This Looks Like The Right Place

Nah. The real truth is that the Universe is all in your mind, which exists somewhere beyond Youranus (did I spell that planet right?)

Read it more deeply. Even that statement is open to question...

I think it goes back to one of the various quantum theories before that. When the unuverse consisted of overlapping proabblity waves, of which only one collapses into an actual real observable event.
String theory is as full of holse as a string bag actually.

Semantics dear boy. The Unverse is all there is. It may consist of lots of multiverses, but the set of all sets contains everything.
Except itself. Or does it?. Cf the Russell paradox.

String stuff dummy!

None of it is untestable, but that doesn't make it true either.

You would have no way of telling.

Please Sport Pilot, this is all well understood stuff. Talk about the Universe moving is simply nonsense. Movement must be relative to something else that the object can be measured against. Your hypothetical and unlikely multiverses and mirror verses are not such objects as there simply is no physical connection between our universe and these hypothetical objects.
Likewise your statement that the universe has a fixed center is nonsense. The universe is known to be roughly 12 billion years old. This is an experimental fact based on a variety of physical measurements. We can look out with scopes like Hubble nearly that far in any direction and see exactly the same thing regardless of direction. There is good reason to believe that the universe has a diameter of at least 90 billion light years, also based on a combination of physical measurements together with theoretical calculations. It may be vastly larger. Including infinite. There is simply no way at all to tell if we happen to be someplace close to the center or billions of light years from the center. Statistically the later is far more probable. Thus talking about a fixed center is simply nonsense. No matter how much we learn and no matter how long intellegent life exists this question will never be possible to answer.
I will take one last attempt at explaining why your "slowly falling object from space" can not exist. I will only use high school physics.
Let us assume for the moment that at a particular moment an object is at a point 100 miles above the earth and traveling at 2000 miles per hour west to east. Further this object is over the equator. Under these conditions it would seem to be standing still to a person directly under it as this is the speed at which the earth rotates at the equator. At the particular moment of examination the object is neither going up nor down. It is simply suspended at a point over the earth at that exact moment.
Now, what does high school physics tell us the object was doing one second before the moment defined above? Simple. It tells us the object was several feet lower and travelling up. How about a minute before the moment definded above? High school physics tells us it was a lot of feet below where it is now and with a lot of vertical velocity. If you want exact numbers any high school physics student can calculate them for you.
Now, rather then having the object simply be going 2000 miles per hour west to east lets slowly speed it up and see where it was a moment before it arrived at the stated point. Again, basic physics tells us it was lower until it finally reaches a west to east speed equal to its orbital velocity which as I recall is some 16,000 miles per hour at this altitude. At this speed it will maintain its height above earth until atmospheric drag slows it enough to cause it to crash.
This establishes a lower limit on the speed of any object from space entering earths atmosphere. It MUST be going at least 16,000 miles per hour. If it is going any less it did not come from space. It came from the earth itself somehow.
Now, this assumes that somehow the earth managed to trap a passing object in a stable earth orbit. This almost never happens. Most of the time an object from space enters earths atmosphere at well above orbital velocity. As the escape velocity from earth is about 26,000 miles per hour this is the speed that most objects from space will have when they hit the earths atmosphere. Makes no difference what direction they come from this is how fast they will be going when they hit our atmosphere.
Plain old Newtonian physics demands the above. You do not need anything fancy like quantum mechanics or relativity to do these calculations. The NASA guys did them with slide rules 50 years ago and got things into orbit and back.

Wasn't there something about ahhh horse shoe orbit ...
*

This fellow says that the speed can vary from 12 to 70 km/s:
"Earth orbital speed is 28.8km/s, orbital escape speed is the square root of two times this, 42.1km/s, and surface escape speed is 11.2km/s. The slowest meteor would be one that just catches up with the earth then "falls", 11.2 km/s. Don't expect anything less than 12km/s. But a retrograde body in parabolic orbit (the maximum speed for a body at a distance of 1AU that is a member of the solar system) might close with earth at a speed of 42.1+28.8=70.9km/s plus the 11.2 "fall" for a total of (total^2=70.9^2+11.2^2) 72km/s. So we expect a range of 12-70km/s with the slower ones in the evening ("catch up" and prograde, no retrograde) and fast ones in the morning where we do the catching-up and collect all the retrograde rocks."
Marty

Couldn't prove any of it by me.
Ed Cregger

Too True. This has taken so many tangents that it is UNi-real ! :-))
Eric

> misinterpreted... universe is Then you perscribe to the 19th century notion that there is only one universe and that there is only void outside of the universe.

Your complicated statement ignores the fact that there must be objects falling at a slowere rate than others. Those are the slowly falling objects.

No. There _is_no_ "outside the universe".

And the meaning with the double negative?

Yes, I read every word , very inspiring. I'm going to have to really get into this type of thing. I'm really burnt out with my job and have been looking for something to get into till I get my other robot thing in production. Plus, we have already been working on the cameras for an even different avenue. Its perfect and all are related in what I want to do. When I get up in the morning to do R&D and such I'm dancing in the shower and ready to go. When its time to go to the gazillionth pool I loathe every step of the way in comparison.
Wish I still had all those weed trimmer motors that I gave away to the uncle-in-law that made kiddy Harleys out of. I had 6 to 8 of them , now I don't have a one just to look at right now.
Thanks all.

Ah, but you miss the point. There is no space outside of the universe. The universe is it, at least in this reality. Other realities? Now that is a horse of a different color. Where have I heard that before? 8>)
Ed Cregger

I am ripping this off from Martin Moleski's prior post.
"The big bang was not a bomb that went off in the center of the universe and hurled matter out into a preexisting void. Rather it was an explosion of space itself that happened everywhere, similar to the way the expansion of a balloon happens everywhere on the surface.
"The difference between the expansion of space and the expansion in space may seem subtle but has important consequences for the size of the universe, the rate at which galaxies move apart, the type of observations astronomers can make, and the nature of the accelerating expansion that
the universe now seems to be undergoing" (38).
So if there is expansion and it is sililar to the surface of a ballon, then there are limits to the universe. So that logically means that there has to be an outside of the universe. Unlike those who are universally upside down.