<p>Yesterday I watched "The Orville" episode 4 and there was interesting moment where a kid and old man saw the space for the first time.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Kid: What is this?</p>
  
  <p>Capitan: Kid, that is space.</p>
  
  <p>Old man: I used to imagine how it would be. It was nothing like this.
  How far does it extend?</p>
  
  <p>Kelly: No one knows. Probably to infinity.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>In real life we also occasionally ask ourselves if space is finite. And I think it's not a relevant question. We tend to adjust everything to Earth standars where everything is limited and finite. It's very hard for us to accept that something can be infinite, that we even think universe is inside of something and has a material "shell" or a wall. But even if there was wall it should be infinite. So in reality our "wall" is probably empty space or hard vacuum or infinite universes that we will never see because they are infinitely far away, well maybe most of them. </p>

<p>So it's that simple to accept that space is infinite, that we should not even ask that question, since it's so irrelevant and space can only be infinite.</p>

<p>Sorry for my english and the question, since you probably know this and much more, I just wanted to write something.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-10-07T21:09:48.883Z
Similar to https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/6014/can-there-be-an-infinity-of-stars-in-the-universe (which hasn't got good answers). Space could be infinite. All we know is that it is probably a lot bigger than the observable universe.
ProfRob
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-10-08T20:19:25.280Z
I like to think that the observation limit of 14 billion years, filled wtih a sponge lattice of galactic masses, is only a drop in the ocean of the universe, and that above the sponge structure, there is another structure, perhaps 2D like a spiral, 3D, higher dimensions, and above that is another structure and pattern. the trouble is that, while time on earth is constant, theoretically, time inside a black hole could be equivalent to many times the actual contents of the universe, because compression is always a form of genesis and black holes compress things.
bandybabboon
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-10-09T08:23:32.857Z
The question of the size of the universe is totally relevant to scientists.
J. Chomel
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-10-09T13:20:39.303Z
@J.Chomel size of universe is relevant yes, but the size of space is not. There's nothing finite about space, it can only be infinite. When you ask how big is space, you imply that it has a sertain frontier, which regarding space is irrelevant, it must have only one property - infinity.
lava-lava
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-10-09T13:29:30.230Z
Question proposed by @J.Chomel and Rob Jeffries are kinda ok, but they use the term Universe, which is not exactly what I was asking. It look like when they refer to Universe they imply space, so I accepted as duplicate, having undergone J.Chomel s authority.
lava-lava
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-10-09T13:46:37.217Z
@J.Chomel I want to unaccept this question being a duplicate because those answers use too much term Universe. Although Rob Jeffries's question implies space it has unsertain answers like "theoretically possible" but I'm saying that space is infinite for sure.
lava-lava
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-10-09T13:57:40.940Z
@lava-lava, I cannot do this myself. The only way (I know of) you have is to edit your question to make it more accurate and propose a reopen. Then moderation will take its due course. Now you still are allowed to create a new question with details that won't have it closed like here. See [ask]
J. Chomel
<space>
Is it relevant to ask the limits of space?
lava-lava
# Is it relevant to ask the limits of space?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-10-07)

Yesterday I watched "The Orville" episode 4 and there was interesting moment where a kid and old man saw the space for the first time.

> Kid: What is this?
>
> Capitan: Kid, that is space.
>
> Old man: I used to imagine how it would be. It was nothing like this.
> How far does it extend?
>
> Kelly: No one knows. Probably to infinity.

In real life we also occasionally ask ourselves if space is finite. And I think it's not a relevant question. We tend to adjust everything to Earth standars where everything is limited and finite. It's very hard for us to accept that something can be infinite, that we even think universe is inside of something and has a material "shell" or a wall. But even if there was wall it should be infinite. So in reality our "wall" is probably empty space or hard vacuum or infinite universes that we will never see because they are infinitely far away, well maybe most of them.

So it's that simple to accept that space is infinite, that we should not even ask that question, since it's so irrelevant and space can only be infinite.

Sorry for my english and the question, since you probably know this and much more, I just wanted to write something.

**Tags:** space

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Similar to https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/6014/can-there-be-an-infinity-of-stars-in-the-universe (which hasn't got good answers). Space could be infinite. All we know is that it is probably a lot bigger than the observable universe.  
> **username_2**: I like to think that the observation limit of 14 billion years, filled wtih a sponge lattice of galactic masses, is only a drop in the ocean of the universe, and that above the sponge structure, there is another structure, perhaps 2D like a spiral, 3D, higher dimensions, and above that is another structure and pattern. the trouble is that, while time on earth is constant, theoretically, time inside a black hole could be equivalent to many times the actual contents of the universe, because compression is always a form of genesis and black holes compress things.  
> **username_3**: The question of the size of the universe is totally relevant to scientists.  
> **username_0**: @J.Chomel size of universe is relevant yes, but the size of space is not. There's nothing finite about space, it can only be infinite. When you ask how big is space, you imply that it has a sertain frontier, which regarding space is irrelevant, it must have only one property - infinity.  
> **username_0**: Question proposed by @J.Chomel and Rob Jeffries are kinda ok, but they use the term Universe, which is not exactly what I was asking. It look like when they refer to Universe they imply space, so I accepted as duplicate, having undergone J.Chomel s authority.  
> **username_0**: @J.Chomel I want to unaccept this question being a duplicate because those answers use too much term Universe. Although Rob Jeffries's question implies space it has unsertain answers like "theoretically possible" but I'm saying that space is infinite for sure.  
> **username_3**: @username_0, I cannot do this myself. The only way (I know of) you have is to edit your question to make it more accurate and propose a reopen. Then moderation will take its due course. Now you still are allowed to create a new question with details that won't have it closed like here. See [ask]  

---

## 0 answers

