[Lance Canham (OP)]

 

You know The way they explain expansion - they blow up the balloon, its wrong. The balloon is infinite and you pinch it all over. I tend to get no argument on this Dark energy Idea.

This is the Simple mistake Physics has made. Something that can be done different but visually produce the same result

This Idea gives Dark energy and when you let this argument sink in and wonder what it means you will realise there should or has to be this other stuff you can not see for obvious reason yet infer its there by its gravitational effect. 

It took very smart people 40 years to accept Big Bang. It made no sense that the whole Universe came out of a small speck.  It did not.

 

My serious Question to Physics - You can not ignore this argument.

I don't think the universe will end. I think it will evolve. I think its infinite and is pooling everywhere. We see that locally. If I go somewhere else its pooling. No matter where you go its pooling. Yet those areas of local pooling are being pulled farther and farther apart.

As the local areas pool they compress the space they occupied into a smaller and smaller area Stretching space between them. For this stretching to happen between these local areas of pooling the universe has to be infinite. There has to be Anchors for each area of pooling to keep the universe from collapsing in on itself. The anchor is infinity or the gravity of everything pulling it in every direction.

an infinite universe working like this would appear to stretch a lot Locally, By this use of locally I would encompass the Whole visible universe. The thing is, Its not expanding The space between the local groups of Pooling is being stretched Nothing more.

The average rate of pooling taken from thousands of groups of Galaxy clusters and the history of change in that should Relate to the universes expansion rate over time.

I have my own ideas of what the universe was before BB and will be like Way in the future. Ill keep that to myself for now. Sticking with Dark energy and an infinite Universe argument for now. Once physics gets past that Everyone will have to ask some questions. You all see a flat earth IMO I don't

I'm pretty sure if I Flew off 1 trillion parsecs in any direction and looked around I would basically see what I see here. Slightly different but basically the same. do that a trillion times over in the same direction and see the same.

Bored Trying not to think about you know what. Week three at home. If and When if ever this sinks in You will all of a sudden know what dark matter is and why you can't find it yet know its there. First comes dark energy.

https://interestingengineering.com/one-day-the-universe-will-end-researchers-have-a-couple-ideas-of-how-it-will-happen?fbclid=IwAR0KOygn5ETe8aWS_OY46zZrkFVasbW5lpDSBBWFPR-Xkp-oeHETfHeX9Ww

Woody comments -----So you are saying that by only considering the observable universe
 we are being fooled into thinking the whole universe is expanding,
 because our thinking (in an actually infinite universe) is too parochial.
 It is only our observable patch that is expanding?

I make an argument to all Physics

Kind of. Instead of Blowing up a balloon its getting pinched all over so the space between every pinch is stretched.. Relating to blowing up a balloon to explain expansion. The visual would be the same How its done different.
 By looking at the dead end in regards to Dark energy and dark matter I wondered if there was another way to create the visual of expansion and Not go against Most common Physics. I know where the error is but not exactly what or the whole piece of what. Not an argument I'm out to make ATM. Just trying to point out that the lack of being able to explain 2 things and the possibility to explain ONE thing differently that when you do and then think about it leads to there must be this other thing Dark matter and even the realisation of why you can't see it yet infer its there due to gravity. This Raises Serious Question

[Bobolink]

You know The way they explain expansion - they blow up the balloon, its wrong.

That is not an explanation, that is an anology.  The explanation is in the mathematics.

As the local areas pool they compress the space they occupied into a smaller and smaller area Stretching space between them.

Evidence shows that galactic clusters are gravitationally bound and moving towards a common center of gravity in the clusters.  I don't know why you think that means space is compressing.  When 2 bodies move towards each other due to gravity, that doesn't mean space is compressed between them.

The thing is, Its not expanding The space between the local groups of Pooling is being stretched Nothing more.
The average rate of pooling taken from thousands of groups of Galaxy clusters and the history of change in that should Relate to the universes expansion rate over time.

Unfortunately, the evidence directly refutes your conjecture.
Let's suppose your conjecture was correct, what would we see?  In our local galactic supercluster the galaxies are moving towards a common center of gravity, so that is in agreement with one part of your conjecture.  Now if we look at the Coma supercluster which is about 300 million ly away would see it's galaxies also moving towards a common center of gravity.  This presents a problem because that means the center of the Virgo supercluster and the center of the Coma supercluster are not moving apart.  In other words there is no expansion.
Going back to your balloon analogy, if all that is happening is that the spots on the balloon is getting pinched then the balloon (universe) is not expanding, it's size is static.

There are lots of other issues with your conjecture.  One obvious one is if the universe is infinite then the galaxies in the galactic superclusters should not be moving towards each other, the should have complete their contraction some time long long ago in the infinite past.

This conjecture of yours makes perfect sense to you because it is based on your limited knowledge of physics and astronomy.  To make a worth while hypothesis you must fully understand the subject.  You might as well be proposing new method of brain surgery based on your medical knowledge.

This was a good conjecture based on limited knowledge.  Since you seem interested in these subjects you should take some online courses.I

Edit to add:  Dark energy is not proposed as the reason for the expansion of space, it is proposed as the reason for the accelerating rate of the expansion.

[puppypower]

If we were on a space ship, traveling near the speed of light, and we looked out the window, the universe would appear contracted in space and time. This is implied by special relativity. If we were to slow from this fast reference, and now look out the window, the universe would appear to expand in space and time. This perception of expansion of the universe, from the POV of the space ship windows, would be true, even if the universe was fixed in size.

The expansion would be a reference illusion, based on the slowing of the space ship, and not an actual expansion of universe. This perception of expansion would be a unique perspective, seen only by those on the slowing space ship.

If we assume universal space-time was expanding in all directions, don't we on earth get a two for one reference affect? If we assume the universe is expanding and thereby space-time is expanding, won't the earth reference get a secondary affect similar to the space ship slowing, since the space-time reference around the earth is expanding, which has a mathematical equivalence to a slowing space ship reference? If we do factor in two for one, wouldn't the universe be smaller since part of size will be based on the unique earth reference illusion affect; immersion in expanding space-time window?

On the other hand, since an expansion means the universe is getting bigger, our earth space-ship should going faster and faster to reflect the universal accelerated expansion. If a space ship was to do that ,the universe would appear to contract from its window called earth. This would add a third affect to the POV of the earth, since the earth is also immersed in an expanding space-time reference, as the universe expands. Is there a two for one or three for one affect?

The two for one makes the universe smaller, but the three for one may be a wash, since the two competing earth window affects, are opposite and would sort of cancel.

However, if we use the balloon analogy for the expansion, but instead of coloring in weightless dots, that expand in all directions with the ballon, we glue on beads with mass to simulate galaxies.  The expansion has to move these massive dots in all direction; we have inertia and gravity to deal with. The energy requirement, in this scenario is a lot larger that weightless dots. This will mean the earth reference affect will have potential, that is not virtual, based on weightless ink dots expanding. Weightless dots can be ignored, so the two or three for one can be ignored. But the massive bead balloon model needs extra energy, so the two and three for one cannot be ignored based on energy conservation.
 

[Bobolink]

If we were on a space ship, traveling near the speed of light, and we looked out the window, the universe would appear contracted in space and time. This is implied by special relativity.

Implied?  No, it is kind of the major point!

The expansion would be a reference illusion,

That is 100% wrong.  It is not an illusion it is what is really happening. 
Example:  Alpha Centauri is 4.4ly from earth.  If you were to fly to Alpha Centauri at 90% the speed of light it would only be 1.95 ly distance.  So it would only take you 1.95 ly * 9.46x10^12 km/ly / 270,000 km/s = 2.2 years.
Does that sound like an illusion to you?

If we assume universal space-time was expanding in all directions, don't we on earth get a two for one reference affect? If we assume the universe is expanding and thereby space-time is expanding, won't the earth reference get a secondary affect similar to the space ship slowing, since the space-time reference around the earth is expanding, which has a mathematical equivalence to a slowing space ship reference? If we do factor in two for one, wouldn't the universe be smaller since part of size will be based on the unique earth reference illusion affect; immersion in expanding space-time window?

Pseudoscience word salad.

On the other hand, since an expansion means the universe is getting bigger, our earth space-ship should going faster and faster to reflect the universal accelerated expansion. If a space ship was to do that ,the universe would appear to contract from its window called earth. This would add a third affect to the POV of the earth, since the earth is also immersed in an expanding space-time reference, as the universe expands. Is there a two for one or three for one affect?

Profound misunderstanding of physics seen here.

However, if we use the balloon analogy for the expansion, but instead of coloring in weightless dots, that expand in all directions with the ballon, we glue on beads with mass to simulate galaxies.  The expansion has to move these massive dots in all direction; we have inertia and gravity to deal with. The energy requirement, in this scenario is a lot larger that weightless dots. This will mean the earth reference affect will have potential, that is not virtual, based on weightless ink dots expanding. Weightless dots can be ignored, so the two or three for one can be ignored. But the massive bead balloon model needs extra energy, so the two and three for one cannot be ignored based on energy conservation.

Yet more profound misunderstanding of physics on display.

You always sound so sure of youself, it is a shame you are almost always wrong.