thx for the input guys. clarifies some of the things i read in wikipedia that i didnt grasp at the time.

how do u guys know all this stuff ... did u research it before u post? lol.

Nope. Light has 0 mass, since it moves at the speed of light. It is affected by the curvature of space-time around a black hole or any other large body. Light travels in a straight line on the space-time continuum, which means when space-time is severely distorted by a large gravitational body such as a black hole, the light can get trapped or at the very least bent. This phenomena was I think the way they proved relativity to be correct; by measuring the bending of light around the moon. That is how gravity works, by bending space-time not by bending the actual partical.

The general estimate for the age of the universe is 13-15 billion years.

It's kinda sad that some people don't know the age of the universe (well the "accepted" age). I seem to remember scientists calculated the age of it by looking at the radiation from the big bang and calculated how long it took for it to get to it's current size

Its right below mexico right?

The education system in general needs much work... Preferably interest group free work.

Wrong!

And it has been proven by String theory and multi-dimensional realit___ies -- if that's possible.

Assuming Einstein himself was right when he stressed on the fact that the all elusive universal constant MAY never be found to either contradict or issue a definitive proof of his (widely considered as the basis of Physics, btw) Relativity-Law.

Usually, universities allow the general public into lectures.  Astronomy has been a long time passion of my own... I have several TTC lectures, and many, many documentaries, although most are dumbed down to the real fun stuff, I enjoy the lectures because I'm a closet astronomy nerd!

The best part of it is realizing how very little we actually know.  Science is.. what we do when we have no idea what we are doing!  It's %100 theory until we discover something that changes it, unsettling at first, but fantastic possibilities!

For example, in March of 2008 we had a Gamma Ray Burst(related to supernovae, star go boom) that was found to be located 7.5 billion light years away, and it was visable to the naked eye... so in other words, that light took 7.5 billion years to reach us. Now, coupled with that, imagine what it would of done to us had it been closer, and how massive the star must of been!  These kinds of discovers rearranged my thinking of how fragile and lucky, we really are to still be around and avoid being wiped off existance.

If you're interested, take a quick google for "astronomy lecture mp3" you'll get some hits... but I would only reccomend it if you're interested to learn the correct terms and information regarding astronomy, otherwise it will get boring for you.

By visible to the naked eye, do you mean of a brightness which is equivalent to something we could see with the naked eye? Since we cannot see gamma rays, it is either comparable in brightness or must have really been redshifted ALOT...

I personally got most of my physics information from a trio of big physics books I got from our grandparents house when they died. The first two are classical physics, which I found somewhat boring since it is just day to day stuff. The third is the fun one... Relativity! I loved reading that book while I was in elementary school... I found black holes especially intriguing.

You have two type of mass ( invarient mass )... the rest mass which is the Newtonian mass as measured by an observer moving along with the object.... and the relativistic mass who is the total quantity of energy in a body or system (divided by C^2 )... The relativistic mass (of a body or system of bodies) includes a contribution from the kinetic energy of the body, and is larger the faster the body moves...

Now, light is always moving at relativistic speed...so, photon have a mass due to the very high speed... if photon slow down, they loose mass ( who is transform in energy )... if they stop, they cease to exist and are fully transformed in energie...

In the Einstein equation E=mxC^2 ... the m is the relativistic mass... Rest mass don't apply to photon... but was used for ease the equation... take a look at http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ParticleAndNuclear/photon_mass.html

I read many books on the universe and seen many shows about the universe by Stephen Hawkings. I think (and also alot of scientists think) There is an unlimited number of Universes. We are one of an unlimited number of universes people. think of the universe as one big huge Circular Sphere, and around is many other Circular Spheres which are other universes. Between these universes is nothingness. Even if we developed light speed we could never leave our own universe. Think of the Universe as a great big planet. Eventualy it will be destroyed, It will be the end of our universe. But it won't be for others. You can also think of the Seperate universes as other Dimensions or Alternate Realities, and those universes could be made up by totaly diffrent compounds that make it up.

Then, the void where light (assuming it IS moving by the big-bang expansion ratio, too) is totally absent (and away from the bubble universe we are in) doesn't have a meaning either, be it outside or unreal. (PS; i made up this "theory" in 1972 to get my geography class degree in college, btw)

Take Copernic's centering the Sun "concept", it took centuries for religion to admit it.

It might take awhile for a mega-string activity to show us the path to a, for example, mirror universe or extra dimensions... doesn't mean it cannot exist or be proven though.

I guess it all comes down to HOW you & them & i define the Universe.

Matter in space. Gravity forces in action, Time in motion, 11 dimensions (4 of which ours to "swim" into). Reality. InfraReds readouts of a speculative edge or clear boundaries (implicating an outside, btw). Relativity consequences. Quantum Mechanics observations...

All of which indicate some truth to deny or submit to.

The open-minded have a knack for discoveries, that's a given.

"This has all happened before, and it will happen again."

Don't think that they were referring to the whole universe in BS:G though.

On a side note: In the Akashic Field theory it has also been postulated that our universe has indeed been formed a number of times before, until it was stable enough to exist in the form we now experience.

Wrong. Quote from B5: "We are all Starstuff".

All the elements that man, animals and plants are made of and which can otherwise be found on earth are out there everywhere in the universe.

And what makes you think there are no other planets out there with a well balanced eco system?

Lastly, concerning zooming in. The universe is repetitive. The same patterns emerge everywhere. Even in Chaos. Zoom into a fractal enough and you find the same patterns over and over again.

Actually I did find one credible reference for some evidence of matter beyond the extent of the big bang "horizon". See http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/080923-dark-flows.html.

Another interesting article from the same site is http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mystery_monday_040524.html, that proports that the universe ia 156 billion light years wide.

Some of the concepts are pretty confusing though. For example the observable universe is only as far as light could travel in the 13.7 billion years since the big bang which gives us a radius of 13.7 billion years of what we can see. However due to space-time "inflation" that distance is much further. This article claims that due to ST inflation that the starting point of light that has travelled for 13.7 billion years is actually now 78 billion years distant and so the extent of the observable universe is a radius of 78 billion years for a total width of 156 billion years.

What's not clear to me or well explained in the information about in cosmic microwave background radiation article or elsewhere any distinction between "observable" universe and how far the big bang has actually expanded. I don't quite see how we could know about anything beyond our observable horizon other than by gravitational effects on matter within the observable horizon but how one could determine the actual extent of the big bang is unclear to me.