0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
It is my view that the universe is infinite, and time goes from infinity to infinity
Why can't a 3 dimensional space contain nothing ?
Could't the energy in our universe be compared to a form of pressure which is rushing out to fill an area of no pressure ?
If I've moved into moron country please feel free to tell
Also in terms of small scale nothing , isn't that what the planck length does , below that size energy has no practical effect so it may as well be nothing ?
matter and antimatter repel
So, where do you stand on this one, Vikki?
As I understand it our universe is pretty energetic even the vacuum on space still has high energy radiation whizzing through it and quantum foam bubbling away so why isn't the time space of our universe just expanding to fill a void ?
The thought that it is expanding shows that it is not infinite.. and therefore there must be something external to the universe.
An infinite universe can still expand. Think of it like this: consider an infinite flat plane which has a grid on in. At t = 0 the distance between a grid line and the next grid line is 1 meter. As time increases that distance increases.
So the universe started off as being infinite and then it became even "more infinite".
What would stop the sides meeting ... I don't quite understand the question
Therefore, under this remit, it is the gravity field that expands the dimensions of time and space.Where there is no time, existence cannot exist. How can we describe non-existence? Can we call it 'nothing'?
What you say is true of an unbounded space, but to apply it to infinity is at best a misuse of mathematics, and at worst "fairy-tale physics".
That makes no more sense than saying something started as being perfect, and became "more perfect".
Quote from: timey Therefore, under this remit, it is the gravity field that expands the dimensions of time and space.Where there is no time, existence cannot exist. How can we describe non-existence? Can we call it 'nothing'?Surely, if there is gravity there would have to be matter/energy to cause the gravity to exist. If there is matter/energy there has to be space for it to emerge/exist in, and time to allow this to happen. Gravity could do nothing unless time already existed.
After I do my best at that and they simply refuse to disagree with what the physics tells us,
You've always had problems with the concept of infinity and this is another trouble spot for you.
….what cosmologists know to be the case and teach in their classes….
Bill , you've got some leaning towards the multiverse, eternal cosmos notion, don't you?
I think it's best to view time as a frame of reference not a physical structure .
Quote from: Cornelius I think it's best to view time as a frame of reference not a physical structure .Does that differ from seeing time as that with which we measure change? I would be quite happy with that, but I accept that it may be no more than a poorly informed opinion.I can't agree that seeing nothing as being "absolutely nothing" is in any way complicating the issue. BTW, I regard "absolutely nothing" as a tautology, on a par with "absolutely perfect" or "absolutely infinite".
If you think about the accelerated expansion of universe (space-time) what that also means is time is speeding up at an accelerated rate.
. One is placed in a slower more contracted reference and the other is placed in a faster more expanded reference.