December 31st, 2012, 07:54 PM
What is the fuel that keeps space expanding.
How dose the fuel keep its energy to keep on expanding space to infinite size ?
Dose the fuel have a infinite life span and force or dose the universe make new fuel as it expands creating new space. (dark energy).
Is there some other partial or force we yet do-not understand. Would the fuel sores not run out or lose some of its energy over time and would this loss of energy not slow down the expansion of space.???
Last edited by ANDY T; December 31st, 2012 at 08:07 PM.
Momentum is not fuel. Nor does momentum need fuel- just a starting push.
The "force" not understood is Dark Energy. Dark energy relates to the acceleration of expansion.
If Dark energy relates to the acceleration of expansion how would this acceleration continue to speed up as even Dark energy must at some point start to lose some of its energy Momentum over time. The larger space gets the more space each particle has and the increase in space between particle (Dark energy) the lower the force becomes and Momentum is slowed.
Last edited by ANDY T; January 1st, 2013 at 07:12 AM.
What if dark energy could be thought of as a property of space, so that the more space there is, the more the effect of dark energy?
One of the possibilities for dark energy is indeed that it is the "cosmological constant" of General Relativity, which is exactly a property of space. This constant was in Einstein's first version of General Relativity. He abandoned its use after the expansion of the universe was discovered, since it was no longer needed to keep the universe from collapsing under the gravitational forces between all of the objects in it.Originally Posted by SpeedFreek
If dark energy is not understood, can it be related to the acceleration of expansion?
Dark energy is by definition the cause of the acceleration of the expansion of space. The open question is whether dark energy is in fact something that is already known in another context.
The first part of your statement suggest dark matter is responcible for the acceleration of space. In the second part it is not known what dark matter is.
Is dark matter the only cause the galaxies are moving apart at the rate of the expanding space, or is there other energies involved?
That's dark energy, not dark matter.The first part of your statement suggest dark matter is responcible for the acceleration of space. In the second part it is not known what dark matter is.
Is dark matter the only cause the galaxies are moving apart at the rate of the expanding space, or is there other energies involved?
Dark energy is the name we give to that which causes the acceleration of the expansion of the universe. We don't know what it is, yet.
Given the assumption that General Relativity is correct, there is a place in the equation of space for a quantity that causes the expansion of space to accelerate. What has been done is to name that quantity, whatever it is, "dark energy." Now lots of people are searching, mostly theoretically at the moment, for what dark energy might be. In other words, people are looking for something that might have effects other than the acceleration of the expansion and might conceivably already be known about because of those other effects. If the "something" is already known, everyone will say "Dark energy is just X"; if it is not already known it will most likely be called "dark energy" after its discovery.The first part of your statement suggest dark matter is responcible for the acceleration of space. In the second part it is not known what dark matter is.
Is dark matter the only cause the galaxies are moving apart at the rate of the expanding space, or is there other energies involved?
Of course there could be more than one thing involved, and then each would wind up with its own name.
I get the feeling there are so many unknowns and variables that the whole thing gets complicated. As it seems too many observed phenomenon with no basic idea of the totality of any one observation. I am sure every one is asking the same questions and no one can feel justified by any one answer. In the end what is the basic idea of wanting to know something that is not understood or used by the masses. If we knew how the world began could it change anything? I have so many questions inside of me that I cannot answer.That's dark energy, not dark matter.The first part of your statement suggest dark matter is responcible for the acceleration of space. In the second part it is not known what dark matter is.
Is dark matter the only cause the galaxies are moving apart at the rate of the expanding space, or is there other energies involved?
Dark energy is the name we give to that which causes the acceleration of the expansion of the universe. We don't know what it is, yet.
In other words you are saying everything or most things we discuss are not really relevant, but hypothetically relevant. Most of it is based on assumptions and conjectures. Telescopes cannot make predictions it can only observe through lenses that are an extension of human eyes. Is this a quest to change earth and the way we live? It is certainly mind boggling to even ask question about the universe but more mind boggling to expect an answer the way we want it, yet we do it anyway.Given the assumption that General Relativity is correct, there is a place in the equation of space for a quantity that causes the expansion of space to accelerate. What has been done is to name that quantity, whatever it is, "dark energy." Now lots of people are searching, mostly theoretically at the moment, for what dark energy might be. In other words, people are looking for something that might have effects other than the acceleration of the expansion and might conceivably already be known about because of those other effects. If the "something" is already known, everyone will say "Dark energy is just X"; if it is not already known it will most likely be called "dark energy" after its discovery.The first part of your statement suggest dark matter is responcible for the acceleration of space. In the second part it is not known what dark matter is.
Is dark matter the only cause the galaxies are moving apart at the rate of the expanding space, or is there other energies involved?
Of course there could be more than one thing involved, and then each would wind up with its own name.
.I do not think the problem of finding a name is a great one, I think finding out how something works is the intriguing question. However I am still at the point where I want to know about space before I can begin to think that I am making sense to myself. What is space? I cannot see it as just the space between objects in much the same way I can understand white matter from black matter. What is light energy opposed to dark energy. These question are still floating around out there waiting for some picture from a observascope to reveal its nature to us so we can move on to understanding the universe. What do you think?
I think you've got the point. Physics generally turns out to be simple [but not easy], but the process of figuring out how things work is very complicated indeed. The big advantage of science is that it is based on observations, and within reasonable bounds the observations are true. However, understanding how things work is messy, and you are sometimes very unsure what is true and never absolutely sure that you have all the important parts right. Hearing someone's new work, or better yet having an idea yourself, gives you a "So THAT is how it is" reaction, and if you are lucky, reading about a part of physics you don't yet know gives you much the same feeling.
Like essentially all of physics, at least when fully understood, space is a mathematical construct. I find it absolutely fascinating that we live in a universe all of which is a mathematical construct, simple in principle but complicated in the way the pieces fit together. For space, we start with the idea of distance, how many meter sticks can I fit between me and that tree? Then we find there are three independent spatial dimensions plus the rather more mysterious time dimension. Then Einstein comes along and tells us that the four dimensions are woven together and that they are mathematically curved. Time is just another dimension like the other three. Then we have difficulty understanding the idea because space is purely mathematical and we were expecting something more concrete. Moreover, there are visualization problems like space being curved within itself, not into an additional dimension like all the objects we are used to. Worse, space is expanding so that the objects embedded in it are getting further apart without moving within space. It takes quite a bit of thought to decide which of the old concepts are helpful in visualizing the reality and which need to be ignored altogether. Then when you learn to live with the new ideas, even newer things show up. And it never ends, because nobody knows all that there is to know.
It is frustrating to be in the middle of something that is not completely understood, but it is exciting as well.
1. Exciting is the word, I am not sure why I want to find out some of these things because reality as we know it is right in our backyards. I personally cannot understand so many things about myself which I think is very important to know before I go dabbling into something that is much farther away. I think it is important because knowing how I am made up and how I function would lead me to understand more of what I perceive, especially in space.I think you've got the point. Physics generally turns out to be simple [but not easy], but the process of figuring out how things work is very complicated indeed. The big advantage of science is that it is based on observations, and within reasonable bounds the observations are true. However, understanding how things work is messy, and you are sometimes very unsure what is true and never absolutely sure that you have all the important parts right. Hearing someone's new work, or better yet having an idea yourself, gives you a "So THAT is how it is" reaction, and if you are lucky, reading about a part of physics you don't yet know gives you much the same feeling.
Like essentially all of physics, at least when fully understood, space is a mathematical construct. I find it absolutely fascinating that we live in a universe all of which is a mathematical construct, simple in principle but complicated in the way the pieces fit together. For space, we start with the idea of distance, how many meter sticks can I fit between me and that tree? Then we find there are three independent spatial dimensions plus the rather more mysterious time dimension. Then Einstein comes along and tells us that the four dimensions are woven together and that they are mathematically curved. Time is just another dimension like the other three. Then we have difficulty understanding the idea because space is purely mathematical and we were expecting something more concrete. Moreover, there are visualization problems like space being curved within itself, not into an additional dimension like all the objects we are used to. Worse, space is expanding so that the objects embedded in it are getting further apart without moving within space. It takes quite a bit of thought to decide which of the old concepts are helpful in visualizing the reality and which need to be ignored altogether. Then when you learn to live with the new ideas, even newer things show up. And it never ends, because nobody knows all that there is to know.
It is frustrating to be in the middle of something that is not completely understood, but it is exciting as well.
Einstein and all the others together with the older civilizations and their versions of science has contributed to where we are today. Science is certainly not new to us on earth, understandable there are different observations and different interpretations, but all in all there is a movement. I have tried so much math’s to see if I could come up with anything different to satisfy my curiosity but I gave up after I realized that there were too many variables and incomplete information to move ahead.
My biggest problem is what we do with individual observations and collective observations. Individual observation is almost obsolete. We are forced to see things one way and that is not what I am about.
It may be that the theoretical dark matter is a form of tachyon?
I think it is fair to say that almost all experts expect one of the other alternatives for dark matter to turn out to be true. At the moment no one really knows how to describe a tachyon mathematically. In fact, one of the usual criteria for an "acceptable" quantum field theory is that it not have tachyons.
Personally, I think it would be a lot of fun for dark matter to turn out to be made of tachyons. The experimental results might suggest a way to fix up our description, and with or without hints the process of learning how to describe them and incorporate them into current theory (or correct the theories so they tolerate tachyons) would be very enjoyable. It is surely premature to spend any time speculating about details, however.
Another far-out possibility would be that tachyons somehow produce the effect of dark energy, but there is very probably no way to even start on this one. We really need some observational information on dark matter and dark energy.
Well then, if Tachyons are real, then this thread is basically solved.I think it is fair to say that almost all experts expect one of the other alternatives for dark matter to turn out to be true. At the moment no one really knows how to describe a tachyon mathematically. In fact, one of the usual criteria for an "acceptable" quantum field theory is that it not have tachyons.
Personally, I think it would be a lot of fun for dark matter to turn out to be made of tachyons. The experimental results might suggest a way to fix up our description, and with or without hints the process of learning how to describe them and incorporate them into current theory (or correct the theories so they tolerate tachyons) would be very enjoyable. It is surely premature to spend any time speculating about details, however.
Another far-out possibility would be that tachyons somehow produce the effect of dark energy, but there is very probably no way to even start on this one. We really need some observational information on dark matter and dark energy.
Oh, no. Tachyons being real would be only the beginning. Moreover, tachyons could be real but totally irrelevant to cosmology.Well then, if Tachyons are real, then this thread is basically solved.I think it is fair to say that almost all experts expect one of the other alternatives for dark matter to turn out to be true. At the moment no one really knows how to describe a tachyon mathematically. In fact, one of the usual criteria for an "acceptable" quantum field theory is that it not have tachyons.
Personally, I think it would be a lot of fun for dark matter to turn out to be made of tachyons. The experimental results might suggest a way to fix up our description, and with or without hints the process of learning how to describe them and incorporate them into current theory (or correct the theories so they tolerate tachyons) would be very enjoyable. It is surely premature to spend any time speculating about details, however.
Another far-out possibility would be that tachyons somehow produce the effect of dark energy, but there is very probably no way to even start on this one. We really need some observational information on dark matter and dark energy.
We would expect to see Cherenkov radiation emanating from such matter. This does not appear to be supported by observation.
| « Does Special Relativity affect one's perception of Expansion? | Rate of Expansion of the universe » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
