The universe is all of space and time[a] and their contents,[10] including planets, stars, galaxies, and all other forms of matter and energy. The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological description of the development of the universe. According to this theory, space and time emerged together 13.787.020 billion years ago,[11] and the universe has been expanding ever since. While the spatial size of the entire universe is unknown,[3] the cosmic inflation equation indicates that it must have a minimum diameter of 23 trillion light years,[12] and it is possible to measure the size of the observable universe, which is approximately 93 billion light-years in diameter at the present day.
Definition
0:50
Hubble Space Telescope – Ultra deep field galaxies to Legacy field zoom out
(video 00:50; May 2, 2019)
The physical universe is defined as all of space and time[a] (collectively referred to as spacetime) and their contents.[10] Such contents comprise all of energy in its various forms, including electromagnetic radiation and matter, and therefore planets, moons, stars, galaxies, and the contents of intergalactic space.[23][24][25] The universe also includes the physical laws that influence energy and matter, such as conservation laws, classical mechanics, and relativity.[26]
The universe is often defined as "the totality of existence", or everything that exists, everything that has existed, and everything that will exist.[26] In fact, some philosophers and scientists support the inclusion of ideas and abstract concepts—such as mathematics and logic—in the definition of the universe.[28][29][30] The word universe may also refer to concepts such as the cosmos, the world, and nature.[31][32]
Etymology
The word universe derives from the Old French word univers, which in turn derives from the Latin word universum.[33] The Latin word was used by Cicero and later Latin authors in many of the same senses as the modern English word is used.[34]
Synonyms
A term for universe among the ancient Greek philosophers from Pythagoras onwards was τὸ πᾶν (tò pân) 'the all', defined as all matter and all space, and τὸ ὅλον (tò hólon) 'all things', which did not necessarily include the void.[35][36] Another synonym was ὁ κόσμος (ho kósmos) meaning 'the world, the cosmos'.[37] Synonyms are also found in Latin authors (totum, mundus, natura)[38] and survive in modern languages, e.g., the German words Das All, Weltall, and Natur for universe. The same synonyms are found in English, such as everything (as in the theory of everything), the cosmos (as in cosmology), the world (as in the many-worlds interpretation), and nature (as in natural laws or natural philosophy).[39]
The prevailing model for the evolution of the universe is the Big Bang theory.[40][41] The Big Bang model states that the earliest state of the universe was an extremely hot and dense one, and that the universe subsequently expanded and cooled. The model is based on general relativity and on simplifying assumptions such as the homogeneity and isotropy of space. A version of the model with a cosmological constant (Lambda) and cold dark matter, known as the Lambda-CDM model, is the simplest model that provides a reasonably good account of various observations about the universe. The Big Bang model accounts for observations such as the correlation of distance and redshift of galaxies, the ratio of the number of hydrogen to helium atoms, and the microwave radiation background.
In this diagram, time passes from left to right, so at any given time, the universe is represented by a disk-shaped "slice" of the diagram
The initial hot, dense state is called the Planck epoch, a brief period extending from time zero to one Planck time unit of approximately 10−43 seconds. During the Planck epoch, all types of matter and all types of energy were concentrated into a dense state, and gravity—currently the weakest by far of the four known forces—is believed to have been as strong as the other fundamental forces, and all the forces may have been unified. Since the Planck epoch, space has been expanding to its present scale, with a very short but intense period of cosmic inflation believed to have occurred within the first 10−32 seconds.[42] This was a kind of expansion different from those we can see around us today. Objects in space did not physically move; instead the metric that defines space itself changed. Although objects in spacetime cannot move faster than the speed of light, this limitation does not apply to the metric governing spacetime itself. This initial period of inflation is believed to explain why space appears to be very flat, and much larger than light could travel since the start of the universe.[clarification needed]
Within the first fraction of a second of the universe's existence, the four fundamental forces had separated. As the universe continued to cool down from its inconceivably hot state, various types of subatomic particles were able to form in short periods of time known as the quark epoch, the hadron epoch, and the lepton epoch. Together, these epochs encompassed less than 10 seconds of time following the Big Bang. These elementary particles associated stably into ever larger combinations, including stable protons and neutrons, which then formed more complex atomic nuclei through nuclear fusion. This process, known as Big Bang nucleosynthesis, only lasted for about 17 minutes and ended about 20 minutes after the Big Bang, so only the fastest and simplest reactions occurred. About 25% of the protons and all the neutrons in the universe, by mass, were converted to helium, with small amounts of deuterium (a form of hydrogen) and traces of lithium. Any other element was only formed in very tiny quantities. The other 75% of the protons remained unaffected, as hydrogen nuclei.
After nucleosynthesis ended, the universe entered a period known as the photon epoch. During this period, the universe was still far too hot for matter to form neutral atoms, so it contained a hot, dense, foggy plasma of negatively charged electrons, neutral neutrinos and positive nuclei. After about 377,000 years, the universe had cooled enough that electrons and nuclei could form the first stable atoms. This is known as recombination for historical reasons; in fact electrons and nuclei were combining for the first time. Unlike plasma, neutral atoms are transparent to many wavelengths of light, so for the first time the universe also became transparent. The photons released ("decoupled") when these atoms formed can still be seen today; they form the cosmic microwave background (CMB).
As the universe expands, the energy density of electromagnetic radiation decreases more quickly than does that of matter because the energy of a photon decreases with its wavelength. At around 47,000 years, the energy density of matter became larger than that of photons and neutrinos, and began to dominate the large scale behavior of the universe. This marked the end of the radiation-dominated era and the start of the matter-dominated era.
In the earliest stages of the universe, tiny fluctuations within the universe's density led to concentrations of dark matter gradually forming. Ordinary matter, attracted to these by gravity, formed large gas clouds and eventually, stars and galaxies, where the dark matter was most dense, and voids where it was least dense. After around 100 – 300 million years,[citation needed] the first stars formed, known as Population III stars. These were probably very massive, luminous, non metallic and short-lived. They were responsible for the gradual reionization of the universe between about 200-500 million years and 1 billion years, and also for seeding the universe with elements heavier than helium, through stellar nucleosynthesis.[43] The universe also contains a mysterious energy—possibly a scalar field—called dark energy, the density of which does not change over time. After about 9.8 billion years, the universe had expanded sufficiently so that the density of matter was less than the density of dark energy, marking the beginning of the present dark-energy-dominated era.[44] In this era, the expansion of the universe is accelerating due to dark energy.
About the Creator
Keep reading
More stories from Gabriel Apostol and writers in Earth and other communities.
What we’ve learned after 32 years of NASA’s Hubble
On April 24, 1990, NASA launched the Hubble Space Telescope into Earth’s orbit. This photo shows the Hubble Space telescope being deployed, on April 25, 1990, one day after its launch. It was taken by the IMAX Cargo Bay Camera (ICBC) mounted aboard the space shuttle Discovery. It has been operational for 32 years, and has not been serviced since 2009. With a 2.4-meter diameter mirror, it gathers as much light in 1 minute as a 160-mm (6.3″) telescope would require 3 hours and 45 minutes to gather. (Credit: NASA/Smithsonian Institution/Lockheed Corporation)
By Gabriel Apostol4 years ago in Earth
From Sanctions to Sunsets: Russians Find Refuge on China’s Southern Shores
As fireworks lit up the South China Sea on New Year’s Eve, an unusual group of revelers gathered along the palm-lined beaches of Sanya, a tropical resort city on China’s Hainan Island. Champagne glasses clinked, Russian pop music played softly from beachfront cafés, and families posed for photos under lantern-lit skies. Just beyond the horizon, however, lay one of China’s most sensitive military assets — a nuclear submarine base. For thousands of Russians, Sanya has become more than a holiday destination. It is a refuge from sanctions, political tension, and the unspoken judgment they say follows them across much of the world. A Tropical Escape From a Cold Political Climate Since the imposition of sweeping Western sanctions following Russia’s war in Ukraine, international travel has become increasingly complicated for Russian citizens. Visa restrictions, flight bans, frozen bank cards, and social stigma have reshaped how — and where — Russians can travel. Many say they have grown tired of what they describe as “sideways looks” in Europe and parts of Southeast Asia — subtle signals that they are no longer welcome, regardless of personal political views. China, by contrast, has maintained diplomatic ties with Moscow and imposed no sanctions on Russian citizens. Sanya, often called “China’s Hawaii,” has emerged as one of the most attractive destinations. With direct flights from Russia, visa-friendly policies, warm weather, and luxury resorts priced far below European equivalents, the city offers something many Russians feel they have lost elsewhere: normalcy. Why Sanya? Sun, Safety, and Silent Acceptance For decades, Sanya has marketed itself as a paradise of white sand beaches, turquoise waters, and high-end resorts. What sets it apart today is not just its climate, but its political positioning. China’s stance of neutrality — or strategic ambiguity — on the Ukraine conflict has made destinations like Sanya appealing to Russians seeking to escape geopolitics altogether. Visitors report feeling largely invisible as Russians, treated simply as tourists rather than symbols of a global conflict. Local businesses have adapted quickly. Russian-language menus are common, hotel staff speak basic Russian phrases, and travel agencies cater specifically to long-stay visitors from Moscow, St. Petersburg, and Siberia. For many, Sanya represents a rare space where politics recede into the background. New Year’s Celebrations Beside Strategic Silence The symbolism of celebrating the New Year next to a Chinese nuclear submarine base is not lost on observers. Hainan Island hosts one of China’s most important naval facilities, home to submarines that form a key pillar of Beijing’s nuclear deterrence. The base is heavily guarded and officially invisible to tourists, yet its presence looms quietly over the region. That Russians are toasting champagne nearby highlights the strange intersections of modern geopolitics. While Western capitals isolate Moscow, China offers both strategic partnership at the state level and personal refuge at the civilian level. For Russian visitors, the proximity to military infrastructure feels incidental rather than alarming. Many say they feel safer in China than in destinations where political tensions are openly discussed. Economic Migration Disguised as Tourism Although many Russians arrive as tourists, a growing number stay for months at a time. Some work remotely, paid in roubles or cryptocurrency. Others have relocated small businesses, IT services, or online consulting operations to Asia-friendly time zones. Sanctions have restricted access to international banking, but China’s alternative financial systems — and the acceptance of cash and regional payment platforms — make daily life easier. Sanya’s relatively low cost of living compared to Moscow or European cities further sweetens the deal. For middle-class Russians, beachfront apartments and resort amenities are suddenly attainable. What looks like leisure tourism increasingly resembles soft economic migration. A City Caught Between Tourism and Strategy Sanya’s transformation into a haven for Russians also raises questions for China. On one hand, Russian tourists bring much-needed revenue to a region hit hard by pandemic-era travel restrictions. On the other, the city’s proximity to sensitive military installations means authorities monitor foreign presence carefully. So far, Beijing appears comfortable with the arrangement. Russian visitors are seen as politically aligned, economically beneficial, and unlikely to raise security concerns. This quiet acceptance reflects the broader China–Russia relationship: pragmatic, mutually beneficial, and grounded in shared opposition to Western dominance rather than deep cultural integration. Mixed Reactions From Locals and the World Local residents in Sanya largely view Russian tourists positively, seeing them as polite, family-oriented, and generous spenders. Unlike mass tourism from some regions, Russians tend to stay longer and integrate more smoothly into daily life. Internationally, reactions are more complex. Critics argue that destinations like Sanya enable Russians to sidestep the social consequences of their country’s actions. Supporters counter that punishing individuals for state policy only deepens global divisions. For the Russians on the beach, such debates feel distant. Many insist they did not choose the war, nor do they control their government’s decisions. A Glimpse Into a Fragmenting World The sight of Russians celebrating the New Year beside a Chinese nuclear submarine base captures a defining reality of the 21st century: the world is fragmenting into parallel systems. As Western sanctions reshape travel, finance, and social acceptance, alternative hubs are emerging — places where geopolitics bend rather than break everyday life. Sanya is one such place, where palm trees and military submarines coexist, and where global fault lines are felt more subtly than elsewhere. Final Thoughts For Russians seeking warmth — both literal and social — Sanya offers a temporary sanctuary. It is a place where sanctions fade into sunsets, and judgment gives way to quiet coexistence. Yet the beaches of Hainan also remind us that no escape is entirely apolitical. Even paradise sits in the shadow of power. As champagne corks pop and waves lap the shore, the New Year in Sanya reflects a world where refuge, strategy, and survival are increasingly intertwined.
By Muhammad Hassan7 days ago in Earth
Myanmar Junta Holds Second Phase of Election Widely Decried as a ‘Sham Exercise’
If you’ve been following Myanmar’s political turmoil, you probably heard the news: the military junta just held the second phase of its general election, and once again, critics are calling it a “sham exercise.” From the United Nations to human rights organizations, almost everyone outside the junta is dismissing this vote as a carefully orchestrated performance rather than a genuine democratic process. Let’s take a closer look at what happened, why it’s being condemned, and what this means for Myanmar’s future. A Military-Run Election in a Nation at War On 11 January 2026, voters in certain parts of Myanmar lined up at polling stations to cast their ballots in the second phase of the election. This phase covered roughly 100 townships across 12 states and regions, part of a three-phase plan that began in December 2025 and will conclude in late January. Sounds orderly enough—but here’s the catch: large areas of Myanmar are still controlled by armed opposition groups or trapped in active conflict zones. In many townships, voting didn’t even happen because it was too dangerous. For millions of citizens, the idea of participating in this election isn’t about choice—it’s about survival. So, while the junta presents this as a return to political normalcy, the reality is much messier. This vote is happening amid ongoing civil war, instability, and widespread human suffering. Who’s on the Ballot? And Who Isn’t One of the biggest issues with this election is who is allowed to run. Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD)—the party that won a landslide in the 2020 election—is banned. Suu Kyi herself remains detained on politically motivated charges. Many smaller opposition parties have also been barred from participating. Rebel groups and youth movements have refused to take part, calling the vote illegitimate. This has left the military-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) as the clear front-runner. In the first phase of voting in December, the USDP already secured nearly 90 of 102 contested seats, which is a strong indicator that the outcome of the overall election is practically predetermined. In short, this is less an election and more a political tool for the junta to cement power. The Junta’s Playbook For the military, these elections serve multiple purposes: Legitimacy: By holding elections, the junta hopes to claim that it has public support. Control: With opposition parties banned, the military ensures it dominates Parliament. International Image: They want the world to see a functioning democratic process—even if it’s staged. But the global community isn’t buying it. The United Nations, human rights organizations, and most Western governments have condemned the elections as neither free nor fair. Key issues include: Widespread political repression Absence of meaningful opposition Election laws that stifle dissent Unsafe conditions for voters UN Special Rapporteur Tom Andrews even warned that the elections “cannot and should not be recognized” internationally. Voices from the Ground: Fear, Frustration, and Exclusion For everyday citizens, voting is complicated. Many are intimidated or fear retribution if they don’t comply. Others live in conflict zones or have been displaced, making voting physically impossible. Ethnic groups and youth activists are particularly vocal about rejecting the elections. For them, the vote is a tool to marginalize minority communities and entrench military rule. Meanwhile, ordinary voters express mixed feelings—some participate out of hope for peace, others because they feel they have no choice. The reality? The election process is fragmented, forced, and disconnected from the lives of most Burmese citizens. International Reactions: Mostly Negative Around the world, reaction to Myanmar’s elections has been overwhelmingly critical. The UN, Western governments, and human rights organizations argue that the polls are designed to prop up an authoritarian regime, not reflect the will of the people. Civil society groups in Asia have also condemned the election, urging countries not to recognize the results. The junta’s international supporters, however—countries like China and Russia—may continue diplomatic engagement, making it harder to isolate the regime completely. The key takeaway? While the junta may claim legitimacy, global acceptance is far from guaranteed. Looking Ahead: What Happens Next? The final phase of voting is scheduled for 25 January 2026, and it’s expected to follow the same patterns: military dominance, restricted opposition, and contested legitimacy. If the junta consolidates power through this election, it will likely form a government that appears “elected” on paper but remains authoritarian in practice. Yet the ongoing civil war, international criticism, and domestic opposition suggest that Myanmar’s road to stability is still far away. For observers inside and outside the country, these elections are less about democracy and more about power. The military hopes to create a façade of legitimacy, but the reality on the ground tells a very different story: one of fear, division, and a population yearning for genuine representation.This blog version is more readable, flows naturally, and keeps the key facts intact, while meeting Vocal Media’s style of a narrative, accessible, and conversational article. If you want, I can also add a sidebar timeline showing all three phases of Myanmar’s 2025–26 elections to make it extra engaging for readers. It would fit perfectly for a blog format. Do you want me to do that? Conclusion Myanmar’s second-phase election may look like a step toward democracy on paper, but in reality, it’s a highly controlled, military-managed process with limited participation and credibility. With opposition voices silenced, ongoing conflict, and millions of citizens excluded, the so-called vote is widely regarded as a sham exercise. For the people of Myanmar, the future remains uncertain. While the junta may claim victory, the country’s deep political, social, and ethnic fractures mean that true democracy and stability are still a long way off. This election is a reminder that sometimes, the act of voting alone doesn’t equal democracy—especially when freedom, fairness, and choice are nowhere to be found.
By Muhammad Hassan4 days ago in Earth
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.