Notices
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: What if: The universe isn't expanding.

  1. #1 What if: The universe isn't expanding. 
    Forum Professor Zwolver's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,676
    Just an idea, probably many more have offered this up at some point, but i still want to brabble about it.

    What is the universal cycle? As it has to be a cycle. Nothing just starts or stops, there is a cycle of this (assumption), with maybe exact repetitions possible, within an infinite amounts of resets where everything will then happen again.

    With an ever expanding universe, it has to shrink too, for it to be able to have a cycle going. This seems unlikely with the rate of expansion we measure. And that left right up and down would connect, doesn't seem logical to me.

    What if, instead it is just our perception of an expanding universe. And the universe is actually not moving at all, all massive objects however, are shrinking, and collapsing into one another. What if every atom is comparable to a balloon, losing size, retaining mass. (with the big singularity, when all the "air" has left the balloon)

    What if, slowly, properties of the universe will change, depending on the molecules. What if some spaces shrunk quicker than others. What of, we go to a location 10 billion lightyears away, and have our spaceship be as large as a planet, but incomparable mass. What if, oxygen, from another galaxy would be too different for our lungs to absorb, or interact with for our bodies. What if their oxygen, isn't even oxygen to us?

    Maybe that is the reason we have not found any aliens.. Their signals, would be made using different matter, and maybe on a different scale wavelength, scrambling it though our space. Maybe space itself is deadly when we go too far away from our home, maybe we can adjust to it over time, changing the composition of our body slowly, until al our molecules are different.

    Just some ideas


    Growing up, i marveled at star-trek's science, and ignored the perfect society. Now, i try to ignore their science, and marvel at the society.

    Imagine, being able to create matter out of thin air, and not coming up with using drones for boarding hostile ships. Or using drones to defend your own ship. Heck, using drones to block energy attacks, counterattack or for surveillance. Unless, of course, they are nano-machines in your blood, which is a billion times more complex..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    ox
    ox is offline
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,989
    I think you have to factor in the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics (entropy) into any speculation.

    It might also be helpful to read Roger Penrose's Cycles of Time.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5,025
    Quote Originally Posted by ox View Post
    I think you have to factor in the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics (entropy) into any speculation.

    It might also be helpful to read Roger Penrose's Cycles of Time.
    That (entropy factor) had lso occurred to me.Is there a strong link between (expanding?) entropy and the expansion or contraction.of the universe?

    Is it possible to imagine any scenario where entropy is not an actor?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Masters Degree Double Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    573
    Quote Originally Posted by ox View Post
    I think you have to factor in the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics (entropy) into any speculation.
    The laws of thermodynamics are pretty difficult to dismiss. One supposes that is why they are called laws.

    And the second law of thermodynamics firms up entropy as perhaps the most significant driving force in nature (1). It has been used to postulate the "heat death of the universe" by increasing entropy (2).

    Quoting from (1):

    "Entropy predicts the direction of spontaneous processes, and determines whether they are irreversible or impossible, despite obeying the requirement of conservation of energy, which is established in the first law of thermodynamics."

    end quote

    The heat death of the universe was proposed based on these thermodynamic laws quite some time ago. Quoting from (2):

    "The hypothesis of heat death stems from the ideas of Lord Kelvin, who in the 1850s took the theory of heat as mechanical energy loss in nature (as embodied in the first two laws of thermodynamics) and extrapolated it to larger processes on a universal scale."

    end quote

    Of course there are other views on the fate of the universe. But for some of us, the well established laws of thermodynamics must be satisfied.

    A continuously expanding universe seems best defined by these laws, as well as another, Hubble's Law (3), which offers direct empirical evidence. Combined, these laws construct a very high bar for alternative concepts.



    1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second...thermodynamics

    2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_d...f_the_universe

    3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble%27s_law
    Last edited by Double Helix; July 16th, 2021 at 04:06 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    ox
    ox is offline
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,989
    Quote Originally Posted by geordief View Post
    That (entropy factor) had also occurred to me. Is there a strong link between (expanding?) entropy and the expansion or contraction.of the universe?
    While entropy is the supreme law of the universe, we still need to understand dark energy.

    Is it possible to imagine any scenario where entropy is not an actor?
    In a closed system.

    But the universe does not always play according to our rules as entropy is not an equation.

    In the case of life and the universe as open systems in relation to the laws of thermodynamics:
    We can't win.
    We are sure to lose.
    We can't get out of the game.

    So we are all actors playing out a tragedy, as is the universe.
    No escape for either from death.

    (Being miserable keeps me happy).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Professor Zwolver's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,676
    Quote Originally Posted by geordief View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ox View Post
    I think you have to factor in the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics (entropy) into any speculation.

    It might also be helpful to read Roger Penrose's Cycles of Time.
    That (entropy factor) had lso occurred to me.Is there a strong link between (expanding?) entropy and the expansion or contraction.of the universe?

    Is it possible to imagine any scenario where entropy is not an actor?
    Yeah, i don't know if entropy is a factor here. When time goes to extremes, it becomes the main variable. We don't know all the factors of the universe, and if we imagine the size of particles of atoms as a set size, if they lose some of their size every second, they may change properties after a while.

    Entropy doesn't work in the scale of the whole universe. As in a cosmic timescale, if something isn't a loop, it never existed, and we cannot exist either. The universe either is a loop, or god exists. So, the universe cannot just expand, it has to contract, or in this case, reach a singularity of where matter changes, and reforms atoms. At least, thats my idea of it..

    Cycles of time, i will give a look.
    Growing up, i marveled at star-trek's science, and ignored the perfect society. Now, i try to ignore their science, and marvel at the society.

    Imagine, being able to create matter out of thin air, and not coming up with using drones for boarding hostile ships. Or using drones to defend your own ship. Heck, using drones to block energy attacks, counterattack or for surveillance. Unless, of course, they are nano-machines in your blood, which is a billion times more complex..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2021
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Zwolver View Post
    Just an idea, probably many more have offered this up at some point, but i still want to brabble about it.

    What is the universal cycle? As it has to be a cycle. Nothing just starts or stops, there is a cycle of this (assumption), with maybe exact repetitions possible, within an infinite amounts of resets where everything will then happen again.

    With an ever expanding universe, it has to shrink too, for it to be able to have a cycle going. This seems unlikely with the rate of expansion we measure. And that left right up and down would connect, doesn't seem logical to me.

    What if, instead it is just our perception of an expanding universe. And the universe is actually not moving at all, all massive objects however, are shrinking, and collapsing into one another. What if every atom is comparable to a balloon, losing size, retaining mass. (with the big singularity, when all the "air" has left the balloon)

    What if, slowly, properties of the universe will change, depending on the molecules. What if some spaces shrunk quicker than others. What of, we go to a location 10 billion lightyears away, and have our spaceship be as large as a planet, but incomparable mass. What if, oxygen, from another galaxy would be too different for our lungs to absorb, or interact with for our bodies. What if their oxygen, isn't even oxygen to us?

    Maybe that is the reason we have not found any aliens.. Their signals, would be made using different matter, and maybe on a different scale wavelength, scrambling it though our space. Maybe space itself is deadly when we go too far away from our home, maybe we can adjust to it over time, changing the composition of our body slowly, until al our molecules are different.

    Just some ideas
    The way the universe works in Savo terms.

    Recycling is the A and O of everything

    Everything basically consists of one and the same thing.

    What it all basically consists of is in itself a pushing force.

    There is no separate substance and four separate forces separately.

    The atomic model and worldview will be revolutionized in the near future.

    A direct observation of how galaxies are born from the middle / inside out proves the current theories to be incorrect. That’s to be discovered at the latest with the new space telescope James Webb.

    Ok, and now for that matter.

    The birth of a visible universe expanding in space.

    First, the supermassive objects of the centers of the galaxies arose in their own 3 D “initial explosions” from the pre-existing pushing force into existing space, and later these space-expanding supermassive objects collided with each other at a steep angle from their initial journey and new colliding galaxies from those collisions.

    The space-expanding stars arose from the expanding dark matter that protrudes from the expanding supermassive objects in the centers of the galaxies.

    Expanding stars have always protruded away from a supermassive object in the center of their own galaxy along a spiral orbit in roughly the same proportion as they have expanded.

    Although they are constantly protruding away from the center of their space-expanding galaxy, they do little to move away from it in relative terms because they are expanding in the same proportion.

    Atomic model by Savo

    In space, the expanding nuclei of atoms recycle with all the cores of other expanding atoms an expanding dark pushing force that has e.g. the nature of the expanding light and thus they constantly push each other away from each other on average in the same proportion as they expand.

    Push your expanding hand over your expanding chest and feel your heart expand in pulses as the expanding atomic nuclei of your heart expand in sync, pushing each other away from each other pulse by pulse.

    Expanding lights consist for the most part of an expanding pushing force that cannot be registered with our devices. These dark expanding waves of expanding light have VERY much more mass than the recordable photons, which also consist of an expansive pushing force in space.

    The registrable electrons and photons arise from these zillions of separate expanding densities of which the expanding dark waves of expanding light consist and are constantly protruding from the separate expanding densities of the nuclei of the expanding atoms.

    Electrons and photons are generated on the same principle as expanding supermassive objects and expanding stars in space.

    All that is needed is an external factor that accelerates the expansion of the separate expanding densities of the zillions to momentarily explosive, thus creating a new larger entity with a very high pressure immediately in the center without any pulling forces.

    At the center of the expanding photon, there is not much pressure on our scale, but relatively similar to the center of the expanding star.

    The dark expanding waves of space-expanding lights interact with each other, accelerating each other’s expansion, and thus the speed of the expanding lights accelerates in proportion to the expansion of matter and light.

    This is evidenced by the following observations.

    1. The cosmological redshift of light

    2. The so-called gravitational lens phenomenon

    3. The so-called gravitational redshift

    4. The fact that all lights always move at the speed characteristic of light.

    5. Double slit tests

    Lights expand and accelerate each other’s expansion when interacting with each other = a scientific argument.

    For example, one can try to manipulate the trajectory of light with the help of billions of years old lights in space far from Earth.

    My questions to Esko Valtaoja, Kari Enqvist and Syksy Räsänen, who are the so-called experts.

    How could an expanding space be studied scientifically so that its existence could be scientifically proven?

    I understand that is not possible because space itself does not radiate information. That is, one cannot try to manipulate space itself in such a way that the success of the manipulation is informed.

    I think expanding space is a concept similar to what the gods of antiquity were.

    Jukka Savorinen
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2021
    Posts
    6
    I am the one who explained how the universe works.

    To this day, in 2021, physicists still do not have a theory of everything in physics.

    Why.

    Because current small-scale and large-scale theories misrepresent the universe.

    Mathematically, these theories have worked excellently.

    But they cannot be combined mathematically into an all-encompassing theory of everything in physics. It is a big problem for physicists when it comes to pursuing the theory of everything in physics.

    Doubt arises. Do quantum theories and the theory of relativity describe the universe correctly.

    I think they misrepresent the universe.

    The theory of relativity contains concepts that man cannot understand. This is openly stated by the so-called experts themselves.

    For example, the so-called the expansion of space cannot be described in words, nor visually.

    The light has been found to be more elongated, i.e. more redshifted, from the more distant galaxy clusters the light comes from. This has been interpreted as galaxy clusters moving away from us the farther away they are.

    Suddenly it could be concluded from this that we are in the middle of the universe and all the galaxy clusters are moving away from us the faster the farther they are.

    This, of course, was not an appropriate view almost immediately after we had abandoned the country-centered model, whose erroneous view was that we were at the center of the universe.

    No, we cannot be in the middle of the universe.

    Something had to be invented and so it was done. Georges Lemaître, a Belgian astronomer and priest, developed a completely new view from the beginning of everything where at first there was nothing, not even space, nor time.

    This new theory was called the Big Bang. According to the theory, everything comes from one point so that there was no energy at that point and space did not expand outward into an already existing place. That is, it is not an explosion in the traditional way. It's about something else entirely. Something you can't describe in words, not visually. It is therefore very special that this model has developed into a so-called a standard model taught as truth. That is, even if the event in question cannot be described in words, nor visually.

    This was so special to me about 20 years ago that I decided to figure out how the universe really works. I did the same.

    I assumed that space is an infinite three-dimensional ever-existing space that is itself nothing at all. That is, according to this premise, I had to be able to explain all observations using space-based, space-moving, and space-changing systems.

    What is the change based on.

    The change is, of course, based on the fact that the separate parts of the changing system move in relation to each other and that movement takes place somewhere. That place is this always-existent infinite three-dimensional space that is absolutely nothing.

    And when space itself is absolutely nothing, then then it cannot change in any way and thus no space is needed in the background of space anymore.

    How, then, do we explain that the farther the lights come from, the more stretched the cosmologically redshifted. That is, if space does not expand.

    Well, simply so that there is no separate matter and four separate forces, as is currently assumed.

    It must be understood that everything basically consists of one and the same thing, which in itself is a pushing force.

    The substance consists of congestion areas of this pushing force so that these congestion areas circulate this pushing force with all other corresponding congestion areas.

    Recycling requires nothing more than what is being recycled because these areas of thrust congestion are able to slow down the pace of thrust within themselves by their thrust.

    Thrust congestion areas consist of even smaller thrust congestion areas, and since these smaller congestion areas circulate this thrust force, then a system of these smaller congestion areas automatically has an internal pressure that causes the thrust force in it to dissipate into a larger and larger space area. . That is, it expands outward in space into already existing space.

    This recyclable pushing force also consists of separate pushing force peak areas that recirculate the pushing force.

    And thus we can say that the atomic model is pushing new ones.

    The nuclei of atoms expand and circulate the expanding pushing force with the cores of all other atoms expanding in space, and thus they push each other away from each other in the same proportion as they expand.

    For this reason, this has not been realized, nor observed.

    The trick is that this recyclable expanding pushing force is in the form that our devices cannot register it. This explains the mystery of light. That is, the wave of light and the nature of particles.

    The waves of light expanding in space are dark to us, meaning we cannot register them.

    However, with the help of registrable photons, the wave nature of light has protruded.

    The expanding waves of expanding light consist of zillions of discrete expanding densities that circulate with each other this expanding pushing force. To form a single expanding photon, these separate expanding densities of which the dark expanding waves of light consist are required.

    The zillion is not the right number in mathematics, but it illustrates well that it is a very large number of discrete expansive densities.

    It is good to understand that light has a very large mass, but almost all of the mass of light expanding in space is in these dark waves.

    And it is precisely because of this that it is very difficult for registrable photons to measure mass.

    Electrons are also generated from these densities which make up the dark waves of light for us.

    That is, from this expanding dark pushing force that the expanding nuclei of atoms circulate with each other.

    Physicists studying matter do not cause an existing electron to detach around the nucleus of an atom, although the physicist thinks so when he emits light of suitable energy towards the nuclei.

    That is, physicists have not realized that they themselves are causing new electrons to emerge from the dark expanding pushing force that protrudes from the expanding nuclei of atoms.

    The photons they send face this expanding dark push force at a suitable distance from the expanding atomic nucleus, and as a result of the interaction, the expansion of the dark push force densities accelerates to explosive and thus the zillion discrete densities combine into a new larger entity, the new registrable.

    Alright. On this basis, when we start to perceive the universe from a small scale, we also get to build a large-scale model of the universe so that we have the opportunity to develop a functional theory of everything in physics.

    Jukka Savorinen
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. What is the universe expanding into?
    By sabodriver17 in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: July 12th, 2014, 02:02 PM
  2. Universe may not be expanding...
    By Strange in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: November 8th, 2013, 11:02 PM
  3. Is the universe expanding or ?
    By Martinaston in forum Personal Theories & Alternative Ideas
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: March 11th, 2013, 02:59 AM
  4. Expanding Universe
    By MOHANTHILAGARAJ in forum Physics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: December 31st, 2011, 09:02 AM
  5. Expanding universe
    By zendra in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: December 3rd, 2009, 07:15 AM
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
  •