Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 2/27/2002 2:10:44 PM EDT
In the spirit of the topic on time travel http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=96759&page=1 I ask the following question: If the universe is constantly expanding (can be proven scientifically though measuring doppler also know as "red" shift), what is it expanding into?
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 2:13:32 PM EDT
The universe is expanding into ITSELF [smoke]
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 3:38:05 PM EDT
I get a terrible headache every time I think of this. By definition the universe is ALL, but what's on the other side of ALL? Is the universe like a balloon that's being inflated, with a boundary? I personally think that it's infinite, and we humans just can NOT comprehend infinity. I'm not religious, but this topic comes closer to making me believe there may be a god than any other. Perhaps it's more of a matter for metaphysics than physics. (Fade to Kansas, "Portrait (He Knew)" [:D]
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 3:50:45 PM EDT
I agree with ECS that because the universe is all that there is, it must be expanding into itself. Don't even bring up the possibility of our laws of physics not applying universally throughout the universe and that as we expand into ourselves, we create another dimension and oh god where is that tylenol......my head really hurts now.
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 4:06:55 PM EDT
The universe is not expanding into itself...that's logically and physically impossible. The universe can be imagined as a ballon without that part you blow into, expanding. Into what, we don't know. Right now, there is not even mathematics to describe what it is expanding into, although scientists have called it "superspace" just to have something to call it. Interestingly enough, if you imagine the universe as a balloon, all the matter in the universe isn't inside the balloon but instead imbedded in the surface of the balloon.
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 4:09:33 PM EDT
There really is no boundry except that set by the nature of space/time itself = curved. Any path taken from one point to another, no matter how straight you try to keep it, will be curved and thus you will eventually end up where you started. Like the surface of a sphere, no beginning, no middle and no end. Not only is the universe expanding, but it is creating new space and matter along the way. Don't ask me why this is, it just is. It seems that the Universe was designed or destined to promote creation. And here is another brain twister, since everything is expanding away from itself, there is no center point. Every point was once the center of the Universe.
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 4:14:37 PM EDT
This subject expands my knowledge!
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 4:18:26 PM EDT
"There are two things that the universe has in infinite supply; hydrogen and human stupidity. And I'm not too sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein If the expansion of the universe is powered by stupidity, no wonder it just keeps going!
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 4:29:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/27/2002 4:30:43 PM EDT by cmjohnson]
I have thought about this subject quite a bit, and I came across an interesting hypothesis that MIGHT explain the observed expansion of the universe in the form of the observed redshift, which is proportional to the distance of the object being observed. Suppose for a moment that space isn't totally transparent to the passage of light (and other electromagnetic energy as well), but extracts a small amount of that energy as it passes through it. A beam of light can't change its velocity according to what we know, so if you were to extract energy from it, it would...reduce its frequency, hence showing a redshift...! The effect would be proportional to distance. It looks like a perfect fit to the observed conditions to me. But then again, I'm not an astrophysicist and don't have any way to prove this theory. It's just my thought on the subject. Humor to follow: If the universe is expanding, what is it expanding into? Well, it's expanding into a large tub of water balanced on the back of a giant turtle. Yeah, but what's the turtle standing on? [:D] Nice try, bub. It's turtles all the way down. [uzi] CJ
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 4:35:55 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Sodie: There really is no boundry except that set by the nature of space/time itself = curved. Any path taken from one point to another, no matter how straight you try to keep it, will be curved and thus you will eventually end up where you started. Like the surface of a sphere, no beginning, no middle and no end. Not only is the universe expanding, but it is creating new space and matter along the way. Don't ask me why this is, it just is. It seems that the Universe was designed or destined to promote creation. And here is another brain twister, since everything is expanding away from itself, there is no center point. Every point was once the center of the Universe.
View Quote
Space/time is curved or warped by gravitational fields. Why does the earth go around the sun? Gravity you say? Sure, but gravity is not pulling us down towards the sun. The suns gravitational field warps or curves space around it which causes us to take a path circling the sun. The universe is not only expanding but its expansion is accelerating. Figure that one out
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 4:55:21 PM EDT
Easy. The 'outside' of the universe is drawing ever nearer to an intensely, perhaps INFINITELY massive object that totally surrounds our universe. As it draws closer, it is accelerated toward it, progressively more so as time goes on. What's beyond the infinite? Lots and lots of parking space, that's what! And not a parking meter to be found! [:D] A mind-blower for you: If space is infinite, but you're driving a spaceship that is moving at infinite velocity, what happens? No matter how far the edge of infinity is, you're there now. If there is no edge, you go on forever...but with infinite speed, the travel time to any point is exactly zero. Are you sufficiently zoned out now? [whacko] CJ
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 5:10:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/27/2002 5:22:54 PM EDT by Boomholzer]
The “red shift” method of measuring distance has estimated the envelope of the expanding product of the “Big Bang” at 14-15 billion years ago. That “proves” the “big bang” and age of the universe because the amount of "red shift" is constant at any normal from the center of earth. Note that this does not indicate that the earth is the center of the universe because the ratio of the earth and its orbit to the theoretical “origin of the universe” is pennies (small) compared to the whole of the universe, the distance to the universe’s expanding envelope should be relatively constant. Sodie: Everything (our universe’s matter) is expanding from itself relative to itself, no matter where the observer is. This does not imply there was no origin. It is theorized that there was an origin. The “Big Bang” was an explosion of matter, not undefined space. Radiation, and gravity are a byproduct of matter. The envelope of the expanding universe may or may not create space (Ether?). Your special analogy of a sphere eludes me. No boundary has been defined outside of out universe; this does not imply a spherical likeness or any distortion of space/time. So back to the original question; what is it expanding into? It may be called the Ether (or Kansas), or it may not be. Depending on if you subscribe to the entrained Ether theory or not. The Ether is the substance of electromagnetic wave propagation (light) and is used by some to define modern physics. The Ether may be influenced by the rotational velocity of a mass (Entrained), or it may not. Therefore, cmjohnson, the Ether (call it space), can be theorized to do what you propose; influence light propagation. (see Michaelson Morley, Sacnac experiments). Outside of our universe?? Most likely it is “space” (undefined) without matter, radiation, and gravity. Me, I don’t really care. Since we can’t seem to understand WTF is going on inside our own heads, much less our own solar system, why worry about the origin of the universe?
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 6:01:18 PM EDT
I NEED more SPACE!!!!
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 6:06:03 PM EDT
The universe is a giant expanding ball of cosmic raisin bread dough. Soon we will be put into the Furnace of the Gods and baked at 350 for 45 minutes. Then we will all be devoured. The end is nigh! Repent, repent!
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 6:36:49 PM EDT
I am very surprised at the quality of the answers thus far! Some of you have gone to great length to come up with some insightful and even very humorous theories. Kudos to you! I thought I would weigh in with my theory. What if the measure of the universe has nothing to do with matter. As humans living in a physical world we are taught to define existence on whether we can see it, feel it, touch it, taste it, or hear it. What the universe has more to do with a relationship of space and time. Sodie touched on this. If I can take his hypothesis a little further and equate space with time. The universe must expand until the point when time ceases to pass. This is to say the boundary of the universe is time itself. Time of course is never ending as you can subdivide it into infinitesimally smaller units of measure but it still continues to progress.
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 6:50:42 PM EDT
I always understood this to mean that the matter was expanding inside the void (the universe). The void is endless, in the sense that it is curved--like running around inside a basketball, you never get done, you just keep running around and around. But unlike a basketball, space is not spherical, it is shaped more like a pringle chip except that there are no edges on the pringle. It isn't something you can easily visualize in 3D. That's why we have mathematics to explain it in more abstract terms. The disagreement between scientists is over whether the matter racing away will ever slow down and start clumping back together, just stop completely (no more red shift) or not stop at all. It's hard to say since energy never goes away, it just gets transformed into something else. But then there are the issues of mass and gravity to consider. It's fascinating, and so much more rewarding than the typical religious answer of "it is because it is."
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 6:50:49 PM EDT
Of course it could just be parking lots beyond the edge of the universe. Could you imagine traveling billions of years with trans warp drives and finally reaching the edge only to see a toll booth with some cracker in an orange bib asking for $5.
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 6:51:42 PM EDT
Originally Posted By IBIAFR: I thought I would weigh in with my theory. What if the measure of the universe has nothing to do with matter. As humans living in a physical world we are taught to define existence on whether we can see it, feel it, touch it, taste it, or hear it. What the universe has more to do with a relationship of space and time. Sodie touched on this. If I can take his hypothesis a little further and equate space with time. The universe must expand until the point when time ceases to pass. This is to say the boundary of the universe is time itself. Time of course is never ending as you can subdivide it into infinitesimally smaller units of measure but it still continues to progress.
View Quote
Well, your theory contradicts what many physicists think about time. First off, space and time are not two separate entities, but co-exist in the continuum that is called "spacetime." You can't have time without space, and space can't exist without time---that is, time is just another dimension of existence, just like depth, breadth and width. Time is the dimension of an object that goes into the future. If you could look at the universe from "outside" it, assuming such a term had any meaning, you would see it as a monolithic, layered block, extending back in time to the beginning and forward to where it is now. In that sense, time does not exist as a separate force that exists apart from the universe.
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 7:12:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/28/2002 6:32:53 AM EDT by cmjohnson]
Actually, there is a theory that has been advanced, and accepted in some circles, that states that there IS an absolute limit to the intrinsic resolution of time. Time is granular, but has extremely fine grains. Think of it as digital time. There is either a bit or there isn't, and there can't be half a bit or any other fraction. There may be an absolute minimum unit of time. I was given to understand that there's actually some evidence to support this theory. Here's another interesting theory for you: If the observed red shift were extended out far enough in the distance, where it continually increases, eventually it'll reach the maximum value, which means the frequency of the observed energy has dropped to zero. At this point, the far reaches of the universe are totally blocked from our view forever unless we go there. This is identical in every significant respect to the event horizon of a black hole, only on a much larger scale. Not only that, but the total mass of the universe may in fact generate enough gravity that two far distant points may have a total gravitational gradient between them that prevents light from passing between them. The light redshifts to zero before it makes it out of the gravity well. Yet you could travel between these two places and never encounter this event horizon to the best of your knowledge, except that at some point in your travels you could suddenly see your destination. This could be known as the 'gravitational fog' theory. As you walk through a fog, you never believe that you are actually IN the impenetrably thick part of the fog. It's always a cumulative effect around you. Imagine gravity as that fog, and you will see what I mean. It is possible that we live inside an immense black hole of universal proportions, based on the gravitational fog theory. It does not rule out the possibility of a black hole within a black hole, which is a concept that will make a mathematician's stomach start to churn very rapidly. CJ (edited because I made a goof in the redshift explanation)
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 7:23:25 PM EDT
Ah but I equated space with time thus saying you can't have one without the other. This is exactly what you are saying. What I was trying to convey was that instead of looking at matter as the definition of the universe it may be benificial to look at time instead. It makes the problem easier to adress by removing the physical boundaries associated with matter.
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 7:47:23 PM EDT
You guys got some crazy theories, I'll tell you the TRUTH! Our universe is in a box that the aliens made. Sure, it is a really big box, and has lots of neat lights on the sides that we can look at with our "telescopes" but we live in a box. The aliens have sensor and cameras to watch us and have a small door that they can come into if they want to come to earth. The universe/earth/stuff rotates because a mutant alien gerbil has a magnet on his evil hamster wheel. That is why the earth has poles, so it will be attracted to the alien hamsters magnets! So if we make long-range spaceships we will eventually run into the side of our box and make the aliens mad. Now quit talking about it or they will come and get you! [peep]
Link Posted: 2/27/2002 7:58:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/27/2002 8:01:27 PM EDT by Boomholzer]
cmjophnson What you getting at with the time quanta? I’m in on the particle aspect but not in the time element. IBFIAFR Matter does define our universe. It is cool to theorize and with an open mind…. it opens possibilities. I feel that the time element has been the scapegoat to make modern physics work (mathematically). This is complicated cheit! However, something is grossly wrong with making time and distances a variable (without involving a gravitational element) to satisfy the mathematics.
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 6:38:27 AM EDT
Prairie-Ranger, I think you have watched the movie "The Truman Show" one time too many! But if I ever see a spotlight fall out of the clear blue sky and it has a piece of gaffer's tape on it labeled 'sirius A', then I will certainly take it into consideration. As for the time quanta theory, I'm not really getting at anything. I simply stated that this theory had been brought forward and was met with some interest. IBIAFR said that time is of course never ending as you can continuously subdivide it into infinitesimally smaller units of measure but it still continues to progress. I was responding to that. CJ
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 7:14:54 AM EDT
I read somewhere that some physicist did a calculation based on the best estimate (at the time) for the Schwarzschild radius of a black hole with the mass of all the matter in the universe. Turns out it was larger than the known universe at that time. In other words, our entire universe is inside the event horizon of a massive black hole. By the laws of physics, just as we cannot know what goes on inside black holes in our universe, we [i]cannot[/i] know what lies outside the event horizon [i]of[/i] our own universe, nor can we even reach it. Kinda mind warping, if you think about it.[%|]
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 1:30:47 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 1:31:33 PM EDT
What I want to know is, will the universe ever stop expanding and then start to contract? [smoke]
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 2:08:17 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Boomholzer: The “Big Bang” was an explosion of matter, not undefined space.
View Quote
Your answer was mostly accurate. But you and many people misunderstand the "big bang." It was NOT the exposion of matter into space. It was the creation of sppace itself and the beginning of space/time. Matter did not even exist for a LONG time after the big bang. Spectral Doppler was the observation of matter through a spectrum. Matter travelling toward us appears in the blue shift, matter travelling away from us appears in the red shift. When Hubbel made his first observations it was believed we lived in a "steady state" universe that was infinite. Hubbel expected to see a 50/50 mix of red/blue shift travel. What he found was ALL matter in the red shift. Everything was travelling away from us and away from everything else. Simple math means to run the observation in reverse meant everything began from a original point. And finally, spectral doppler observes viewable matter travelling out into space. It does not view the expansion of space itself. The edge, perimeter of the universe (if one still exists) is not visible, would probably NOT (99.999999% sure) contain viewable matter anywhere near it and would be too far out to be seen by us if it did have viewable matter near it.
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 2:41:06 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 3:29:54 PM EDT
Something about the event horizons of black holes: Freely falling through an intense gravitational field is by itself not harmful, since as long as you are in free fall you are experiencing ....free fall, of course! It doesn't matter if the gravitational field is a tenth of a g or a thousand g's as long as you're falling freely in it. You won't feel it either way. The difficulty is tidal effects. A tidal effect is a difference in gravitational strength over a distance. A 'typical' black hole has a tidal effect that is so strong that if you fell into the black hole head first, your head would be pulled in much harder than the outer parts of your body, and the effect gets progressively worse as you get closer to the gravitational source. If the tidal effect were strong enough, it'd stretch you into a long, thin, and very dead line. Tidal intensity is greater with smaller gravitational sources. You would not perceive the tidal effects of a really large black hole and could in fact survive freely falling through the event horizon...but if there's solid body on the other side that's generating that gravitational field, when you hit it you'll be smashed flat...atom thin flat! As for what's really on the other side of an event horizon...who knows? Who could? Speculate all you like, nobody will be able to disprove you. CJ
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 3:52:58 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ECS: What I want to know is, will the universe ever stop expanding and then start to contract? [smoke]
View Quote
NO The universe is not only expanding but is expanding at an accelerating rate. Since F=ma it is safe to assume, I believe, that there is some force yet pushing outward. It is not simply inertia. We believe we have a rough idea of the universe just after the Big Bang. Prior to that, for now, is anybody's guess.
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 4:04:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/28/2002 4:07:28 PM EDT by NH2112]
Originally Posted By cmjohnson: As for what's really on the other side of an event horizon...who knows? Who could? Speculate all you like, nobody will be able to disprove you. CJ
View Quote
From the minds of Messrs. Lee, Lifeson, & Peart... Cygnus X-1 In the constellation of Cygnus There lurks a mysterious, invisible force The black hole of Cygnus X-1 Six stars of the Northern Cross In mourning for their sister's loss In a final flash of glory Nevermore to grace the night... Invisible to telescopic eye Infinity The star that would not die All who dare to cross her course Are swallowed by her fearsome force Through the void to be destroyed Or is there something more? Atomized at the core Or through the astral door To soar... I set a course just east of Lyra Northwest of Pegasus Flew into the light of Deneb Sailed across the Milky Way On my ship, the "Rocinante," Wheeling through the galaxy Headed for the heart of Cygnus Headlong into mystery The X-ray is her siren song My ship cannot resist her long Nearer to my deadly goal Until the black hole Gains control... Spinning, whirling, Still descending Like a spiral sea, Unending Sound and fury drowns my heart Every nerve is torn apart...
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 4:13:38 PM EDT
A physicist once told me the universe is shaped like the bell of a trumpet with a big black hole in the center. He said it's not really expanding outward, but around the curve of the bell and back into the center.
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 4:26:13 PM EDT
Originally Posted By mattja: A physicist once told me the universe is shaped like the bell of a trumpet with a big black hole in the center. He said it's not really expanding outward, but around the curve of the bell and back into the center.
View Quote
That's the "ballon hypothesis" mentioned by so many, above. Largely dismissed at this point. The Hubble telescope has changed much of what we knew about the universe.
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 4:51:35 PM EDT
if you are really interested in looking further: [url]www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/astroevid.html#the%20hesitating%20universe [/url] [8D]
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 5:29:30 PM EDT
Well it is the current theory that the expansion of the universe is increasing at an increasing rate and it looks solid. I believe that Einstein, in his original theories used a "repulsion" value to counter the gravitational force and postulate a static universe. It is speculated that with this new knowledge that he was possibly partly correct. Now this is all theory. The fact is that at the singularity, whether we are in side one or not, all predictability breaks down. Spacetime doesn't exist at the singularity. As far as we know we may be the xxth big bang in a history of big bangs that we cannot know of due to this breakdown of predictability. The expansion does however water that idea down because at the present the universe is getting bigger faster and faster But, it is also getting darker and darker. Extrapolating this infinitely expanding universe theory it is possible that in the end everything will be dark and matter will expand further into nothingness. Kind of bleak huh? We are at the threshold of our knowledge of physics. Believe it or not is is now speculated in some legit scientific circles that ESP is actually real and has a solid basis in quantum mechanics. The basic theory is that particles can be in two places at once, using the uncertainty principle. Now with a lot of mathematical mumbo jumbo and an experiment splitting a laser beam in two and manipulating both by affecting only one it has been theorized that given the continuity of spacetime and the very existence of conscious thought by minute transmissions of electromagnetic charges it may be possible by some to sense the variances of spacetime. Now this brings about the theory of a predetermined future which is actually the past depending on your reference. Or it could be that like spacetime and the uncertainty principle, it is possible to be everyplace at once. You know the lousy thing is that in 4-5 billion years the sun will burn the last of it's hydrogen and become a red giant. Loosing it's mass, gravity will no longer maintain the forces within and it will expand well into the orbital plane of Mars and we will cease to exist unless by that time we have found a new home. It is possible that for a brief cosmic period during these death throws of the sun, life as we know it will be possible on some of the outer planets or their moons. What does this mean for us? Well, for me it makes the hardships of life a little easier to bear. Knowing that me and my problems are a minute fraction of the ordered chaos of the universe. I'm not a religious man but it is such a magnificent and complex universe to just have appeared!
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 6:05:53 PM EDT
Originally Posted By The_Beer_Slayer: for us dumb rednecks. Has anyone calculated the size of the nothingness the universs is expanding into? Or is the nothingness for lack of a better term expanding as well. mike
View Quote
The Nothingness is space. The Universe includes all known space. Matter within the universe is expanding into the greater space of the universe. Space itself may or may not be continuing its expansion. If it is, there is "nothing" on the other side or "that" would be the edge of space. As far as calculating the total size of the universe including all space, we would need to be able to see the edge. That ain't likely to happen soon. Currently we can approximate dimensions of many things, but the actual size of the universe is still in the works.
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 6:15:22 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: The Nothingness is space. The Universe includes all known space. Matter within the universe is expanding into the greater space of the universe.
View Quote
That would be incorrect. Matter within the universe is NOT expanding in space, spacetime itself is expanding into something we call superspace, but we can't describe.
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 8:02:51 PM EDT
Originally Posted By RikWriter:
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: The Nothingness is space. The Universe includes all known space. Matter within the universe is expanding into the greater space of the universe.
View Quote
That would be incorrect. Matter within the universe is NOT expanding in space, spacetime itself is expanding into something we call superspace, but we can't describe.
View Quote
In terms of the original big bang you are correct. It was space and space/time that was expanding. Matter largely did not exist yet. I noted as much above initially. What I was speaking of was matter observed in spectral doppler. I was clarifying what Hubbel observed as he did not see the edge of space itself. But matter IS exapnding out into space itself. This is what Hubbel observed. Galaxies are racing away from each other and a common center further into space. Whether or not space itself is still expanding is yet to be proven, kinda hard to see that far.
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 8:16:00 PM EDT
Just remember that you're standing on a planet that's evolving And revolving at 900 miles an hour. It's orbiting at 19 miles a second, so it's reckoned, The sun that is the source of all our power. Now the sun, and you and me, and all the stars that we can see, Are moving at a million miles a day, In the outer spiral arm, at 40,000 miles an hour, Of a galaxy we call the Milky Way. Our galaxy itself contains a hundred billion stars; It's a hundred thousand light-years side to side; It bulges in the middle sixteen thousand light-years thick, But out by us it's just three thousand light-years wide. We're thirty thousand light-years from Galactic Central Point, We go 'round every two hundred million years; And our galaxy itself is one of millions of billions In this amazing and expanding universe. (waltz) Our universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding, In all of the directions it can whiz; As fast as it can go, at the speed of light, you know, Twelve million miles a minute and that's the fastest speed there is. So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure, How amazingly unlikely is your birth; And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere out in space, 'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth! --The Galaxy Song, Monty Python, "The Meaning of Life"
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 8:34:25 PM EDT
Goddamnit, someone tell me why every time ponder this topic I feel sick. Like really, suddenly, sick to my stomach. You know, I bet if I tipped my head over the ol' porcelain 10-ring right now I'd just barf my guts up. I dunno, infinity for one reason or another causes me pain. Don't get me wrong, I understand what you guys are sayin; it's just while one part of me thinks "Well, that's interesting," something else inside me is writhing in pain. Am I nuts? Will alcohol solve this? I welcome any constructive thoughts here. [puke]
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 8:40:51 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
Originally Posted By RikWriter: Matter within the universe is NOT expanding in space, spacetime itself is expanding into something we call superspace, but we can't describe.
View Quote
In terms of the original big bang you are correct. It was space and space/time that was expanding. Matter largely did not exist yet. I noted as much above initially. What I was speaking of was matter observed in spectral doppler. I was clarifying what Hubbel observed as he did not see the edge of space itself. But matter IS exapnding out into space itself. This is what Hubbel observed. Galaxies are racing away from each other and a common center further into space. Whether or not space itself is still expanding is yet to be proven, kinda hard to see that far.
View Quote
SA, I may be wrong, but as best I understand it, it is indeed space itself that is expanding, which is causing everything in the universe to race away from everything else. Any physics experts want to comment?
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 8:52:02 PM EDT
Here I am, thrashing through a 'religious' problem, and what do I find? This thread! I am but a mere mortal. Very Human. Not Perfect. Still in my unperfected state, all I can say is: You guys are makin' this shit up, right? [;D] Skipping over the science, you realize that WE are the new asshole somebody just tore... Sorry.[0:)] Fit of irreverance and frustration.
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 8:59:11 PM EDT
i wish i knew if this site was bs , but this is pretty interesting: http://www.ncoic.com/compton/compton8.htm
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 9:15:34 PM EDT
Originally Posted By RikWriter: SA, I may be wrong, but as best I understand it, it is indeed space itself that is expanding, which is causing everything in the universe to race away from everything else. Any physics experts want to comment?
View Quote
OK Rik, here is the brainbender. We are BOTH right. This is because we are talking about two different but related issues. Spectral Doppler observation is the viewing of matter (galaxies, etc.) racing out into space from a common original point. This is what I am talking about, currently. The Big Bang was the creation of space itself, and later matter, which expanded and may continue to be expanding at this moment if it has not already reached infinite proportions. The original Big Bang was NOT the explosion of matter into EXISTING space, because space didn't yet exist. This is what you are talking about. Both issues are correct and related.
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 10:13:35 PM EDT
This is the reason that I read AR15. It's the only place I've found where people can discuss mysteries of the universe, politics, religion, relationships, and of course, GUNS! in an intelligent and/or humorous manner. A fascinating group of people indeed.
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 9:56:16 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/1/2002 10:01:18 AM EDT by Boomholzer]
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
Originally Posted By Boomholzer: The “Big Bang” was an explosion of matter, not undefined space.
View Quote
Your answer was mostly accurate. But you and many people misunderstand the "big bang." It was NOT the exposion of matter into space. It was the creation of sppace itself and the beginning of space/time. Matter did not even exist for a LONG time after the big bang. Spectral Doppler was the observation of matter through a spectrum. Matter travelling toward us appears in the blue shift, matter travelling away from us appears in the red shift. When Hubbel made his first observations it was believed we lived in a "steady state" universe that was infinite. Hubbel expected to see a 50/50 mix of red/blue shift travel. What he found was ALL matter in the red shift. Everything was travelling away from us and away from everything else. Simple math means to run the observation in reverse meant everything began from a original point. And finally, spectral doppler observes viewable matter travelling out into space. It does not view the expansion of space itself. The edge, perimeter of the universe (if one still exists) is not visible, would probably NOT (99.999999% sure) contain viewable matter anywhere near it and would be too far out to be seen by us if it did have viewable matter near it.
View Quote
I think you mis-understood what I was getting at with that statement. I wanted to point out that "space" was not all compacted up in the pre-event "infinite ball of crap" and then let loose to form three dimentions by the Big Bang event. I agree that space was "not there" before the event. I understand it as a explosion of matter. The space (three-dimentions) and time (gravity) as we know are a byproduct of the dispersion of this matter. Previously, there was no spacial or time elements inside or outside the infinite ball of crap.
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 10:05:44 AM EDT
It may have begun as an explosion of matter but immediately after the "bang" there was only energy, some of which coalesced into matter:E=mc^2. Whether space existed infinitely prior to the bang or is being formed as we speak is the subject of much conjecture.
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 10:19:11 AM EDT
Previously, there was no spacial or time elements inside or outside the infinite ball of crap.
View Quote
If there were no spatial or time elements, then there were no "previously" or "inside or outside" either, were there? [;)]
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 10:21:45 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 10:27:02 AM EDT
[url]http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest1.html[/url] Here is a good explanation of Expansion. As I said, it is NOT the galaxies flying away IN space but rather spacetime itself expanding and taking the galaxies with it.
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 12:28:28 PM EDT
Originally Posted By RikWriter: [url]http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest1.html[/url] Here is a good explanation of Expansion. As I said, it is NOT the galaxies flying away IN space but rather spacetime itself expanding and taking the galaxies with it.
View Quote
Rik, again you are correct. And I think everyone has a pretty good handle on it now that the details have been understood. BUT, you are talking about EXPANSION. I was talking about a related matter, but not necessarily EXPANSION of spacetime itself. Hubbel did not observe spacetime expanding, he could not have possibly seen that far. He observed the galaxes demonstrating more or less the same properties. Sorry, if I confused the issue.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top