Universe Question

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Rambler

Senior Member
Registered Senior Member
Hey guys,
I went hiking with my wife the other day and had some time to think about some the topics we've been discussing. I got thinking about red shift and expansion of the universe etc...

As i understand thanks to einstein the expansion of the universe is not a matter of the universe expanding into a new "space" but the original space "stretching" and becoming larger (like a elastic band). Now this "stretching" is observed to be happening all over the universe. Wouldn't that imply that WE are stretching as well and that a minute ago I was infact smaller then I am now....also if this expansion is happening at the same rate everywhere (observation would suggest it is) wouldn't it be impossible for US to detect the expansion????? I'm not talking about motion like the earth around the sun or the sun around the galactic centre, or even other galaxy's motion relative to us. I mean the ACTUAL expansion started by the big bang.
 
<font color = "blue">"As i understand thanks to einstein the expansion of the universe is not a matter of the universe expanding into a new "space" but the original space "stretching" and becoming larger (like a elastic band)."</font>

<img src = "http://users.esc.net.au/~nitro/BBoard_member_gifs/bowser_anim.gif">That's news to me. So, it's like a balloon where only within four dimensions exist?

<font color = "blue">"...wouldn't it be impossible for US to detect the expansion?????"</font>

I imagine that it would depend on the rate of physical expansion, relative to the rate of moving expansion.

------------------
It's all very large.
 
I took a bit of a gamble saying it was einstein but I'm pretty sure I read it on topic concerned with relativity, and I would think that this would be a fundamental concept so einstien would have suggested it. Again i could be wrong, no doubt plato or boris will set me straight.

If I got it right though isn't it a trip to think we are all growing :)
 
if the fabric of the universe was uniformly expanding the universe would not appear to grow to us because the cosmic entities would expand at the same rate as the space around them

Krusher
 
Here comes the cavalery to the rescue of Einstein !

Now this "stretching" is observed to be happening all over the universe. Wouldn't that imply that WE are stretching as well and that a minute ago I was infact smaller then I am now...
Click to expand...

You are right but not that right :)
The stretching is indeed happening everywhere and if there was otherwise no interactions between bodies it would become apparent as if those bodies were slowly but surely floating away from each other. Note the italics however, as you all know there are interactions, like for example the electromagnatic forces in our bodies keeping our atoms and molecules from falling apart. These also do a great job in preventing us from blowing up together with the rest of the universe.
You could think of the expension as a minute repelling force, it is far smaller then gravity however it increases with distance. Quite the inverse of what we are used to in forces (it is not a force however we only perceive it as such), this is the reason it is only apparent on the largest of scales. Even within our own local group of galaxies, which is a structure in the range of millions of lightyear gravity still wins from the expansion force, this just to show you how small the force is on our scales, a bacteria has more influence on the orbit of the earth around the moon then the expansion force on our bodies I'm afraid...

Still, Rambler I think you should go on more hikings with your wife, it obviously has a good effect on you ;)

------------------
"If I have been able to see further, it was only because I stood on the shoulders of giants."
Isaac Newton
 
It seems logical to me that the universe is expanding and will continue to do so simply because of the laws of motion.

There is nothing to stop the cosmic bodies moving out from the big bang.

What is wrong with my thinking?

Krusher
 
Ram Man,

Geez man if I went hiking in the bush with my wife the last thing I'd be thinking bout is exosci. Now with the testosterone out of the way...........

Now for the answers to your questions:

Dunno
Dunno
Dunno

Easy huh? :D

Seriously folks,

Expansion and stretching of universe - I like the lacky band thing but I always viewed it as a balloon being blown up. But I tend to find I get more questions than answers when I try to visualise the concept.

1. Expanding into what?

2. Expanding away from what?

3. At what point will the expansion rate exceed the elasticity of the universe?

4. And what of surface tension? If the edge or membrane of the expanding universe is ruptured (so to speak) we have a leak in our universe. Either a leak or an explosion or an implosion being that our universe is a vacuum?

It kind of reminds me of when my kids are blowing bubbles in the back yard. Maybe we are a bubble in God's back yard? After all it was He who breathed us into existence.

Hey there you go a new theory on multiverses, God blowing bubbles. :D

Well I guess I'll have to hit the books and prove it with maths for anyone to take me seriously. With all my spare time I should be finished by next century, in other words it aint gonna happen.
 
Hi Tony,

Well, the balloon analogy is used alot to let people grasp the concept of an expanding universe, but as both Plato and Boris already pointed out to me (in a post on the subject), the analogy has its advantages and its disadvantages... Once you get through the difficult task of bending your mind into comprehending what's going on, you'll notice the ballon analogy is not quite as nice as you'd expect.

Anyway, to get back to the point:

1. Expanding into what?

As far as I know the current theories: Nothing! It's that easy. When we're talking about our own universe, everything we know (space and time) are confined to our universe alone. This whole structure (space and time) is getting larger, but "what" it is expanding into, is something we cannot understand.

2. Expanding away from what?

Once again: Nothing! (one might argue that the answer is also "expanding from everywhere"). To get back to that balloon analogy. If you put three dots on the balloon and inflate it, all three points will recede away from eachother, but to each dot it would appear that the other two dots are simply moving away from it, so if you'd live on that dot you'd say that the universe is expanding away from you. Ofcourse, the two other dots (or rather: our imaginary two dimensional people who live on the dots) would say they are the center of expansion. So the expansion occurs everywhere FROM everywhere (yes, difficult to get..).

3. At what point will the expansion rate exceed the elasticity of the universe?

The "elasticity" of the universe doesn't exist (there's no point where you can no longer "stretch" the universe). What can happen is that gravity drags everything back together (Big Crunch scenario), but astronomers and physicists still aren't quite sure if this will happen (or if the expansion will go on forever). Sidenote: I've read somewhere that current calculations suggest that the universe will expand forever.

4. And what of surface tension? If the edge or membrane of the expanding universe is ruptured (so to speak) we have a leak in our universe. Either a leak or an explosion or an implosion being that our universe is a vacuum?

Ehr... bad balloon analogy. You cannot create "holes" in spacetime (okay, there's some stuff called wormholes that are theoretically possible "ruptures" in spacetime, but let's just forget about this at the moment for the sake of simplicity).

The difficult thing to grasp is that, if you use the balloon analogy, that the surface of the balloon is actually three-dimensional (and still a closed surface). I cannot find a better way to describe the expansion than the following:

Imagine you have a pair of boots that allow you to take 100 million lightyears steps at a time (this reminds me of a children's tale somewhere). If you decide to go for a walk one day, and tour the entire universe, then you would have taken several thousands of steps. The next day, if you decide to go for another walk, you'd find yourself taking a lot more steps, simply because the path you follow (the same as the day before) has grown bigger in the meantime. You yourself would have remained the same size, simply because atomic interaction forces (eg. the electromagnetic & gravitational forces Plato talked about) prevent your body (and your clothes, boots, table, home, planet, galaxy) from expanding.

Anyway, that's what I've understood from it so far (still trying to get the complete picture myself ;)), so if anybody has any comments, please go ahead...

Bye!

Crisp


------------------
"The best thing you can become in life is yourself" -- M. Eyskens.
 
Tony,

you asked Expanding into what?
I can't give you a better answer then nothing. If you want to grasp the concept of nothing (which is infact less then empty space) then imagine the edge of our universe as a horizon. We will NEVER see whats on the other side because you can never reach a horizon, for if you get there you've brought our universe with you and hence expanded it more. So its our universe and a horizon NOTHING absolutley nothing beyond it. However this can't be verified so I guess this is where science meets faith. :)
 
Crisp and Ram Man,

Thanks guys for taking the time out to expand my knowledge, my little universe :D

This is seriously interesting stuff to postulate about and I wish I had paid more attention in science. As you guys both know I'm a believer (at the risk of sounding like a broken record I had to say it) and what I'm finding in having discussions with the science folks is that it bolsters my faith. Yeah I know that sounds dumb in light of Boris's view's, but what I see the deeper I look is that there are intricacies involved in all sciences that almost defy explanation. The structure of DNA is way complex and speaks more of design than chance. One thing I saw recently was an electron microscope image of an electric motor, and no I'm not talking about nanotechnology. This little gizmo actually exists in our guts, I can't remember the exact name of it but it sure was eerie to see something like that was designed into our make up

We as man are only starting to grasp the enormity, complexity and structure of the universe. Personally I think we are way to premature in stating with our limited views and by making broad associations based on said "scientific evidence" that there is no grand planner or designer behind all we see. Our knowledge is sketchy, we have a patchwork quilt of propositions, theories, ideas and evidences and from this we make very broad assumptions and form very strong beliefs.

I know I'm waffling on a bit here guys but am I the only one that sees the enormity of it all? Am I the only one that sees things like this? The complexities involved for these things to just evolve bewilders me. It all speaks to me of a grand design engineer. Hey I know I'm not a rocket scientist but I can grasp complex theories, I can understand where they come from and what they propose. I have an appreciation of a broad range of sciences and the more I look the grander the picture becomes.

Crisp I know you like to debate in a similar fashion to Boris, you want to argue from a proven base that has been tried and tested by science with repeatable results. That is excellent, a true believer in the things that are provable, but don't you find that the deeper we look the more complex the instrument need to be? Don't you find that as we move forward in our knowledge we find more avenues of investigation open to us than people and equipment to investigate? Now were talking about intelligence here, intelligent humans with incredible equipment trying to reverse engineer, solve, discover and understand the complexity of it all. What I'm trying to say is that because of the complexity of equipment developed and the depth of discovery open to us does it not speak reams to us of a complexity that goes beyond chance? Regardless of my stance on faith and God, if I put that to the side and try to view this thing subjectively it just blows me away. No matter what angel I come at it from, no matter how I try to position myself in another's shoes and attempt to see what they mean, attempt to comprehend their views I find myself with the same end result. It speaks of grander things to me than mere chance. I can't debate you on finer details, your and Boris's knowledge run circles around mine, but when I read the stances taken in debate and the level and depth of explanation required to bolster a view point with science, well sorry guys it speak again to me of design.

Then again maybe its just me?

Ecclesiastes 3:11 He hath made everything beautiful in its time: also he hath set eternity in their heart, yet so that man cannot find out the work that God hath done from the beginning even to the end. ASV

Ecclesiastes 3:11 He has made everything right in its time; but he has made their hearts without knowledge, so that man is unable to see the works of God, from the first to the last. YLT

Essentially this means that God has created all things good. Man has not the wisdom or capacity to fully understand, comprehend or fathom the achievements of God (even to the minutest detail) in all that He has done.

How is it that we do not understand that the more we have learnt the less we know.

Allcare

Tony H2o
 
Tony,
On a side note....

A recent study of identical twins who where seperated at birth suggests that our religous convictions are a genetic trait. They found that in all cases the degree of religous belief was VERY similar even though the seperated twins had completely different upbringings. One set of twins had as different an upbringing as you could wish for a study of this characteristic. One was brought up by his Jewish father in (some european country, can't remember the name) as a devout Jew, and the other was brought up by his mother in Germany as a Nazi. Although their belief systems were different they both exibited a very strong conviction of their respective system. As I said this apeared in ALL sets of twins studied and from memory the group was quite large, something like 50 sets of twins, not one case had a thiest and an athiest. Also the whole twin physco/mental conection was tested and found it didn't exist. The similarities seen between them is a very similar genetic personality code. So there you go environment does little to form our personalities and character...its nearly all genetic. I don't think its as conclusive as I made it out to be, but from what i saw pretty soon it will be.
 
Hi Ram Man,

You've been watching the ABC haven't you?

I meant to watch that follow on to the series also but forgot. It was very interesting though to read your summary of it.

I would however have to say I'm not surprised in the least that their character traits, personalities whatever caused them to have very similar convictions. Their genetic code is after all identical, so inherited traits would be equal in both individuals.

Does this then mean that they could not form separate opinions? By no means and I think that the program and your review highlights this. They still had freedom of choice as to what they believed as individuals, however their convictions in their belief systems would be very similar due to their near identical personalities.

From what you wrote I think you were trying to say that religious conviction or belief may be due to genetics, due to our DNA. I would not agree with that statement, personality and the way we process information and view the world yes, but genetic passing on of a belief system or faith.....nah don't think so.

If it was so then you would had people lining up on J Day saying "But God my DNA would not let me believe"......nah again don't think so.

Kind of reminds me of a little story I read recently. Sort of relates to mans opinion of himself.

One day a world leading genetic scientist died and found himself at the pearly gates. Now this came as a bit of a shock to him because he was an atheist, so he rocks up to the arch angel Michael and demands to see God. "I'll check quickly for you if He is available" next moment "poof" the scientist is standing at the foot of God's throne.

"Now look here God" he says "Mankind no longer needs you, we have achieved incredible things by ourselves and can manage without your help. Why we've even been able to determine every attribute and characteristic including hair colour, eyes, height etc of new babies. We can even start life in a test tube and have extended life spans 10 fold. What can you do? Your not needed anymore!"

"Oh I see says God, that is impressive, lets see what can I do? Well I can take this lump of clay and breath life into it". So God grabs a lump of clay holds it up to His mouth and breaths on it, hey presto a living man. "Can man do that?" says God.

"Not a problem" boasts the scientist and he grabs a hand full of clay and starts to manipulate it.

"Whoa there big guy" Says God "Get your own clay"




[This message has been edited by Tony H2o (edited May 10, 2000).]
 
Hi Tony,

That is excellent, a true believer in the things that are provable, but don't you find that the deeper we look the more complex the instrument need to be? Don't you find that as we move forward in our knowledge we find more avenues of investigation open to us than people and equipment to investigate?
Click to expand...

I totally agree, and have almost nothing to add to your statement. That instruments need to get more and more complex is because of the advancement in the theory of elementary particles and quantummechanics in the last .. 50 years. We have theories about what happens at subatomary levels, and the only reason to verify these theories is to look at these kind of processes as good as possible. I don't think I have to mention this usually takes a room full of equipment ;).

About the lack of equipment and people to investigate: I totally agree. As a student I am interested in the more "theoretical" aspects of physics, but it is really a pity to hear from people that do research in this area that their budgets get cut by the year. But then again, it's not always easy to explain to someone that this one equation actually makes computer memory work (it just takes 40 years to get to that point ;)). But this is a totally different debate (about the need for fundamental research vs. the need of immediate results).

Bye!

Crisp
 
Tony, (still side note)

you said,
--------------

I would not agree with that statement, personality and the way we process information and view the world yes, but genetic passing on of a belief system or faith.....nah don't think so.

---------------

Thats not exactly what I meant, basically you genetic make up will determin wheather you are inclined to a belief system based in faith or one based in reason...
 
Hi Ram,

So what are we talking here?

Genetic coding determins our physical attributes and brain size? Yes I agree.

Genetic coding causes a preference to right of left brain domination? Yes I agree.

So the conclusion is that we respond to God based on either emotional rational or scientific rational?

Again I don't doubt that some people have a lean towards emotions for decision making and some towards rational scientific deduction based on "said" facts.

But that's almost exactly what I'm try to say in a different way. Personaly I find I try to take a balanced approach, not completly emotional and not overtly scientific. I find that either avenus I travel takes me to the same place - God. Like I was trying to say in above posts, when I look at the sciences, when I go into detail it speaks of "amazing". This is regardless of any stance I might take on creation or evolution, this is regardless of time frames that may be or may not be involved. The deeper I look at the complexity involved in all sciences and the discoveries being made daily.....well I'm stuck for words. Its just bewildering to me to try and think that all this just happened, but then again I guess its just as bewildering for Boris, Plato, Crisp and yourself to try to think there is a God who designed it all.

I don't know how we reconcile these things guys, I have no idea of how to express to you in the scientific terms and clear cut results you rely on that God is real. All I can do is try and inspire you to think beyond the known, I know its hard if your a left brainer or is that right brainer? ( Hey Boris fix me up on this one will ya :D )


I'll leave it with the following:

Romans 1:
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

For the invisible things of things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen.

Invisible things clearly seen?

Pop quiz.

Who can guess what the writer means?

And remember they didn't have microscopes back then, so who do you think told him?


Allcare

Tony H2o
 
hi Tony,

You know I like your reasoning it sheds like a new light on the eternal bickering between believers and non believers.

I would propose a different kind of division. Some people look at the universe and are overwhelmed by the whole of it, the believe in God I would like to call a top down kind of explenation. Other people (like myself) try to comprehend as much as possible by dividing the universe in pieces. They hope that by doing this, eventually a picture of the whole will form. This is more like a bottum up approach.

However I begin to realise more and more that we actually need something of both ways. You see by trying to explain the universe all at once you are missing out on a lot of the interesting details, however by concentrating on the details to much you can get lost in them. In dutch we say you don't see the forest any more with all the trees in the way.

------------------
"If I have been able to see further, it was only because I stood on the shoulders of giants."
Isaac Newton
 
Plato,

Thanks man, hey I'm half Dutch. parents from Holland and me born in Oz.

You know the more I think things through the more I like what you said about the way we view things.

I don't come here to alienate people from God I come here in the hope of showing them He is alive and living. I come here with the hope of reconciling people to Him just like Jesus did. Sometimes along that path the things I say and others say are disagreed with, I can live with that. Jesus even told us this would happen because of Him and our faith in Him. Not that I want to make enemies with people but I do want them to understand who and what God is, understand that he's not a zillion miles away.

Anyways thanks againg and see ya on Monday.

Allcare

Tony H2o
 
Hey Tony,
I quite agree with you I think whatever we discuss there will aways be something we will not understand and need to hypothesize about, and quite rightly so, for what would be the fun in a universe where everything was determind? Quite honestly I don't think we will ever find the grand unified throey because there will always be something smaller and something bigger and if we can't even control deisease on our own planet, what chance do we have of controling out universe?

Still it is fun and thought provoking to discuss!!
Vix.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top