The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: How do we derive the Universe is expanding and expanding into nothing?  (Read 3861 times)

Offline stacyjones

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Our visible Universe is a larger version of what is represented by the blue lines in the following.



'Supermassive Black Holes Transport Matter into Cosmic Voids, Astronomers Say'
sci-news.com/astronomy/supermassive-black-holes-matter-cosmic-voids-03658.html

Quote
“Some of the matter falling towards the holes is converted into energy. This energy is delivered to the surrounding gas, and leads to large outflows of matter, which stretch for hundreds of thousands of light years from the black holes, reaching far beyond the extent of their host galaxies,” the astronomers explained.

At the scale of our Universe the energy referred to above is dark energy. A Universal black hole is powering our visible Universe causing the galaxy clusters to accelerate away from us.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3162
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile


At the scale of our Universe the energy referred to above is dark energy. A Universal black hole is powering our visible Universe causing the galaxy clusters to accelerate away from us.


That is interesting, how would that compare to a stationary universe that gained motion because at a relative central point a single planet changed in entropy causing the universe to inflate away from this point?

 

Offline stacyjones

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile


At the scale of our Universe the energy referred to above is dark energy. A Universal black hole is powering our visible Universe causing the galaxy clusters to accelerate away from us.


That is interesting, how would that compare to a stationary universe that gained motion because at a relative central point a single planet changed in entropy causing the universe to inflate away from this point?

A Universal black hole powering our visible Universe explains why most everything appears to be accelerating away from us. The stuff that has been getting pushed for longer than we have is accelerating away from us. We are accelerating away from the newer stuff that has been getting pushed for less time than we have been. From our perspective, most of the matter is accelerating away from us.

A Universal black hole powering our visible Universe also explains the directionality of the matter associated with the dark flow (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_flow). The energy associated with the Universal black hole is pushing the matter associated with the dark flow, causing it to move directionally through our visible Universe.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3162
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile


At the scale of our Universe the energy referred to above is dark energy. A Universal black hole is powering our visible Universe causing the galaxy clusters to accelerate away from us.


That is interesting, how would that compare to a stationary universe that gained motion because at a relative central point a single planet changed in entropy causing the universe to inflate away from this point?

A Universal black hole powering our visible Universe explains why most everything appears to be accelerating away from us. The stuff that has been getting pushed for longer than we have is accelerating away from us. We are accelerating away from the newer stuff that has been getting pushed for less time than we have been. From our perspective, most of the matter is accelerating away from us.

A Universal black hole powering our visible Universe also explains the directionality of the matter associated with the dark flow (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_flow). The energy associated with the Universal black hole is pushing the matter associated with the dark flow, causing it to move directionally through our visible Universe.

Dark flow?  do you simply mean beyond the visible spectrum and Fr=0?


The same ''dark'' flow that makes this work

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


In the universe only exist two directions, - or + relative to the observer.   


Up down left right are not real, neither is north or south, in the universe our own evidence suggests that when things gain entropy they move + from a central point and vice versus when they lose entropy gain they - in direction and contract.








« Last Edit: 29/04/2016 06:26:51 by Thebox »
 


Offline RobC

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 21
    • View Profile
You will probably realise from my posts that my knowledge of cosmology is rudimentary to say the least.

What I find fascinating is that the rate of expansion is accelerating.

Speculation for the cause?
 

Offline McQueen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 545
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.geocities.com/natureoflight/pgindex
You will probably realise from my posts that my knowledge of cosmology is rudimentary to say the least.

What I find fascinating is that the rate of expansion is accelerating.

Speculation for the cause?

Firstly the Universe is everything, so there is nothing outside the Universe, If there was anything outside the Universe  it would also be part of the Universe.  So from our view-point the Universe is infinite.

Secondly a good analogy of the expanding Universe would be as follows:  Instead of an explosion, imagine the expanding Universe is like a loaf of raisin bread rising in the oven. From the perspective of any raisin, all the other raisins are moving away in all directions. This is all very well , the problem here is that it is possible to measure the rate at which the raisins are moving away from each other. So when speaking of either cosmological red-shift or a normal red-shift, the same principles of objects moving away from a location are involved. The fact that many of these cosmological red-shifts, seem to indicate near to light speeds or FTL  speeds is disturbing.  The only reasonable explanation would seem to be that when we see red-shifts that are close to C  or to FTL speeds, what we are seeing is the remnant of acceleration that took place at a time close to the Big Bang event. This is in fact one of the possibilities, that cosmologists agree exists.  So the Universe might not in fact be expanding and there is considerable proof that the Universe is instead slowing down.

To state that light can move faster than light because space itself is expanding allowing light to move FTL, even using GR sounds suspect, after all light within space and light within expanding space is still light or we wouldn't be able to record the red-shift in the first place.  How could we even record this light if space expansion gives it the ability to move at any FTL velocity ?

Here is a brief summary of why astrophysicists believe that FTL speeds are possible:

" Astrophysicist Edward Robert Harrison said, "Light leaves a galaxy, which is stationary in its local region of space, and is eventually received by observers who are stationary in their own local region of space. Between the galaxy and the observer, light travels through vast regions of expanding space. As a result, all wavelengths of the light are stretched by the expansion of space. It is as simple as that..."] Steven Weinberg clarified, "The increase of wavelength from emission to absorption of light does not depend on the rate of change of a(t) [here a(t) is the Robertson-Walker scale factor] at the times of emission or absorption, but on the increase of a(t) in the whole period from emission to absorption." "

As can be seen this theory seems to depend on some quite out f the way theories.

Quote
Between the galaxy and the observer, light travels through vast regions of expanding space. As a result, all wavelengths of the light are stretched by the expansion of space. It is as simple as that..."

The fact remains that light is travelling through vast regions of space, that would not result in red-shift, a red-shift would only occur IF an object were moving away, it has nothing to do with distance.

Quote
The increase of wavelength from emission to absorption of light does not depend on the rate of change of a(t) [here a(t) is the Robertson-Walker scale factor] at the times of emission or absorption, but on the increase of a(t) in the whole period from emission to absorption."

How  does time taken for absorption  produce red-shift effects ?
« Last Edit: 05/05/2016 12:42:45 by McQueen »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum


 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums