Sub space

[fermions]

Is Sub space real. If it is would it be possibly to extract enormous amounts of energy from sub space leading to advances in space technology and traveling intergalactic distances.

[wlminex]

In what context are you using the term "Sub Space"?

[AlphaNumeric]

Don't get your physics from Star Trek. They might have things like subspace transceiver arrays, subspace field coils and 'pockets' of subspace in various episodes but it's used as a vapid buzzword. Other vapid examples of borrowing fancy sounding words include "gravimetric distortion", "meta-phasic shield" and "interplexing beacon". Googling for 'subspace' will bring up lots of sci-fi nonsense but the term does mean something in mathematics but it isn't anything to do with how it is used in science fiction.

[KilljoyKlown]

Don't get your physics from Star Trek. They might have things like subspace transceiver arrays, subspace field coils and 'pockets' of subspace in various episodes but it's used as a vapid buzzword. Other vapid examples of borrowing fancy sounding words include "gravimetric distortion", "meta-phasic shield" and "interplexing beacon". Googling for 'subspace' will bring up lots of sci-fi nonsense but the term does mean something in mathematics but it isn't anything to do with how it is used in science fiction.

Well, yes that's true. But at the beginning our universe started expanding and creating our local space. What exactly is it our space is expanding in? I could call it subspace for want of a better word.

[OnlyMe]

Don't get your physics from Star Trek. They might have things like subspace transceiver arrays, subspace field coils and 'pockets' of subspace in various episodes but it's used as a vapid buzzword. Other vapid examples of borrowing fancy sounding words include "gravimetric distortion", "meta-phasic shield" and "interplexing beacon". Googling for 'subspace' will bring up lots of sci-fi nonsense but the term does mean something in mathematics but it isn't anything to do with how it is used in science fiction.

Is there a simple explanation for what it means in mathematics?

[arfa brane]

Is there a simple explanation for what it means in mathematics?

Yep. Vector spaces have subspaces.

In mathematics

* Euclidean subspace, in linear algebra, a set of vectors in n-dimensional Euclidean space that is closed under addition and scalar multiplication
* Linear subspace, in linear algebra, a subset of a vector space that is closed under addition and scalar multiplication
* Affine subspace, linear manifold or linear variety, is a geometric structure that generalizes the affine properties of Euclidean space. It is a subset of a vector space closed under affine combinations of vectors in the space.
* Subspace topology, in topology and related areas of mathematics

Q: is there a simple explanation for what "affine" means in mathematics?
A: if you treat the number line under subtraction as having no distinguished point, you find that for example, 5 - 3 = 13 - 11. And so on. It works with real numbers too, obviously.
Which means (the operation of) subtraction on the number line makes it an affine space. Same with addition since 4 + 3 = 6 + 1, etc.
So you don't have to start anywhere "special", and since 2 + 5 = 5 + 2, you can start at either number and move right "by" the second. With subtraction you move left instead.

[AlphaNumeric]

Well, yes that's true. But at the beginning our universe started expanding and creating our local space. What exactly is it our space is expanding in? I could call it subspace for want of a better word.

Except there doesn't have to be anything the space is expanding into. You don't need to embed an expanding space into a larger space.

Is there a simple explanation for what it means in mathematics?

If you're in N dimensional space then you can write any location as the sum of N independent vectors. A subspace is when you pick less than N vectors. All the points you can then write using your M<N vectors together form an M dimensional subspace. It's a subset of the space you're in.

More formally, as said above by AB, it needs to form a vector space itself, so you have to consider affine spaces which include the origin else you don't have a vector space.

[KilljoyKlown]

Except there doesn't have to be anything the space is expanding into. You don't need to embed an expanding space into a larger space.

That's not a very clear concept. How is it justified? Do you believe in a finite universe? I would think all standard BB proponents have to believe in a finite universe? For instance if you could be transported to the edge of our expanding universe. What would you call what's on the other side of that edge?

[OnlyMe]

That's not a very clear concept. How is it justified? Do you believe in a finite universe? I would think all standard BB proponents have to believe in a finite universe? For instance if you could be transported to the edge of our expanding universe. What would you call what's on the other side of that edge?

This is offered only as a point of conceptual reference, not as a statement of any descriptive fact.

First space is defined for us by the relationship of observable objects. It can get a bit more complicated than that and include the effect, of unobservables like dark matter and dark energy, but in the end it involves, how those affect what we can observe.

Set aside the idea that the BB is some sort of explosive event, represented by all of everything having been confined at some time in the past to a small volume.., and then expanding outward, in a Big Bang. Instead consider that what we think of as the BB, represents a cascade reaction that began with an event, something like the way crystals form in a super saturated solution. Once the initial crystallization occurs in a relatively localized area or volume, it continues to spread throughout the entire solution.

Once observable crystals form, in the case of the super saturated solution, the relationship becomes completely kinetic, or in the case of the universe, once photons and matter have formed or differentiated, EM and gravitational forces begin to play an additional role, in the dynamic kinetic relationships. The matter begins to interact in complex ways. It is believed and appears, that in the case of the universe, all of the observable matter was created during that very short period of initial crystalization or differentiation. From that initial crystalization or BB, the expansion becomes an issue of dynamic or kinetic interactions between the initial mass and light...

Add to the observable matter, dark matter and dark energy.., and space, which we can only define as the distances and relationships between what we can observe, seems to be expanding, even in an accelerating manner. This expansion is really nothing more, than a continuing change in the distance between observable objects. Which seems to be explained best by the space between those objects growing rather than the objects moving apart within a static volume of space.

This does not require that any space other than the observed distance between observable objects is created.

As with many attempts to put concepts like this into terms of classical experience, it is not an entirely accurate description. It is only meant to provide some conceptual basis, that does not require a rigorous understanding of mathematics.