What is space?

I am saying space is something, correcting people who are saying space is not a "thing", ofcourse it exists. I was also saying "nothing" does not exist hence it's name 'No-thing'. everything that exists is something therefore nothing is non existent and abstract.

pece.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Oh, right.

So we don't know what space is, if it 'moves' (but relative to what?);
all we can say is "it contains matter which is discrete, and in motion, relative to other matter, and energy which is why matter has relative motion".

Since we can see distant objects are all receding, then the relative motion must generally be expansive, not static.
Therefore the 'motion' of space itself is the expansion, the relative motion of space due to energy is equivalent to the relative motion of matter due to the same thing.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Im not sure if using 'move' would be the best choice of words,

The objects could recede and universe expand without space having to actualy expand itself. If space was limitless matter could expand from a central point giving the impression of universal expansion. I see no reason why space itself has been shown to be expanding along with all matter in the universe.

Why would space itself need to be included in the expnsion of the energy?, why can energy not be expanding on its own into free space which is already present?.



peace.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Ahhh, yes the Adam go... Just like that. But you're hardly featured in that except for the typical one-liners (something like bad acting). Laika did a good number there and is one of the few on the religions forum that seemed to know something. You shouldn't try to take credit for Laika's aptitude. Dig deeper, though, you might find something better.

 

But space is part of the universe. Wouldn't objects stop receding eventually, if space didn't expand?

In which case, where is the central point of expansion, which should stick out quite noticeably?

Maybe you don't understand the problem then.

Space contains energy, and matter.
The matter and the energy is expanding away from itself - the matter/energy density is decreasing with time.

If there was a 'free' space before the expansion began, then the cosmos would have an apparent centre of expansion, but it doesn't.

 

Exactly. This is the problem I have with the analogies that even scientists use to describe the BB to laymen.

It was not an explosion of spacetime in preexisting spacetime. It was an expansion of ALL (as far as we know) of spacetime from a very dense state.

I prefer imagining my POV within an arbitrary unit volume of an already infinite but incredibly dense universe at T = 0. Then the metrics of spacetime begin to "inflate", for whatever reason - everywhere - carrying every point within every unit volume away from every other point.

 

Here's where mass came from:

Space is a bubble of Higgs potential.

 

Sounds good to me.

 

Is that object A or B?

 

That is an idea without evidence. Nothing known can move at FTL speeds.

 

A state far beyond the minimum limit for a black hole does not expand.

 

quantum wave. I still find it odd that you say that matter forms at low energy densities where I would think that they would form at high energy densities (so more of the building blocks of matter, so to speak). Could a powerful enough nuclear explosion form matter that was not there originally?

What's your take on ball lightning which seems to be a semi-stable form of energy?

 

But we know there must be objects beyond the most distant we can see.
So they're traveling away from us at > c. They must be, or light would reach us (we would be in their light-cones).

It does (or it's possible) if it doesn't have any mass yet; see how it got mass in post 87 (the idea of mass being due to a field that pervaded the universe after massless particles evolved somehow), or don't you think the Higgs 'matters'?
Actually that's not a very good description of how the universe got massive; the Higgs field has always existed, but it had no value until after the very early cosmos had condensed into baryons. Then, as explained above, it was able to attain a nonzero value somewhere, and that spread through the whole show, like a growing bubble.

Isn't logic funny?

 

Mass can occupy Space (That's space as opposed to Spacetime, Mass no my knowledge is made up of Spacetime, well technically "Energy".) Space obviously doesn't occupy anything it's just the remainder when you subtract from an area.

There is a rather interesting theory in how the universe came about.

Lets apply that the LHC is going to create a very small controllable collision, we know that the Big Bang was many multitudes the size of this incredibly Micro experiment in comparison. We can extrapolate for the Actual Big Bang to be created through this method, we'd require many Billions of LHC collisions. We can extrapolate that the sheer cost of one, implies that we as people on a Single Universe would never gain the Funding or Labour to build a universe that matches the size of our one (if not this one itself).

This is of course where the extrapolation for Multiple Universes is applied. If multiple universes could communicate with one another their findings, it's a potential to "double up" the research efforts while being paid the same amount.

Imagine say 5 universes, they all get paid $500,000.00 to do research. It would be possible to send a the same team of researchers off in 5 different research paths for the same price as one, if of course it was possible to communicate all the results between all 5 universes. There is a further theory in regards to FTL communication between such universes, where the results from the team on universe 1 could be given to universe 2 to revise [retrofit further] at the same time. This of course messes with an exponential curvature by suggesting research could just jump straight up.

It's not just the Funding and Labour that could be applied by this means, Lets say an LHC collision was created on each "parallel", however the sharing of data between each parallel universe allows the collisions to be coordinated. They could occur at the same point, at the same time but from different directions, or occur at different points at the same time from different directions etc.

Mathematically it implies that it would be possible to take a Cartesian frame of reference to the "space" where each universe is aiming and a kind of fractal could be developed to allow collisions to expand out from a central point. (Or take a reference point at a set distance from the centre point and "matrix" such collisions towards the centre generating a higher constitution of mass/collisions.)

Obviously it's something I've theorised in but it's incredible complex and difficult to just explain. The reason of course for me to attempt to explain it, is that mass subtracted from one universe and applied to a single other would generate multiple universes multiplying Space to itself. You couldn't do that with mass because it would break the "Laws of Thermodynamics".

 

When we look up in the sky, we are looking back in time. If the CMB collapsed and vanished after a few hundred million years, we would not know it for a LONG time. Since light moves so "slowly", we cannot see much of the present day universe, whatever speed it is expanding at.

If you can show me that Higg's bosons exist, they matter. No one has found any evidence for them at present and followers of the HB are a bit like JW's talking of the end of the world, coming up with ever new values as old ones prove false.

 

I was suggesting in the above post that matter forms as the energy density declines from the "dense" state, not at the low energy density.

I would say it was charged atmospheric conditions, but the phenomenon of ball lightening is far removed from the energy conditions that surround the formation of mass during the early expansion period as I'm sure you agree.

 

Huh? What are you talking about? :shrug:

 

Take your choice.

 

It's neither A nor B.

 

The Planck Space is a square measurement, that is really the smallest space we can mathematically deal with. At this level, spacetime is bubbling with matter and energy.