Skip to main content
Physics

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

9
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Is it truly outrageous to speculate that "the Universe is inside a black hole"? Because it seems common enough in the popular science press. For instance, New Scientist newscientist.com/article/… starts "WE COULD be living inside a black hole." $\endgroup$
    – Larry OBrien
    Commented Jul 28, 2011 at 3:58
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Outrageousness is in the eye of the beholder. Also, New Scientist specializes in reporting on what is probably best described as the "brainstorming" of the scientific community, hunting out the "maybes," "initial results suggest," "not inconsistent with..." type articles that make for splashy headlines, not definitive results in mature subfields, so take anything there with a grain of salt. $\endgroup$
    – Andrew
    Commented Jul 28, 2011 at 14:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thanks for the clarification. My feeling with New Scientist is that they're willing to entertain speculation, but not absurdities. For some reason, I'm pleased that "Universe in a black hole" is conceivable. $\endgroup$
    – Larry OBrien
    Commented Jul 28, 2011 at 16:57
  • $\begingroup$ Lots of helpful references in en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe, including an estimate of 10^80 atoms, not particles. My bad... so we're a lot closer than I originally let on, but it's still not a credible contender as an alternative cosmological theory. $\endgroup$
    – Andrew
    Commented Feb 15, 2012 at 18:03
  • $\begingroup$ "..... lends whole new meaning to the term negligible" $\text{LOL}^{\aleph_0}$. $\endgroup$
    – Selene Routley
    Commented Mar 3, 2014 at 23:30