal how Euclid proved there is an infinite number of Primes?

Cheers

Don

Euclid theorums

It some how seemed easier on the programme.

quote:

It some how seemed easier on the programme.

Agreed. In fact, to my mind, everything seemed easier (and believable) on the programme.

I think the programme glossed over one or two of the rigorous details of proof...............

Cheers

Don

quote:

Any one recal how Euclid proved there is an infinite number of Primes?

Assume there are a finite number of primes, multiply them all together, add one. The result is not divisible by any of your original set of primes because of the 'remainder 1', so it must either be a new prime or divisible by a prime not in your list. So the assumption of a finite number of primes is shown to be false.

I think. I could check it out, but where's the fun in that?

Paul

quote:

I could check it out, but where's the fun in that?

No need Paul. What you wrote above, is effectively the same as Horizon's explanation. Pure and simple.

Cheers

Don

Monty Hall's game (two goats or a car) always ammuses me.

I take great delight with "Decision-making Directors" who are incapable of ever changing their minds having once made a "decision"....prats. I usually suggest they should consult an expert before making a decision. This suggestion also seems to cause some of them another wave of pain.

Cheers

Don

quote:

Originally posted by Paul Ranson:

quote:

Any one recal how Euclid proved there is an infinite number of Primes?

Assume there are a finite number of primes, multiply them all together, add one. The result is not divisible by any of your original set of primes because of the 'remainder 1', so it must either be a new prime or divisible by a prime not in your list. So the assumption of a finite number of primes is shown to be false.

I think. I could check it out, but where's the fun in that?

Paul

That was it, why didn't that link I posted say that?

It did. But in a very obscure way. Great clarification, Paul. Only with your "plain english" explanation could I make any sense of the more formal proof.

So, just for the "fun" of it, who can recall Monty Hall's game and who can recall the best strategy for winning the car, and who can provide the proof for that strategy?

Cheers

Don

quote:

Originally posted by Don Atkinson:
So, just for the "fun" of it, who can recall Monty Hall's game and who can recall the best strategy for winning the car, and who can provide the proof for that strategy?

Cheers

Don

Ok, so let say you have three cups. Under two cups is a 1p under the third cup is a voucher for a CD555 and accompanying PS.

The cups are placed, and jumbled up. Before your first pick, the chances of you picking the Naim Voucher is 1/3.

A cup is uncovered (obviously assuming the cup uncovered reveals a 1p). By changing your choice, you increase the odds of you picking the Naim voucher to 2/3 due to the reduced number of overall options.

I can't remember if they mentioned it in the Horizon episode, but there are obviously a few assumptions made so as to look at the problem from an external perspective.

Also, the shape of the '4D square' looks even better animated.

quote:

Before your first pick, the chances of you picking the Naim Voucher is 1/3.

Given the rules of the game, right from the start your chance of winning the star prize is 2/3.

Cheers

Don

PS I like the animated 2 x dimensional representation of a 4 x dimensional object/volume