continually expanding?

Because it does not suck?

Are you asking why would the universe expand if there was a God?

miketrees wrote on Jun 26^th, 2013 at 8:47pm:

Because it does not suck? Are you asking why would the universe expand if there was a God?

No, were saying that if the universe is expanding, then there is a God.        :P

!!!


i.e.
Our [mankind's] science of the universe [cosmology], is wrong/mistaken.

Or, at least, there are many scientists who are arguing that it is.....

What if the 'expanding universe' is a fatally flaw
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1367800239/0#0

hhmm, don't know.
Great question

Jaqs wrote on Jun 26^th, 2013 at 5:26pm:

continually expanding?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_expansion_of_space



Quote:

The expansion is a generic property of the universe we inhabit, though the reason we are expanding is explained by most cosmologists as having its origin in the end of the early universe's inflationary period which set matter and energy in the universe on an inertial trajectory consistent with the equivalence principle and Einstein's theory of general relativity (that is, the matter in the universe is separating because it was separating in the past). Additionally, the expansion rate of the universe has been measured to be accelerating due to the repulsive force of dark energy which appears in the theoretical models as a cosmological constant

It will slow down in time.... and then, just as it has done in the past, it will contract to a pin-point of energy that will explode outwards all over again.

Groundhog Day.

It's all very routine.

"Nothing to see here, folks ~ please move along".

And what does the universe expand 'into' "
I thought the universe was everything ?

Does it expand into a vacuum.
Is the vacuum pulling the universe apart.

Oh, I read a book on einstiens theory of relativity. really good, till I lost the thread on about chapter 6 or so.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jun 27^th, 2013 at 9:54am:

And what does the universe expand 'into' " I thought the universe was everything ? Does it expand into a vacuum. Is the vacuum pulling the universe apart.

It's anybody's guess.

It's push, not pull factors that has us spinning through space at the moment.

The one-off Big Bang theory has been thoroughly trashed, of course. It was a favourite of the Goddists, and so enjoyed quite a run in the popularity polls.

Nobody wanted to risk their university cosmology grants from the government by announcing they believed the Big Bang theory was a religious hoax based upon keeping faith with Genesis in the Bible.

As we now know, the universe breathes in and breathes out like a huge lung. Or like a spherical tide in constant ebb and flow.

Although I am a card-carrying atheist (NOT a communist) ~ I'm not entirely sure there isn't an invisible 'Intelligence' operating in the universe.

I'm not entirely convinced that Evolutionary Theory accounts for all of the mind-boggling complexities of the living organism. The extraordinary cleverness of the human body alone gives pause for thought if there isn't something beyond Natural Selection and the evolving complexities of the higher orders of species.

Needless to say, by no stretch of the imagination would I try to hawk the highly improbable fiction that there is a moral God.

A practical, artisan God - maybe. But moral? Not a chance.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 27^th, 2013 at 9:18am:

It will slow down in time.... and then, just as it has done in the past, it will contract to a pin-point of energy that will explode outwards all over again. Groundhog Day. It's all very routine. "Nothing to see here, folks ~ please move along".

How do you define "past" in that context?  The past stops at the singularity. Space-Time stops at the singularity.  (That's a rhetorical question)


Sprintcyclist wrote on Jun 27^th, 2013 at 9:54am:

And what does the universe expand 'into' " I thought the universe was everything ? Does it expand into a vacuum. Is the vacuum pulling the universe apart. Oh, I read a book on einstiens theory of relativity. really good, till I lost the thread on about chapter 6 or so.

Think of the universe expanding in the same way as the two dimensional surface of a balloon expanding as it's being inflated. In the same way, the universe isn't expanding into anything.

Vacuums are full of neutrinos, gravity waves and electromagnetic energy (etc etc). A vacuum is not the same as nothing. A vacuum is every bit a  part of space-time. A clock will still function in a vacuum.

muso wrote on Jun 29^th, 2013 at 9:57am:

How do you define "past" in that context?

Previous events of a cosmic nature. The last Big Bang and all the ones before it. We can take the past as being the history that has gone before this current point in time.

Herbert's Helpful Hint: Don't get too hung up on cosmological theories upon the nature and structure of the universe. Even Einstein has been found in error on several points. Cosmology is an evolving science. It was only 40 years ago that all the previous theories concerning the nature of the sun had to be trashed because new technology had proved them wrong.

Whole university libaries across the world had a book-burning of their solar-theory text books. The whole lot became landfill overnight.

So don't stand too much in awe of current theories. They are only speculation after all.   

The material universe is expanding into the eternal abyss of space.

Masters create the world to the causa prima. The universe will act according to the master's projection. Contraction, expansion, linear, cyclic, genesis, finale ... the master will decide what the universe does.

The Hindus decided the world was cyclic, the Jews decided it was temporal ... in all cases the master decides what the universe does.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 27^th, 2013 at 9:18am:

It will slow down in time.... and then, just as it has done in the past, it will contract to a pin-point of energy that will explode outwards all over again. Groundhog Day. It's all very routine. "Nothing to see here, folks ~ please move along".

No it won't - the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate.

Bobby. wrote on Jun 29^th, 2013 at 3:14pm:

Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 27th, 2013 at 9:18am: It will slow down in time.... and then, just as it has done in the past, it will contract to a pin-point of energy that will explode outwards all over again. Groundhog Day. It's all very routine. "Nothing to see here, folks ~ please move along". No it won't - the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate.

That's only an illusion because of relativity factors.

muso wrote on Jun 29^th, 2013 at 9:57am:

Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 27th, 2013 at 9:18am: It will slow down in time.... and then, just as it has done in the past, it will contract to a pin-point of energy that will explode outwards all over again. Groundhog Day. It's all very routine. "Nothing to see here, folks ~ please move along". How do you define "past" in that context?  The past stops at the singularity. Space-Time stops at the singularity.  (That's a rhetorical question) Sprintcyclist wrote on Jun 27th, 2013 at 9:54am: And what does the universe expand 'into' " I thought the universe was everything ? Does it expand into a vacuum. Is the vacuum pulling the universe apart. Oh, I read a book on einstiens theory of relativity. really good, till I lost the thread on about chapter 6 or so. Think of the universe expanding in the same way as the two dimensional surface of a balloon expanding as it's being inflated. In the same way, the universe isn't expanding into anything. Vacuums are full of neutrinos, gravity waves and electromagnetic energy (etc etc). A vacuum is not the same as nothing. A vacuum is every bit a  part of space-time. A clock will still function in a vacuum.

This is what's wrong with science and scientists -they say the stupidest things and people just nod along.
A clock in vacuum - as if that experimental vacuum room was not itself situated in space and time. THAT vacuum is situated in something - space and time.

There is no known vacuum in the sense of being outside space and time, except in 'models' which are, being models, in space and time.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 29^th, 2013 at 3:24pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 29th, 2013 at 3:14pm: Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 27th, 2013 at 9:18am: It will slow down in time.... and then, just as it has done in the past, it will contract to a pin-point of energy that will explode outwards all over again. Groundhog Day. It's all very routine. "Nothing to see here, folks ~ please move along". No it won't - the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. That's only an illusion because of relativity factors.

Yes - I had a whole thread on that possibility:

Dark energy may be an illusion.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1365078149/0#0

The universe isn't expanding - everything in it is shrinking.

... wrote on Jun 29^th, 2013 at 11:55pm:

The universe isn't expanding - everything in it is shrinking.

The Universe is expanding.

... wrote on Jun 29^th, 2013 at 11:55pm:

The universe isn't expanding - everything in it is shrinking.

That's just from the perspective of package sizes at Coles and Woolworths.

Back to the OT - If you want to speak spiritually, look within first.

Just as a Devonshire farmer will tell you that ... "The answerrr lies in the soil" ... so too can we say that the mysteries of the universe ... "lie in the stars".

And given that ...  energy can neither be created nor destroyed ... we are left with the conclusion that the number of Big Bangs has been infinite.

Which again, leads us to the conclusion that ... the universe has been in endless flux for an eternity.

It has also been surmised that there are an infinite number of Big Bangs happening all over the universe ~ each of them in their various stages of ebb and flow.

 

Bobby. wrote on Jun 29^th, 2013 at 3:14pm:

No it won't - the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate.

Is there an answer to this paradox?

Is this because as the material universe puts distance between its parts, the gravitational forces are weakened, and therefore the outward thrust is increased?

That's your assignment for today, bobbythebatsh*t.  8-) Have your paper in by tomorrow lunchtime.

Perhaps when the lumpy bits of space have expanded away from the point of the last big bang, that will be the trigger for another big bang.

Perhaps the material bits of the universe had a family split up many years ago and run away fro each other.

They are still running but now are running trying to find each other.
hence the more frenetic pace :-)

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jun 30^th, 2013 at 1:37pm:

Perhaps the material bits of the universe had a family split up many years ago and run away fro each other. They are still running but now are running trying to find each other. hence the more frenetic pace :-)

;D ;D ;D

Looking for Lost relatives? Check the registry at the entrance to Black Holes.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 30^th, 2013 at 9:03am:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 29th, 2013 at 3:14pm: No it won't - the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. Is there an answer to this paradox? Is this because as the material universe puts distance between its parts, the gravitational forces are weakened, and therefore the outward thrust is increased? That's your assignment for today, bobbythebatsh*t.  8-) Have your paper in by tomorrow lunchtime.

No - there appears to be another force called dark energy which is
creating more space.

force = mass x acceleration.

Just as a mass will accelerate under the force of gravity this seems to be the same as gravity but in reverse.
The distance between galaxies is increasing at an accelerated rate.

Some say that this is an illusion caused by time slowing down
over 13.7 billion years.

Good post, bobby.

Where do black holes fit into all of this?

From current observation it seems that the material universe is eventually destined to disappear into black holes...

Dark matter ... yes, that's another spanner in the works.

Apparently they've also managed to pick up the background noise of the last Big Bang. The shhhhhh sound is still Out There amongst the stars.

Dark Energy is basically a fudge factor. You can tailor it to fit whatever value you decide is right for the Hubble constant.

Nobody really understands what dark energy is.

Bobby. wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 8:46pm:

force = mass x acceleration.

That's an approximation of the following equations for low relative velocities.  f = ma is not really useful for cosmology. It's useless for anything accurate. You can't even use it for GPS satellite orbits.

t = (c/a) sinh(aT/c) =  sqrt[(d/c)2 + 2d/a]

d = (c2/a) [cosh(aT/c) - 1] =  (c2/a) (sqrt[1 + (at/c)2] - 1)

v = c tanh(aT/c) = at / sqrt[1 + (at/c)2]

T = (c/a) sinh-1(at/c) = (c/a) ch-1 [ad/c2 + 1]

γ = cosh(aT/c) = sqrt[1 + (at/c)2] = ad/c2 + 1

um, well, that's more mathematical than my idea.

"...........Perhaps the material bits of the universe had a family split up many years ago and run away fro each other.........."

But mines more fun.

.... and then of course there are 'wormholes', and parallel universes, and anti-gravity forces which once understood and harnessed will change our world as we know it.

muso wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2013 at 10:24pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jul 2nd, 2013 at 8:46pm: force = mass x acceleration. That's an approximation of the following equations for low relative velocities.  f = ma is not really useful for cosmology. It's useless for anything accurate. You can't even use it for GPS satellite orbits. t = (c/a) sinh(aT/c) =  sqrt[(d/c)2 + 2d/a] d = (c2/a) [cosh(aT/c) - 1] =  (c2/a) (sqrt[1 + (at/c)2] - 1) v = c tanh(aT/c) = at / sqrt[1 + (at/c)2] T = (c/a) sinh-1(at/c) = (c/a) ch-1 [ad/c2 + 1] γ = cosh(aT/c) = sqrt[1 + (at/c)2] = ad/c2 + 1

Dear Muso,
f=ma was just used to explain the reverse effect of dark energy.
I know about relativistic correction.

We don't know if dark energy is an illusion or not.

Bobby. wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2013 at 8:28am:

muso wrote on Jul 2nd, 2013 at 10:24pm: Bobby. wrote on Jul 2nd, 2013 at 8:46pm: force = mass x acceleration. That's an approximation of the following equations for low relative velocities.  f = ma is not really useful for cosmology. It's useless for anything accurate. You can't even use it for GPS satellite orbits. t = (c/a) sinh(aT/c) =  sqrt[(d/c)2 + 2d/a] d = (c2/a) [cosh(aT/c) - 1] =  (c2/a) (sqrt[1 + (at/c)2] - 1) v = c tanh(aT/c) = at / sqrt[1 + (at/c)2] T = (c/a) sinh-1(at/c) = (c/a) ch-1 [ad/c2 + 1] γ = cosh(aT/c) = sqrt[1 + (at/c)2] = ad/c2 + 1 Dear Muso, f=ma was just used to explain the reverse effect of dark energy. I know about relativistic correction. We don't know if dark energy is an illusion or not.

So you're an agnostic with respect to dark energy?  It has its true believers and its deniers.

Basically Dark Energy fills in the gaps in our knowledge, like some cosmological Polyfilla.   ;)

Maybe one day, we'll have a theory of everything that doesn't need a God Dark Energy.  ;)

muso wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2013 at 9:09am:

Maybe one day, we'll have a theory of everything that doesn't need a God Dark Energy.  ;)

Are you saying God's a Negro?  8-)

Muso,

Quote:

So you're an agnostic with respect to dark energy?  It has its true believers and its deniers. Basically Dark Energy fills in the gaps in our knowledge, like some cosmological Polyfilla.   Wink Maybe one day, we'll have a theory of everything that doesn't need a God Dark Energy.  Wink

I am undecided about dark energy.
Apparently if time slows down over 13.7 billion years
then dark energy is an illusion.

What are your thoughts?