# Thread: Expansion of space question

1. If space itself is what's expanding (according to the BBT), this leads to a few perplexing questions:

Is space a thing?

If space is a thing, and it's expanding, does that mean the amount of it is growing?

If the amount of it is growing...... where is the new space coming from? Are we getting something from nothing?

2.

3. The best answer I know would be to say that the CMBR lessens as the amount of space grows, so maybe CMBR is being traded for more space? But... that's not a very satisfying answer...

Basically it seems necessary to account for what is being lost to make the new space.

4. Originally Posted by kojax
If space itself is what's expanding (according to the BBT), this leads to a few perplexing questions:

Is space a thing?

If space is a thing, and it's expanding, does that mean the amount of it is growing?

If the amount of it is growing...... where is the new space coming from? Are we getting something from nothing?
Space is not expanding ! is the same!

5. Space is a function of matter. I believe that Q went to great lengths in the other discussion about the Big Bang to point out that space is the distance between objects. So to say that, according to the Big Bang theory, the Universe is expanding, is really to say that the distance between objects in the Universe is increasing.

6. Originally Posted by Rationalist
Space is a function of matter. I believe that Q went to great lengths in the other discussion about the Big Bang to point out that space is the distance between objects. So to say that, according to the Big Bang theory, the Universe is expanding, is really to say that the distance between objects in the Universe is increasing.
relative to what poits of origin ours? a moving planet in a moving system? Get real!
And remember this rule apply to all
for every action there is a reaction.

7. Originally Posted by SolomonGrundy
Originally Posted by Rationalist
Space is a function of matter. I believe that Q went to great lengths in the other discussion about the Big Bang to point out that space is the distance between objects. So to say that, according to the Big Bang theory, the Universe is expanding, is really to say that the distance between objects in the Universe is increasing.
relative to what poits of origin ours? a moving planet in a moving system? Get real!
[Insult Deleted] Everything is moving away from everything else (except for the odd galaxy), no-matter what the reference point is. You could be in a galaxy 10 billion light years away and see the same movement. Where you observe the expansion from dosen't matter.

8. Originally Posted by SolomonGrundy
Originally Posted by Rationalist
Space is a function of matter. I believe that Q went to great lengths in the other discussion about the Big Bang to point out that space is the distance between objects. So to say that, according to the Big Bang theory, the Universe is expanding, is really to say that the distance between objects in the Universe is increasing.
relative to what poits of origin ours? a moving planet in a moving system? Get real!
All relative to each other. The expansion is isotropic and homogenous and is universal. It also explains how the Universe is cooling.

9. Equal weights at equal distances are in equilibrium, and equal weights at unequal distances are not in equilibrium but incline towards the weight which is at the greater distance.
From a frame not ours of view the real one all is not moving random and the force of the rotation is 0 making things to stand still . that cannot be seen when you move in a moving frame the result are not the real ones.

10. From a frame not ours of view the real one all is not moving random and the force of the rotation is 0 making things to stand still
When I was trying to make sense of all this my brain just wanted to stand still. Maybe you can elaborate for me. . .

11. Originally Posted by Rationalist
Space is a function of matter. I believe that Q went to great lengths in the other discussion about the Big Bang to point out that space is the distance between objects. So to say that, according to the Big Bang theory, the Universe is expanding, is really to say that the distance between objects in the Universe is increasing.
Ok. Distance is expanding. New word, same concept.

Is this distance a thing? If so, where does it come from? Does it just appear out of nowhere?

One possibility I suppose might be to go multi-dimensional. Maybe black holes create space in other dimensions somehow, and the black holes in those dimensions create space in ours?

12. At the risk of spamming my “theory” a la streamsystems, what do you think of my idea that explains it?

13. Ok. Distance is expanding. New word, same concept.

Is this distance a thing? If so, where does it come from? Does it just appear out of nowhere?
Distance is neither matter nor energy; it is merely a concept. It's a property we assign and is dependent on matter.

14. Has anyone ever seen the "ping-pong balls on the rubber string" analogy? Would space-time itself be simply stretching (as opposed to expanding) without creating new space or matter? This would certainly account for the fact that galaxies futher away from us are moving away more rapidly than closer ones.
Of course, this would mean that the "Big Rip" theory would be true.

15. Let's suppose for a moment that the universe is NOT expanding but that all it's components are shrinking thus making it appear to 'expand' is there a test for this?

Just as if you were shrinking everything else would look as if it were getting larger.....

16. Originally Posted by Megabrain
Let's suppose for a moment that the universe is NOT expanding but that all it's components are shrinking thus making it appear to 'expand' is there a test for this?

Just as if you were shrinking everything else would look as if it were getting larger.....
Um, that would be a possibility with my hypothesis...

17. Originally Posted by Rationalist
From a frame not ours of view the real one all is not moving random and the force of the rotation is 0 making things to stand still
When I was trying to make sense of all this my brain just wanted to stand still. Maybe you can elaborate for me. . .
As i can explain it to a little one
From the eyes of the observer our universe is like a rock not moving and inert!

18. Space is a function of matter. I believe that Q went to great lengths in the other discussion about the Big Bang to point out that space is the distance between objects. So to say that, according to the Big Bang theory, the Universe is expanding, is really to say that the distance between objects in the Universe is increasing.
How bout this...
1) The Universe is expanding.
2) You can not test this because of relativity
ex:
everything in our universe expands uniformly in one instant. It all
doubles. That means that your ruler doubles to.
3) Because of this, there is no such thing as a gravitron
4) Because of this, many of the leading theories are wrong.
5) Does this cause the breakdown of the electromagnetic/strong nuclear weak nuclear/gravity force-combination theory?
Oh no! now we have a problem. Haven't we proven the existance of gluons, bozones ect. using particle accelerators?

Tell me where my statement is flawed please... It might be... That's my throw on the subject though.

19. Agreed. Half the reason I don't read many threads anymore is the lack of people wanting to actually address the discussion and are more attentive to getting one up on another human being. Pathetic really.

About the OP. The universe is apparnetly getting larger due to red shift, and certain blue shift in some areas of space. Space itself is just spacetime, the spacetime continuum. Apparently the entropy of the universe is increaseing but seeing as a very large portion of the universe is 'dark matter', we for now as a species just assume it is explanding. There is no 'new' space. Space is infinite. The 'space' we can 'see' furthurmost is a sphere and that is because light from far far away has yet to reach us. Space could have a limit and it could not, and it will be a very long time before we can prove or disprove either to be true or false.

EDIT: Please do not think any less of this forum because it has a few people who ruin it .

20. I think the universe is contracting.....

21. You all in my opinion are trying to understand Big Bang Theory. This is my understanding under that theory to expansion;

Singularity, the term given to all that is now or ever will be in the Universe was located prior to the start of expansion. Whether a atom size unit or larger that was the universe, so to speak and in a different form of matter. Its said our laws for physics did not exist prior BB.

Expansion, began and no one seems to have given the cause which science will accept. After about 300k years to some say a million years, the extreme heat (20B/D/Kelvin+ - a star about 20M/D/K) space cooled to below 10 BDK where matter as we can understand could form. This first hydrogen and then helium, which was about 99% to 1% helium.

The expansion which caused the cooling, going on at C or possibly many times C (the speed of light) and continues to this day. As matter formed and became stars were suggested very large, allowing a quick burn off and death, by todays seen stars which allowed a quick turn over or regeneration to fit the 14-15 Billion Year age of the Universe.

During this 15BY the expansion has gone on and all that original matter, from the singularity has become the total matter in the Universe, which some say is now 156 Billion light years across (diameter). Yet the total matter has remained the same and space between matter has expanded.

The red (heading away) and blue (heading toward) shifts are measurements, not an action of matter. All matter moves to gravity of other objects.

Each second the circumference of the Universe expands 186k miles or more, making the relative distances between objects greater. If BBT is correct, in time the distances will increase over time to where less and less should be seen through telescopes or with the naked eye, but not because anything is physically moving away.

Steady State Universe, suggest quite a different picture. A Universe that has always existed in some manner, whether exactly as we now see it or not and will always exist. This through a regeneration of matter from whatever, back to hydrogen and forming new stars. In the formation of our solar system, not 5 billion years ago 99.95% was hydrogen, our planets and all the billions of meteors/asteroids being the .05%.

22. Originally Posted by zizzy34
I think the universe is contracting.....
Our little portion of the Universe, is known to be contracting. Our local cluster of Dwarf galaxy orbit the Milky Way or Andromeda (spiral as ours)which is headed for our MW. Two small dwarfs are expected to be absorbed by MW in the next 50-100 thousand years. You could say in 30-40 billion years, there should be only one very large galaxy or a very large gas cloud. Of course our solar system will be long gone, reformed into another star and probably gone again...by then.

23. Originally Posted by jackson33
Originally Posted by zizzy34
I think the universe is contracting.....
Our little portion of the Universe, is known to be contracting. Our local cluster of Dwarf galaxy orbit the Milky Way or Andromeda (spiral as ours)which is headed for our MW. Two small dwarfs are expected to be absorbed by MW in the next 50-100 thousand years. You could say in 30-40 billion years, there should be only one very large galaxy or a very large gas cloud. Of course our solar system will be long gone, reformed into another star and probably gone again...by then.
Your right, our portion is, and we should see some type of larger galaxy. I'm particularly interested in to see "not literally, because i'll be long gone during that time" what will happen when the super blackholes at the center of each galaxy merge.

24. Originally Posted by Rationalist
Ok. Distance is expanding. New word, same concept.

Is this distance a thing? If so, where does it come from? Does it just appear out of nowhere?
Distance is neither matter nor energy; it is merely a concept. It's a property we assign and is dependent on matter.
Yes, but the expansion of space is the official BBT concept, because they needed a way to interpret the redshift observations that allowed objects to be accelerating rather than just moving at constant speeds.

Why? Because the linear relationship between distance away from us and degree of redshift wouldn't hold if the redshift resulted from the objects' actual velocities. You have to account not only for how far away the object you're seeing appears to be now, but where it actually is now.

I mean, an object that appears to be 1,000,000 light years away, moving at .0000000833 C is really 1,000000.0833 light years away by now. If it's 10,000,000 light years away and going at 0.000000833 C then it's really 10,000,0008.33 If it's 100,000,000 going at 0.00000833 then it's 100,000,833 (I'm using the assumption that Hubble's constant is estimated around 80m/s/megaparsec, which is slightly higher than the average estimate)

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/que...php?number=346

See, the difference between its apparent location and its current location in the present multiplies by 100 if you multiply its speed by 10. In other words, we'd be looking at a distance squared relationship if we allowed that the velocity of the objects themselves is what causes redshift.

25. Could the universe be both expanding and contracting?

Like breathing out and breathing in?

26. Not under BBT. It is expanding from the original singularity at near C or 186k miles per second. That is the circumference is expanding, which by area increase is also increasing by each second. More area to increase from. Think circumference is said to be about 450 Billion light years, if you want to calculate miles. If a spear, wonder what time is required to doubling. BBT must have an answer....and that time should be decreasing.

27. Moderator's Note: This is addressed to both SolomonGrundy and Megabrain - consider this a formal warning for flaming. That sort of behavior will not be tolerated. Continued such behavior on this forum will result in a temp-ban

Posts involved in the off-topic flame discussion were deleted. If anyone has a concern about this warning, the deletions, or the consequences for continued such flames, please PM me.

28. Originally Posted by kojax
If space itself is what's expanding (according to the BBT), this leads to a few perplexing questions:

Is space a thing?

If space is a thing, and it's expanding, does that mean the amount of it is growing?

If the amount of it is growing...... where is the new space coming from? Are we getting something from nothing?
These questions are good logical questions.
The expansion of space (EoS) is an implied interpretation of the Hubble galactic redshift observations by Lemaitrae that even Hubble himself had doubts about.
Lemaitrae also believed in a start up huge primeval atom for its beginning (universe). The atom idea, of course, was dropped. He apparently did not believe in 'creation out of nothing'. Of course, this is what the EoS implies as I believe it to be. So in my opinion, the BBT is cosmogony, not cosmology.
If you turn the clock back in time, it terminates to 'zero'. so it has to be a creation out of nothing biblical concept.

It is currently being portrayed as an EoS since it is not an explosion. Space is carrying the galaxies with it. This implies that the matter has no momentum because the galaxies are being carried wirh the space expansion.

The EoS idea is ludicrous because space is nothing but simply an emptiness!

So this misinterpretation is not the cause of the cosmological redshift. I believe the light waves are expanding that makes more sense.
I have written an article on this topic with the evidence for its support.

Cosmo

29. Jackson33 wrote:
"During this 15BY the expansion has gone on and all that original matter, from the singularity has become the total matter in the Universe, which some say is now 156 Billion light years across (diameter). Yet the total matter has remained the same and space between matter has expanded."
Ok, what i dont get is how, in just 15 billion years could the universe be 156 billion light years across? Does this not mean that it has expanded at well beyond the speed of light?
I dont think i'll ever get this.

30. The speed of light limit is for something moving through space, while with the expansion, space is inflating and the galaxies are simply expanding with it. So no light speed limit is violated.

31. Ok, so if the universe is 156 billion light years across and at the edge of one side is a galaxy and at the other side another galaxy, they are 156 billion light years apart but THEY didnt travel apart, all the space in between them expanded them apart. Am i getting there? :?
Also Kalster, it was another post but your rubber ball analogy. Is it like at the moment of the BB the solid rubber ball was infinitely small, then didnt explode but suddenly expanded, so that there is still solid rubber ball in the middle or at where i thought the point of detonation would be?

32. Originally Posted by GrowlingDog
Ok, so if the universe is 156 billion light years across and at the edge of one side is a galaxy and at the other side another galaxy, they are 156 billion light years apart but THEY didnt travel apart, all the space in between them expanded them apart. Am i getting there? :?
Also Kalster, it was another post but your rubber ball analogy. Is it like at the moment of the BB the solid rubber ball was infinitely small, then didnt explode but suddenly expanded, so that there is still solid rubber ball in the middle or at where i thought the point of detonation would be?
The rubber would represent space-time, so no centre exists. If you shrink the ball more and more, the volume would get less and less until it is infinitely small. Nothing exists outside space-time, not even “nothingness”. Think of the rubber as 3D space. Maybe a better way would to think of an infinitely small clump of dough with raisins in it. As the yeast starts working, it starts to rise with the raisins moving away from each other in 3D space the same way the dots on the ball does in 2D space. Also, you should not think of an edge to the universe, as that would be what would occur in an explosion. Maybe a way to think about it is: imagine yourself on the inside of a very large ball. It is so big that you can’t see the curve it makes. Now if you jump on a bike, you’d think that you are travelling in a straight line, but instead you will eventually end up back where you started. In this scenario you would never see an edge, in fact it does not exist. I hope this helps

33. Yea, it does a lot, thanks. It's like the universe was once the largest ever Nerf ball compressed into a single spot, then in an instant it was released and has been expanding ever since. A Nerf ball eventually reaches full expansion, i wonder what will happen to the universe if it reaches full expansion. i have seen "The Universe" theories on the big rip. What do you think of that theory?

 Bookmarks
##### Bookmarks
 Posting Permissions
 You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts   BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On [VIDEO] code is On HTML code is Off Trackbacks are Off Pingbacks are Off Refbacks are On Terms of Use Agreement