ALMA sees old galaxies before they merged. two ways to look back into the past?

Yes, but is it locally iso-tropic, espeially if space is mostly empty?

I don't believe that the illustration is a flight of fancy. It is a natural possible emerging construct of string theory. It seems to conform to everything we know about the universe.

The problem is that many such structures can contain these same properties. Thus the illustration is not a perfect representation. There may be many other similar representations but only different in detail.

The main point as I understand it, they all answer to the required "mirror symmetry"

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calabi–Yau_manifold

Question 1: Is the universe spherical?
Rather than trying to answer this myself, I suggest this link from NASA may answer the question much better than I could.
https://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/StarChild/questions/question35.html

Question 2: Is there any definitive requirement that the entire unverse is equally iso-thermal everywhere?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/isothermal

If not, then curvature of some sort seems inevitable.
To me the impression get from all this is that the universe is indeed curved, but has a negative curvature.

https://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/StarChild/questions/question35.html

But I will qualify that I am not able to express this in mahematical terms.

Question 3: What is the meaning of entropy ?

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

I go from the assumption that the majority of space has an absolute tempreature of absolute zero or

Read more:

To me that means that all encountered temperatures higher than -459.67 F are not a degree of coldness, but of warmth. Zero degrees Celsius (0 °C ) already register as = + 32 °F, a degree of warmth.

But it would seem that entropy will continue until an state of absolute zero entropy is achieved.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

In The Expanding Sphere Membrane model it is not the temperature that is modeled, but the lapsed time, distance covered in the radial direction, from the central Big Beginning.
Isotemporal. living ~at the same time (since the BB.) so,
One item at a time, first isotemporal, later isothermal.
The confusion comes from the french part of english. In french 'le beau temps' is not a good time but nice weather, temperature.
The main theme of the thread is Time. although it was hotter in times past.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

W4U: that image has a lot of voids, possibly reaching right through that convoluted membrane. so:
In the Universe there are mostly voids, in big conglomerations, also even inside the atoms, so, looking at nebel's Expanding Sphere Membrane model,
could we assume, that even the space expanding inside the universe is the same that existed outside, before the BB point in time, still spreading the goodies that contributed to the BB event, even now comprising the voids inside the membrane / universe, as it moves into the future?
The timespace among us begging us along into the future?
The ESM membrane not existing as an an impenetrable skin, but permeable, allowing the osmosis of timespace, but not allowing it to leak into the past through the inner surface?
"The buck stops here", only inside the membrane ( misquoting Truman)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Write4U said: ↑
We're always looking toward the center, i.e the BB.

W4U: In the simple Expanding Sphere Membrane, you would always looking in a tangential directing, not toward the center where the Big Beginning was in past timespace, which would require looking down in the radial direction, a no no for flatlanders. The look back would receive info from a smaller past sphere universe of course, from a spiral path, but with the present near - flatness all messages seem to come in near straight local lines, gravitational lensing notwithstanding.
NE: from all points in the membrane, time is at right angles, like in our graphs. that puts the BB at the intersection of all the radii from the membrane universe.
Has that meaning, as you asked?
The past of the universe is encased in the now empty inside shell of the model membrane. even the CMBR is dispersed from there into the membrane with a ~27 light year local horizon. The big questions remain:
How do we view this past timespace that the universe/membrane has passed through?
Unique as it is from the pristine pre-BB time[space],
Has it been strip-mined of the condition that the Dirac Sea, or other never nothing/void* advocates propose? The Shell Theorem, Faraday Cage seem to indicate so!
Is the past time different from future time in that is now corralled, never to be occupied by another entity.? But, Galaxies. could merge? why not membranes {if any}, like waves passing through each other?
Is the future timespace that is waiting for the uniiverse/membrane to pass through, still endowed with the conditions Dirac Sea, nnv* make potentially possible? (timespace might be potent).
The past is truly gone. sorry, you can not go back and change your mate grandfather 's wedding date to change the identity of your mother in law.

 

that is correct in the model too, what it reveals though, is that the universe/ membrane beyond that 2x~14 billion light years diameter on the spherical membrane is only 1/3 of the total membrane. so: from any respective point on the membrane, which was shaped by moving out 13.8 billion years from the BB, you can see only 1/3 to the CMBR.
The elephant in the room: what does that empty space , of time elapsed, now empty represent.

 

I understand, but
question 1: what about the "background glow" of the BB" . Where on a flat plane would we be able to see that phenomena? Over the entire flat tangent? (see my post # 3).
Would that mean , here , now, I am still bathed in the background glow ? But then, why would I need a telescope to look "back in time".

question 2: How on the tangent would we be able to see stars which no longer exist in the present (have gone nova a billion years ago)? Would their light still occupy a place on the present plane? Is that why the sky looks so crowded with light from stars, half of which may no longer exist?

I understand, but if I can see the light, would it be a matter of magnification for me to "see" a wedding taking place on say the planet of an old star?
This is really interesting.

 

Good questions, thank you:
I) As a flatlander, you would look only into the plane, and scanning a panorama, you would see everything coming at you through the 360 degree "tangent" from the past. Yes, we are all bathed in the Cosmic Background Radiation, as was the Bell. Inc. Horn in NJ, and the university window apparatus just down the road in 1965. and we are bathed in it now. and, of course
the signal is so feeble and so cold that you need a real cool telescope like that horn to see, feel it.

Yes, all the light from stars are still circulating in the membrane, but only 1/3 of them, that are within our 2R* horizon are visible to us, but there are many points on the membrane overlapping with our horizon limit, and within their 2/3 of the membrane area that we can not see, but they can, that would bring those into focus. for them.
Even our section of 27 billion light years (and all the others beyond our horizon) look so crowded, with stars, galaxies, because we are looking at a smaller, more crowded past.

That would take real astounding technology, resolution. . I tried to be politically correct not to kill the grandmother of my mother in law. just shift the wedding date (get me to church on time) to change the odds of that particular sperm meeting the ovum, would do it.
If we could have a mirror installed, we could watch that wedding taking place,( if the expansion is less than 1/2 c. but as was said before,
we could never see anything like the wedding coming around from the other side of the membrane universe. because > more than 2/3 of the universe, to never to be traversed by that image,-- lie between us and the backs of our heads.
In the ESM model, the Universe, membrane has a diameter of 87 billion light years , full of matter and circulating radiation messages. We can only see ~ 27 of those, but other can see different areas of 27 billion LYs than ours. thank you for prodding me.
* R = distance from the BB to the membrane.

 

In the Expanding Sphere Model. it is assumed that all parts of the universe exist the same time, have moved through the 4st dimension an ~equal amount, so the sphere membrane would be approximately having at all points the same radius from the beginning.
The infinity looked at, is not that of the universe, but that of time itself. It is thought to have existed before the BB, and still being out there for us to move onto.
Because the universe has been expanding through time, and is now, we always have to send a message into the future, and always receive it as coming from the past, and that is true wherever we look. Everything we see, like those galaxies in the OP, from ~13 billion years ago, send those photons into the future, we see them as coming from that long ago past, so,
the universe is expanding through time. but:
At any given moment the duration in the time dimension is zero, therefore the membrane of the model is thought of as having zero thickness.
When trying to send a narrow message to our star, aim it 500 seconds into the future. That is why Broadcasting guarantees hits, not narrow-casting.

 

Yes, There are 4 dimensions in our spacetime universe.-- So, for clarity, in the ESM model, one time dimension has been traded for the time dimension, which normally appears only in the x axis in our coordinate geometric presentations. therefore,
The real universe, has no empty space between the Big Beginning point in time and us. but
In the ESM model, that empty space pictures the past time from the start to the present iso-temporal membrane, or any points on it. and
as per Gauss/Faraday cage, and the Shell Theorem, there are no forces from inside that empty inside past,-- pushing out like air overpressure an inflating and expanding balloon. Instead
The Expanding Sphere Membrane model proposes that
a) all proper movement inside the membrane have to generate centrifugal forces,
b) all energy supposedly present in the timespace void outside, which the membrane is expanding into, (conquering the future), becomes part of the membrane, and feeds even the accelerated expansion.
c) that the [dark] energy that is appearing in the voids between galaxies, other entities, is just that, constituents that come with the infinite timespace through which the membrane/universe moves.
Energy does not come from/resides in the past, but from the future, as it did in the Big Beginning origin point in time.

 

nebel said: ↑
Seattle, in the ESM model, the universe would be ~ 87 billion come from inflation? light years measured in a great circle diameter, where does your additional 6 billion come from inflation?
predictions ?

thoughts on this issue, 1) correction: circumference, not diameter.

2)In this hexagon, (credit:taken from Google images), in a model that would have a string circumference universe model, assuming that the observers, us were at A, the horizon to the origin BB distance R would be points B and F. 1/3 of the total "string" universe. but
The ESM model is a sphere membrane so:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

(credit image from google images), This picture of a "cap" of a sphere, would give the view from the top to the horizon, shown as the latitude line defining the reach of any radiation originating since the BB origin.
It would take 4 of these caps to cover the whole membrane, not 3 strings as in the enclosed hexagon. A= 4 x 3^2 x pi.
It would take 4 observers spaced ~ 27 billion light years apart to see the whole universe at one time.
3/4 of the universe (at least as seen in the ESM model) are beyond our ken.
The cone from the center to the r defined latitude line would be the light cone for an observer at the top. (you could not look further in the membrane than the time that the universe has expanded. ) but if
Another inverted cap would be projected below to the center, Ass epicted in the hexagon)forming a "flying saucer" like object with the dark line as rim,
The light cone would not have point at the BB point in time of origin, but a curvature as "flat" as the membrane today. giving a really distorted view of what we call a "point" . A light cone that is a double cap. not part of the Expanding Sphere Membrane.
The Locally visible universe, membrane cap, including the vertical radius line could represent an umbrella (or mushroom)
A universe ~ pictured by 4 joined, expanding umbrella locals, with handles linked since the BB origin.

 

The image below shows the radius projected onto the surface of a sphere. each one of the caps or segments would define the horizon that an observer at the center would see looking along the membrane toward the Big beginning. The radius being the time that the sphere has expanded
As can be seen, in the model, looking back to the BB would not allow an observer even see 1/4 of the total universe, 5 observers equally placed in the total universe.
image courtesy of bernhard gutsche.
as to the OP question, the ALMA image can not be seen by most of the observers in the rest of the universe.
sorry, images will follow later.

 

if this images displays, it shows in the model, that 15% of the time beyond the radius is beyond the horizon of the observer.

 

here is the image, courtesy bernhard gutsche

 

Here is a different image, by bernhard gutsche, it shows the 15% bigger than the radius cap that would give 4 observers in the membrane/ universe total coverage of the present expanded universe. Comparing the 2 images shows that if we can look back no further than 13.8 billion light years, we can see only 21% of the total expanded universe.

 

I still like the concept of CDT (causal dynamical triangulation.) which as I understand it, is perfectly illustrated in a soccer ball.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truncated_icosahedron#Cartesian_coordinates

I don't know how much this would allow us to see of the entire sphere . It doesn't seem to allow us to observe 1/3 of the total surface area, but only a much smaller portion if we consider the curvature of each plane.

 

If you look at the models I posted, models of a model, it is apparent, that we can not see 80% of the total universe that has expanded out of the Big Beginning through time. I actually had to make them to convince myself. The caps represent the panoramic view of 13.8 billion light years away, the radius.
Curvature of the plane? it is expressed in the Expanding Sphere Membrane model, because the membrane is compound curved. and yes,
The difference between the straight 6 times radius projection and the same length around the surface of the membrane is 6% . ~6% less. For that reason alone we could not see the Big Origin, let alone because of the opaque barrier. (see post 447 page 23)
"There are more things on Heaven and Earth than are dreamt of----" Shakespeare. the bard was right: at least 80% more things, and that percentage does not even touch what we will not know about the timespace before the Big Beginning
I have one more model to post.

 

Yes, Trying to fit cornered objects into a sphere to get cosmic results has a long and distinguished tradition,> Johan Kepler in Prag tried that, but by pragmatism he ended up with curves. everywhere.
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/...OcmuIgpQR-MX6jiwCCRub1jfqCp_EA0g19sy5OvAfDK4H credit google and to author.
http://hrsbstaff.ednet.ns.ca/joldford/Handouts/Kepler Lab_files/image002.gif. copyright as per address. thank you.

Compound Curves in the Expanding Spheres Membrane , spiral proper motion paths out of the point in timespace aka Big Beginning.

True, as cutting models out of balls showed, less than 25 %;-- <20% with certainty, but some overlap elsewhere. thank you.

 

Actually the fundamental idea goes way back to Plato.

I can undersand that in an inflated icosahedron there are no straight lines. Even the apparent straight lines are curved, if you were to look at them from a different angle.

And IMO, curvature everywhere is a positive result. Far from disqualifying the model, I would say that if the universe has a geometry at all, such a geometry would be ideally suited, because such a structure contains all the abstract fundamental configurations, from triangles (simplest connected geometric form) to circles (Pi), as well as wavefunctions.

It would also seem to be applicable to a manifold model of the universe. Push on a soccer ball and you can dent it, without losing its geometric integrity or total surface area. If the dent is moving, the result produces a wave function.
I find those many potentials significant when trying to fashion a model of the universe.

Moreover, it produces a mirroring effect, which, as I understand it, is another required geometric feature of the universe.

I found this presentation by Roger Antonsen very interesting and especially his demonstration of the geometric shapes that can be abstractly formed by the number 4/3 (1.33333333...)

https://www.ted.com/talks/roger_antonsen_math_is_the_hidden_secret_to_understanding_the_world

 

Thank you, all viewers surely appreciate these thoughts you linked. It is easier, it seems to see some of the math regularities in the solar system rather than the universe which appears to have a more organic resemblance at the large scale. (voids and filaments) but imagining it to be a spherical structure, having emerged from a point is a simplifying start, and from a sphere one could impose math forms that include, divide and form it, but that are not seen in nature. dividing a soccer ball skin into sections to sew them together, gives rise to such possible patterns.

In the expanding membrane, I have superimposed only 4 sections, because they represent the size of the radius doubled, equivalent to the look back time along the membrane, Figure 553 554 above, what we can see, 1/4 at best.
radius of the sphere = the expansion time, cap with that radius as the area on the membrane = our visible universe section.
mirror images too, 2 done, one to go.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

courtesy of bernhardgutsche
Here is a picture in the partial ESM model of the visible 1/4 section of the universe. The double cap disk is thought to be one radius (13.8 BLY ) thick and the rim that radial distance away from the central observer on top. The Big Beginning at the bottom center. No point in the disk is more than 13.8 billion light years distant from the central points(BB or observer). This would represent the light cone of the observer and contain all the observable timelines in the 1/4 section of the membrane that forms the top surface. Here the cone is a curved, bulging funnel.
The model shows that
The past allows more insight that what is in the present, the membrane. Hindsight is more than 20/20. looking back ~7 billion years would be seeing 12 % further than a cone would allow.

The ESM does not allow for this disk to be actually filled with matter, or containing a picture of the past, like in the sausage ***illustration model of the universe. Only the top surface contains all matter and stretched 3D space.
*** sausage model of the universe with BB at one end of the casing and time trailing off to the right on the x axis. picture courtesy of CBC news and authors. Another version of this seen in post # 3 of this thread.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!