http://space.newscientist.com/commen...age=3&referer= is a discussion of some anisotropic features of the universe in which it is alleged that the entire physical universe is 10^100 times as large as the one that it is possible to observe.

From the story: If this is a reasonable guess at size and a Uclidean sphere is assumed for shape, does it make any sense to guess at where our chunk of the observable universe may be within the 14*10^100 billion lightyear domain? Or, is my understanding of what is being said in the story too far off?

__________________
For those inclined to oppose human meddling with the structure of the universe or the composition and configuration of objects and groups of objects within the universe, consider:
Whether there is a limit to the magnitude of a modulation of chaos below which order remains invariant? Or, is order but a fiction invented by perspectives applied over finite, however large, time intervals?

You linked to page 3 of a (water-pooled-on-the-slope-of-a-Mars-crater) New Scientist discussion. Where's what you quoted, the original article?

Never mind. I found it:

Hints of structure beyond the visible universe

Guess, to what end? So far I'm not seeing such a guess make much sense; it doesn't seem to have much value given the steep hypothetical assumptions. But, I suppose it makes a kind of sense to guess if you find it entertaining. Do you expect more from it?

More yummy: BBC Nature: Hints of 'time before Big Bang' (Chriss Lintott)

__________________
0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...

Quoted from the bbc link: The second law, at its formulation, was constrained to isolated, closed, finite, systems and focussed on the thermodynamic properties of such a system while not allowing for the effects of "ordering" forces such as gravity, electricity, and magnetism which aid and abet the generation of sentient beings which further muddy the waters of order/chaos. I have been shocked and astonished that the WMAP data supports such a high degree of isotropy as it does and am led to wonder how much effect the second law has had in generating this isotropic state over the last 13.3 billion years.

In my abysmal ignorance and bigoted view of how the universe is structured, I cling to Uclidean 3-space inhabited by an unclear version of something that approximates a Higgs field with sufficient complexity to generate all that we have observed and are likely to observe. There are no additional spatial dimensions in my wonder world, backward time travel is prohibited, and the big bang, if there was one, did not emanate from a volume the size of a sphere of planck radius or less. Contemplation of the universe within such constraints is about all I can handle until the tooth fairy informs me otherwise.

__________________
For those inclined to oppose human meddling with the structure of the universe or the composition and configuration of objects and groups of objects within the universe, consider:
Whether there is a limit to the magnitude of a modulation of chaos below which order remains invariant? Or, is order but a fiction invented by perspectives applied over finite, however large, time intervals?

So who or what is "Uclid"?

__________________
*

A misspelling of Euclid.

__________________
For those inclined to oppose human meddling with the structure of the universe or the composition and configuration of objects and groups of objects within the universe, consider:
Whether there is a limit to the magnitude of a modulation of chaos below which order remains invariant? Or, is order but a fiction invented by perspectives applied over finite, however large, time intervals?