What do you think would be outside the universe?

[Dunbaratu]

This is one of those topics which sounds a lot more profound than it really is because it boils down to really just asking "what is the definition of this word that has always had two things conflated together in it? Which of those two things is the actual definition and which is the consequential effect of that definition without being part of it?"

The word is "universe" and the two conflated meanings are "Everything existent" and "All the contents of all space that originated in the Big Bang."

As long as we believe there exists nothing other than that which came from the big bang, the two different meanings are equivalent. The fact that they are equivalent causes us to forget which one is the actual definition, and since words are defined by common usage, if we forget which is the actual definition then that means we forget what the word really means. We don't even know which of the two meanings our own ancestors coined the term for. Once you start talking about the potential for there to exist things outside of that which we traditionally called "universe" it immediately raises the question - "wait a sec - which of those two definitions is the definition?

In other words, if we were to discover something outside the matter and energy from the big bang, which of the following two errors would that mean we had made in the past:

1 - We were right to define "the universe" as "all that exists", but then that means we were we wrong to call the stuff coming from the big bang "the universe"?

2- We were right to define "the universe" as all the stuff coming from the big bang, but that means we were wrong to call the universe "all that exists".

When it comes down to it, you've got to first decide what the word "universe" actually even means first. And if you go with the definition "everything that exists" then the phrase "outside the universe" cannot by definition mean anything. (And then it would probably mean we need a new word for "the stuff that came from the big bang - the galaxies, stars, and planets" because we couldn't keep using the same word for both without causing undue confusion if it turns out there exists stuff outside the stuff that we used to think was all the stuff there is.).

[Right]

I would (and many cosmologists) say that it is unintelligible, or impossible to properly conceive. Our best bet at understanding whats beyond (if there is anything) is through analogy. I like the analogy that Neil deGrasse Tyson offers because its easy to understand, but for that very reason most people have a tendency of oversimplifying the picture.

Found it, here it is (explanation at 1:58):