If all matter was created in the Big Bang (not counting spontaneous generation of particle-antiparticle pairs), wouldn't that imply that a finite (if very large) amount of matter exists in the Universe?

By the same token, wouldn't that imply that the Universe is spatially "finite", i.e. a compact (if boundaryless) 3D manifold?

If not, why not?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/9419/2451 , physics.stackexchange.com/q/1915/2451 and links therein. $\endgroup$
    – Qmechanic
    Oct 2, 2020 at 19:41
  • $\begingroup$ Have you read about Friedmann universes with $k=0$ and $k=-1$? $\endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    Oct 2, 2020 at 20:51
  • $\begingroup$ @G.Smith I mean, writing down equations is one thing, but being physically possible is another, and I have a sneaking suspicion that solutions of those equations with $k = 0, -1$ might be unphysical to begin with. $\endgroup$ Oct 3, 2020 at 0:49
  • $\begingroup$ Mainstream physics does not consider these models to be unphysical. $\endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    Oct 3, 2020 at 3:48

1 Answer 1


All we really know is that all of the matter in the observable universe was a very uniform, very hot, expanding plasma about 13.7 billion years ago. We don't know where that came from. "Big bang" is just a name for our ignorance.

Whatever process produced that state could plausibly have produced a region of finite or infinite size. Whether it's finite or infinite, it could be just one part of a larger universe. At this point we just don't know.

  • $\begingroup$ I very much like this answer. @benrg $\endgroup$
    – Buzz
    Nov 14, 2020 at 19:10

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.