Is saddle still the best candidate? Like when you move a circle across a circle you get a torus, and when you move a parabola across parabola you get a “saddle”
First thing I will point out is there is no known shape of the univers.
ewigkaiwelo@lemmy.world 4 days ago
MelodiousFunk@slrpnk.net 4 days ago
I want a toroidal universe. Just so it can be eaten by an extracosmic Homer Simpson.
jabathekek@sopuli.xyz 4 days ago
obviously the eye of our universe is flat
JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
If we assume the hubble constant is the same in all directions, the farthest we’d be able to see would be a sphere, dictated by the time light has had to travel to us.
Grimpen@lemmy.ca 4 days ago
That’s what I’m assuming the original diagram is showing, the “Observable Universe” in some sort of radically increasing scale.
JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
It’d be interesting to see what a log scale would look like for this. I’ll see if I can find one.
Here’s one.
Log scale diagram of the observable universe pablocarlosbudassi.com/…/atlas-of-universe-is-lin…
Looks like the image at the top is a bit condensed comparatively.
Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 4 days ago
I’ll admit, I’m not deep in astronomy but thats inherently misguided. In a 3d space, observing at a fixed point, all areas that extend past how far we can observe would not be the shape of the universe but just our range of vision.
Tinidril@midwest.social 3 days ago
Thus the term “observable universe”. Everything beyond our observable universe is being expanded away from us at faster than the speed of light, so nothing outside will ever reach us. Causality is completely and irrevocably severed at those distances so, arguably, anything outside the observable universe is not part of “our” universe.
Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 3 days ago
My point is, it doesn’t reveal anything about the nature of the universe only about the limited view we can observe.