As the thread title suggests:
What would happen if hypothetically the universe stopped moving absolutely?

My answer is that the universe would become zero dimensional in other words cease to be. It would effectively dis-appear.

Any other speculations would be welcome :)

This is an incredibly ambiguous question.

1) The universe as a whole is not "moving" in any sense.

2) Do you mean expanding?

3) If the universe stopped expanding, there would be no cosmic redshift, and eventually it would be flooded with light, probably making it uninhabitable. I don't know what the uniform temperature would be given the current Hubble volume.

4) Reaearch "Olbers Paradox" and see why an expanding universe is necessary...

Thanks SL but My question was stated in absolute terms. Movement includes all inner vibratory rates of mass etc....in other words the universe stops moving and stops changing.

The question is really to explore the nature of space time and how that space is compressed due to time. Time being movement or change . And if that movement and change stopped we would end up with just space with no mass in it. Thus the universe would cease to exist and nothingness would be absolute.

QQ wrote:

Movement includes all inner vibratory rates of mass etc....in other words the universe stops moving and stops changing.

Ok. My view of time is that it is just the way we perceive the duration and separation of events. So in that sense, if all particle motion were to stop, then there would be no events, so, nothing that I would call "time".

I'm not sure I follow the "no movement, no mass" idea.

QQ, I was thinking about something similar when you posted this thread. Mainstream
thought seems to be that the universe will keep expanding and eventually suffer a heat
death, in which all movement stops, as you state. But what will be left? You seem to
believe 'nothing', I don't dispute that view but I speculate something else COULD happen. The fundamental particles, quarks if that is what they are, may be released
to become free roaming. The electromagnetic forces, such as the strong nuclear force,
should disappear with the cessation of movement, but what of the fundamental building blocks? I realize matter and energy are supposed to be equivalent, via E=mc^2, but could it be possible that the binding and repulsive forces within the atom
are what we are releasing with fission and fusion, and not the conversion of fundamental particles into energy? The fundamental particles are not thought to have
movement within themselves as far as I know, so would they disappear also? Could it be possible the universe would end up with a sea of quarks, with no repulsive forces
to keep them separated? Would gravity disappear with the heat death, or is gravity a
property of the fundamental particles, would they still have mass? You can see where I
am going with this speculation, would the universe then begin to collapse with no repulsive forces to keep the quarks separated, with attractive gravity the only 'force'
left? This would mean, of course, that gravity is not electromagnetic in nature, but
fundamental also. Of course, when the collapse continues, eventually the pressures
and associated heat could increase until....a new 'Big Bang'. This scenario would depend upon the current expansion being electromagnetic in nature, and not 'anti-
gravity'. Just a wild thought, no evidence that it could be possible.

QQ,

Why would you postulate that mass is only present because something is moving?

I'm wondering the same thing superluminal is.

I don't think the dimensions of the universe are dependent on the movement of things within those dimensions. Can you reasonably show that the dimensions are dependent on movement?

Superluminal, concerning yer idea of time, I would assume that time would still exist as well. I don't think of time as dependent on events happening. You can time a duration of no events, in a sense. For example, you can time how long a book sits on a table. I ask of you a similar question: Can you reasonably show that time is dependent on events?

84 posts to go!

Thanks SL but My question was stated in absolute terms.I noticed. There is no such thing as absolute motion, so your question does not have meaning.

QQ, I was thinking about something similar when you posted this thread. Mainstream
thought seems to be that the universe will keep expanding and eventually suffer a heat
death, in which all movement stops, as you state. But what will be left? You seem to
believe 'nothing', I don't dispute that view but I speculate something else COULD happen. The fundamental particles, quarks if that is what they are, may be released
to become free roaming.

But even the we still have movement quarks free roaming...etc etc...

The whole pont of the question was to explore the nature of spacetime and pose the speculation that movement thus change, thus time, gives us space with time thus space time.

if movement ceased then all we would have left is space....empty space with no time.

It is an interesting approach I guess to see just how intrinsic movement and time is to our view of the universe.

I noticed. There is no such thing as absolute motion, so your question does not have meaning.

why do you think this Maddad?

As the thread title suggests:
What would happen if hypothetically the universe stopped moving absolutely?

My answer is that the universe would become zero dimensional in other words cease to be. It would effectively dis-appear.

Any other speculations would be welcome :)
If the universe stopped moving I would get off just to have a look around.
Geistkiesel

I noticed. There is no such thing as absolute motion, so your question does not have meaning.
Prove there is no such thing as "absolute motion"; or are you just reflecting the state of mind of the general public?.

Are you saying that when all the relative motion of all observed stellar objects is summed and averaged that what? The sum is zero? or the sum is >0 or the sum < 0? What?

by QQ,

if movement ceased then all we would have left is space....empty space with no time.
================================================== ==============

Here is where I don't follow your logic. Why do you attach such importance to 'time'?
Time is an arbitrary unit of measurement, that is all. Space-time is just a method of
specifying a particular location in three dimensional space at a specific instant. Freeze
ALL movement and of course time could not be recorded, but why do you think everything EXCEPT empty space would cease to exist? What physical process do you
propose to stop ALL movement in the universe, and would this process stop all movement in the universe simultaneously, or a bit at a time?

firstly 2inq, there is no expectation of this ever actually happening.
Secondly I believe time is a word given to describe two dimensions. One the instant of event and two the passage of events or change.

I'll try to explain a little, excuse teh terminology please:

The instant of events happenstance is often referred to as the NOW the passage of events is often referred to as change. The measurement of time is always the later and always measured in hindsight or after the event, indicating a given unit of change. Change requires movment of some sort, and so change creates the NOW and the NOW is at the center of change from future to Past.
If movement stopped change would not occur whether the objects appear outwardly stationary or not. [nothing is ever stationary - remember no absolute rest frame is available for mass]
If change does not occur there is no future and therefore no event to happen thus mass would no longer be an event thus the universe would just diss-appear as there is no event, no universe.

The measurment of time would be zero the universe would become zero - any way just my thoughts....maybe you or someone else could provide other thoughts on the subject..... :)

Ps I am working on a time theory that as yet I have not seen explained any where except as "time vector" or "moving dimensions" theory. It is difficult to describe it in an SRT framework as posed by most adherants. However I think in time I will be able to put the whole thing forward in an understandable fashion......a long while off though....

:cool: As the thread title suggests:
What would happen if hypothetically the universe stopped moving absolutely?

My answer is that the universe would become zero dimensional in other words cease to be. It would effectively dis-appear.

Any other speculations would be welcome :)

[So, QQ, I answered only a small part of the "stopped motion" problem, but with mathematical finess the cUrrent solution can be imposed through a proess of extrapolation.]
QQ,
If you assume a Big Bang scenario then you assume a universe at rest. To conclude otherwise would be to either conclude the original glob of expanding space/mass was originally in a state of motion, but wrt to what, itself? or that since the t = 0 the sum total of the mass distribution became imbalanced wrt the center of mass of the observed (or observable) universe which would put a net v > 0 in some arbitrary direction. The latter scenario seems unlikely and would not constitute a motion of the universe. I am assuming your question was more intended to a "total drift motion" of the early universe. Then, as the expansion of the universe was an extremely ordered event it seems unlikely that the universe developed a drift motion in the early millions of years after t = 0. This condition would have been manifest as a universe strung out in more or less long line as opposed to generating what must be any measurable deviation from pure spherical symmetry.

Well, there is a deviation from pure spherical symmetry as witnessed by the huge walls of super clusters of galaxies separated by vast empty voids that is the current limit of observation, which belies both, 1. An ordered spherical expansion pattern, and 2. An evolved drift velocity that developed in the early phases of expansion.

The observed mass distribution of the univese is not isotropic.

Hey QQ, Did your question result in the demise of the Big Bang theory, or what?

Geistkiesel :cool:

@Quantum Quark
You said earlier on that “if movement ceased then all we would have left is space....empty space with no time.”

It seems to me that you could have just as easily said that one spatial dimension disappears when we super cool space-time....

When particles do not interact/stop moving in the spatial dimensions, it seems that it would be applicable to the temporal dimension - they don’t move/emit particles through the temporal dimension.

Time would disappear only in the sense that it cannot be measured. The temporal dimension would still be there, imho.

Actually I believe that it would be more like aboslute zero everything would still exist in the same terms it did before everything froze, in all actuality it seems more like if "the universe stopped moving" it would be more like not eliminating but freezing time. Like absolute zero all particle motion would cease hence all motion would cease, including the expansion of the universe. Besides something may still be able to exist in zero dimensions it would just have no spatial coordinates. Its possible that our minds simply cant comprehend a zero dimensional object, if such a thing exists, though i believe it wouldnt, after all no length no width no height, what are you left with? something that simply exists?

So Blob and Warp, you think it would be like a still picture, a snapshot of unanimated objects, frozen still?


If energy stopped flowing then energy doesn't exist is my contention. E=mc^2 would show that if no energy = no mass.

Also if energy stopped moving there would be no light and not reflection. So being able to see anything would be a real problem as there would be nothing to see.....

by Quantum Quack:

"Also if energy stopped moving there would be no light and not reflection. So being able to see anything would be a real problem as there would be nothing to see..... "
================================================== =============

This part sounds like Dark Matter. One form of Dark Matter is thought to emitt no
electromagnetic radiation, nor reflect it. It is only detectable by the gravitational
influence it still has. You might also be interested in fermonic concentrates. When
matter, normal fermonic matter, is cooled to very near absolute zero, it breaks down
into a new form of matter, neither solid, liquid, gas nor plasma. It is closest to a plasma.

I've often thought that space and time would vanish also if I would be able to accelerate to the speed of light.

As the thread title suggests:
What would happen if hypothetically the universe stopped moving absolutely?

My answer is that the universe would become zero dimensional in other words cease to be. It would effectively dis-appear.

Any other speculations would be welcome :)

The answer is time would stand still. This would result in the absence of Past, Present and Future so in practical terms it would not exist in any one reality by any observer.

Mass would not change. It would go into storage to continue upon initiating motion.

because Time Travel or manipulation is possible as referenced by an observer in order to travel to the past one must stop movement of the universe into the future.

But isn't mass made of compressed spacetime and if so wouldn't mass be non-existent with out the time aspect?

But isn't mass made of compressed spacetime and if so wouldn't mass be non-existent with out the time aspect?

Mass is energy, energy can not be created or destroyed. It can only change states.