The nature of "space"

Greetings all! It's been a while since I visited, but I always turn to this forum when I've got a puzzle that I simply can't wrap my head around.With that in mind... the simple question here is this:Is there "space" outside of the known universe?What I mean is that, if you were to journey to the outermost edge of the known universe... the point where all matter in the universe had not expanded past yet... would there just be more empty space beyond that boundary?To give you a little more background, I'm currently in a discussion with a creationist and we are discussing the nature of empty space in the Universe. He is trying to make a point that, as the universe expands, new "space" is "created" between the different stellar bodies.My point is that space itself is nothing but the void... the medium (if you will) that all matter expands into. It is not tangible, but rather it is only identifiable as a lack of anything between the various stellar bodies. A true void.My own problem with this understanding is perhaps due to my current understanding of the nature of the universe. I've never understood that whole "balloon" analogy with everything sitting on the surface of the balloon. Instead, I've always thought of the universe more like a "cloud" containing all matter in the known universe that is constantly expanding in all directions outward.If my own understanding is incorrect, maybe someone here could help put it into better terms.Thanks!

Kinda... I guess I thought of space as just a sort of medium/non-medium, with planets, gases, and stars all just floating around in it. Kinda like pieces of fruit "floating" in jello.It sounds more like all space, and the objects in it (stars, planets, etc) are actually interwoven into the same "fabric" of space-time... and the entire thing is expanding.Is that a little closer?

-shudder- He's actually arguing a point for a "creator" by arguing the "on-going creation" of space between the various planets, stars, etc. It sounds like he actually is incorrect... but only in the sense that space is not "created", but rather that the existing space expands.Right? I probably should have been a little more clear with that point. I wasn't trying to say that tangibility was the only thing that made something real... but rather that space was the absence of anything, including subatomic particles.Let me approach it another way... you have a jar filled with a particular compound. You can tests to determine exactly what this compound is, what it is composed of, etc. If your hypothetical jar only had the void (and vacuum) of space "in" it... how would you determine that? How would you identify it as such? Crap. Does this somehow relate to my comment in the previous response about everything in the universe being "woven" together? If so, maybe I'm starting to understand.... (careful optimism LOL)

Thanks for the explanation (especially the answer to my hypothetical jar scenario)!One more question... Is there a reason that space expands, but planets and other bodies woven into that space "fabric" do not?

Ok, I kinda follow that...Let me ask just one more question. (It's another issue being raised by the creationist I'm talking to)Is there a "center" of the Universe? To expand on that, if space is finite, does it loop around on itself?I guess I'm just wondering how far that balloon analogy goes. Let's say we draw one line of latitude around the balloon, and one line of longitude. Excluding the poles, we'll have two intersecting points. Let's call point 1 "Earth" and point 2 "Tralfamadore".If we get in a ship and travel in one direction along our line of latitude to Tralfamadore... can we then continue travelling in same direction, along the same line of latitude, and get back to Earth?Thanks everyone!