It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by suicide__x
If the universe is not expanding (therefore infinite?), what is outside of the universe?
:S
Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by suicide__x
Nothing to beat yourself up about. None of us can truly wrap our brains around "infinite".
Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
And here's a thought if the galaxy is supposedly expanding and galaxies are moving away from each other due to this expansion. While not exactly moving at all as I have heard it at one point explained. Why exactly are galaxies colliding?
Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
And here's a thought if the galaxy is supposedly expanding and galaxies are moving away from each other due to this expansion. While not exactly moving at all as I have heard it at one point explained. Why exactly are galaxies colliding?
Originally posted by escapevelocity
Phractal Phil,
You seem to be taking the "foam" metaphor too literally, which leads you to push it too far. (Also, why does it always have to be foam? Why not compare the large-scale structure of the Universe to a sponge? Cut through a sponge and the resulting flat surface will be a perfect cross-section of that structure.) That's why you suppose that galaxies "ride" atop curved surfaces of what are like bubbles and that those surfaces can break as they stretch, just the way soap bubbles break.
We don't know what makes galaxies arrange themselves in a foamy/spongy pattern, so we can't assume anything concerning the behavior of the "walls" of the bubbles, like, for instance, that they "break" and that chaos ensues, inspired solely by the way foam behaves. If that really is what happens, would we see such a tidy pattern all around us, with no messy spots here and there? True, one could argue that it's because we haven't been able to make a survey that's thorough and broad enough yet. Maybe that will always remain an impossible feat.
At your website you're not clear about the distinction between "cosmic" and "ether" foam, nor is it clear what you mean by "sub-universe".
Astronomers keep using an inadequate noun when talking about "collisions" of galaxies, which sounds exciting and somewhat sensationalist, and it should be "mergers". Maybe they do it in order to convince children, which are potential colleagues, that their field of study is thrilling.
Interstellar distances, even in "globular clusters" of stars, which are of the crowded sort (except, of course, between members of double and multiple star systems), are so great that when galaxies come together stars don't start crashing into one another all over the place. They interweave nicely. I guess the new neighbors do create gravitational disturbances that make some stars change their courses, so that some may approach others and interact, but maybe they start "dancing" together indefinitely rather than absorb the neighbor the way close binaries do.
Originally posted by Copernicus
Scientists also used redshifts to show how we are the center of the universe:
Center of the universe
[edit on 20-9-2009 by Copernicus]