this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
1273 points (98.9% liked)

Science Memes

15874 readers
3010 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] don@lemmy.ca 8 points 3 hours ago

I mean, we can talk about it for a bit, Angie, if it’d make you feel better, but that’s really about it, honestly.

[–] Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip 27 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

This is a postulation not a discovery.

Someone did a weird math thingy that gave a word result and this was how they tried to explain it. There's been zero confirmation this is actually the case. Just like they can't decide if dark energy/matter is a thing.

[–] Johanno@feddit.org 6 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

We have a theory for expansion of the universe. It is called "the big bang theory".

However according to the math our universe should slow down expanding, but we can observe it is speeding up. Solution? Dark Energy.

There are models that try to simulate the orbits and shit of things we can see. Now those models aren't working however... Solution? Dark matter.

This is very run down concept of what dark matter and energy is. Basically shit we need for the math to work out to the observation we make.

However I don't think we are inside a black hole. This would mean that instead of mostly nothing our universe would be cramped with matter....

[–] faultyproboscus@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

If you take all the mass in our universe and run it through the Schwarzschild equation, you get a black hole with about the same radius as our observable universe.

Things don't need to be tightly packed to be a black hole, there just needs to be enough stuff in an area.

[–] cptspike@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago (3 children)

How do we predict the total mass of the universe?

[–] faultyproboscus@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 minutes ago

I think it's a combination of at least three things.

Cosmic Microwave Background radiation gives us a pretty good idea of the energy/mass density in the universe at a fixed point and age of the universe. If you take the densities estimated from the CMB and multiply it by the estimated size of the universe at the time the CMB (380k years after the Big Bang), then you get the total mass.

Second, we can just look for what we can see. I think there have been large-scale surveys done to estimate total mass/energy in the universe.

The third estimate has to do with something called 'critical mass' - we observe the overall 'curve' of space to be very close to flat. I'm talking the geometry of space; two parallel rays of light do not ever cross or diverge. For this to happen, there needs to be a certain average density of mass.

Wikipedia has the mass of the observable universe listed as 1.5×10^53 kg, although this can go up to 10^60 kg at the higher ends.

If we plug the Wikipedia numbers into the Schwartzchild radius formula: r = (2GM) / (c^2)

Where G is the gravitational constant, M is our mass, and c is the speed of light:

r = (2 * 6.67408 * 10^-11 m^3 kg^-1 s^-2 * 1.5*10^53 kg) / (299792458 m/s)^2 r = 2 * 10^43 m^3 s^-2 / 8.988 * 10^16 m^2/s^2 r = 2.225×10^26 meters r = 23.52 billion light years

Wikipedia lists the radius of the observable universe as 46.5 billion light years.

So... given the Wikipedia numbers, the universe would need to be half the size it is now to be a black hole. At these scales, being within an order of magnitude is... fine.

If we bump up the estimate of mass to only 3x10^53 kg, then the Schwartzchild radius equals the size of the observable universe.

So it's within the margins of error of our current estimates that the Schwartzchild radius of our universe would be the current size of our universe.

[–] Im_old@lemmy.world 3 points 59 minutes ago

Approximately

[–] MycelialMass@lemmy.world 2 points 49 minutes ago

Light from stars tells us how big they are then adjust for things that don't emit light by looking at how objects move (i.e. gravity). Objects in this case not necessarily being single entities but often groups of things like entire galaxies. This is basically how dark matter became a thing. Scientists were like "hey theres waaaay more gravity moving things around but we dont see any objects causing it...."

[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 47 minutes ago

but like, the whole point of black holes is that time and space switch places, which means all the matter/energy inside them is packed in a single infinitely dense point

that's a pretty big thing to ignore

[–] ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

So, dark matter and energy is the Universe's theorized version of the Kelevin (from The Office).

[–] ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online 9 points 7 hours ago

Man I really wish we had super fast space travel like star wars...

[–] Jocker@sh.itjust.works 10 points 8 hours ago

May be that's why it sucks to live here.. It's related

[–] Geodad@lemmy.world 48 points 16 hours ago (5 children)

What if we're not in a black hole, but in the aftermath of a vacuum decay event?

[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 8 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Geodad@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

Look up vacuum decay. It's theoretically a thing that can rewrite spacetime at a lower energy level, and would expand out from a point in a bubble. The expanding bubble would erase and rewrite everything it touched into the lower energy level.

[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 hours ago

We're inside a dust cup?

[–] burgerpocalyse@lemmy.world 34 points 13 hours ago

no my vacuum is working fine, thanks

[–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 9 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Well, that might suck slightly less in the long run?

[–] Geodad@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

That depends. The chances of finding other life are lower. That would also make a cosmic horizon that we would never be able to see beyond. It would make us unable to find the beginning of everything.

load more comments
view more: next ›