Notices
Results 1 to 8 of 8
Like Tree2Likes
  • 2 Post By AlexG

Thread: Expanding Universe

  1. #1 Expanding Universe 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    66
    So should I call it space or should I think of it as universe? Or, is it that both are the same? Also, as I think of such an "idea" I want to think of it as a balloon filling into space. As the balloon fills it gains [(?)] as it gains [(space)]: universe-- it pushes into space? Would that then mean infinite spacetime and would it then justify exanding?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Quote Originally Posted by ampwitch View Post
    So should I call it space or should I think of it as universe? Or, is it that both are the same? Also, as I think of such an "idea" I want to think of it as a balloon filling into space. As the balloon fills it gains [(?)] as it gains [(space)]: universe-- it pushes into space? Would that then mean infinite spacetime and would it then justify exanding?
    Here's a well written, simple primer on cosmology. It's a pdf. The first page is blank, so just scroll down.

    http://www.mso.anu.edu.au/~charley/p...DavisSciAm.pdf

    Something more advanced can be found here

    Ned Wright's Cosmology Tutorial


    ampwitch and Cogito Ergo Sum like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    66
    I apologize that the question isn't very clear, nor original. What I am trying to learn is what the force is working against it? I am guessing gravity but that does'nt suffice the question. I guess what I want to know is, is it gravity that forces the "ballon" not to "shrink" or collpse back in on itself? How would I describe that tension? Thanks!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    66
    Thanks AlexG! Good articles, though still more to learn...I hope. Again thanks!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    15
    The big bang theory is based on interpreting the increase in wavelength of distant galaxies (cosmic redshift) as representing a Doppler effect and the galaxies acceleration away. However, the cosmic redshift is only indicative of the way in which light increases in wavelength as it travels across the Universe. The Universe is infinite in distance and duration, space and time. Elliptical galaxies and the core of spiral galaxies emerge from the emission groundstate of the Universe. If you're interested, there is an essay called "The Materialist and Infinite Universe", which presents these matters. It can be located by putting the title into the search engine on your computer.

    typology1
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    topology1:

    You are still new. The information you presented in your post is not the mainstream position, but is presented in a matter of fact way. That is frowned upon. Please in future qualify your posts as such where needed, while staying on topic. Thanks
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    15
    Apparently, I can’t state something as a fact that is yet to be accepted as a fact by a majority of the science establishment, irrespective of the fact that I see what I presented as being a scientific fact that is yet to be accepted as such by a majority of the science establishment. OK! But the fact remains that in 1920 when Edwin Hubble observed the redshift of distant galaxies he never accepted that is was due to an expanding Universe. A Swiss Astronomer by the name of Fritz Zwicky at the time proposed that the redshift was due to the way in which light naturally increases in wavelength as it travels across the Universe. This is called the “tired light” theory. The only other evidence for the big bang theory is the observation in 1964 by two astronomers, named Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, by way of radio telescope, that the space between galaxies was composed of microwave radiation which is assumed to be left over from the big bang. The existence of the microwave radiation has an alternative explanation. If you take a more connected and systematic perspective of the Universe, you can come to the conclusion that the microwave radiation is indicative of an emission (light) groundstate from which elliptical galaxies and the cores of spiral galaxies can emerge through the absorption of emission (light). One day this may be accepted as a scientific fact by a majority of the science establishment. In the mean time, it must be presented as theory.

    Typology1
    Last edited by KALSTER; July 11th, 2012 at 03:39 AM. Reason: Edited duplicate post
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    Right. So next time, the appropriate section then like I asked in the other thread? Any further posts by you in this thread will be deleted. You will get enough responses in your own thread, no worries. Thanks.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Universe is not expanding
    By forests in forum Pseudoscience
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: March 14th, 2012, 03:17 PM
  2. Expanding universe
    By zendra in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: December 3rd, 2009, 07:15 AM
  3. Expanding Universe?
    By Paul D in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: January 12th, 2009, 09:19 AM
  4. The Universe Expanding
    By agent1022 in forum Physics
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: January 7th, 2009, 06:48 PM
  5. Non-expanding universe
    By Burke Carley in forum Pseudoscience
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: November 23rd, 2006, 10:35 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
  •