Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

What space did the universe expand into?

page: 3
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 03:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by yourmaker
why cant it just always have existed? why is that question denied so harshly?

the space before the big bang existed infinitely and will always exist.
its beyond our comprehension as we are just appearing right in the middle and will die out just as quickly.

imo


The fact that it's still expanding faster than the speed of light strongly suggests it wasn't there before.


It's early for me, so if this doesn't make sense, just ignore: If Ed Hubble looked at one side of a busy highway, with all the cars of a morning commute heading in one direction, would he conclude that if he reversed the direction of the cars they would come from a single point? And would he also conclude that the highway is expanding because all of the cars are moving away from him? And yet, from his vantage point he wouldn't be able to see the highway and exits further down the road.




posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj
If Ed Hubble looked at one side of a busy highway, with all the cars of a morning commute heading in one direction, would he conclude that if he reversed the direction of the cars they would come from a single point?


I don't think so, they would just have to have come from the same direction, not the same point. But if he looked in every direction and saw cars driving away from him, he could run it back and conclude they came from a single point, like this:



I don't know, that's my guess at least.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 03:53 AM
link   
Being that I tend to sit around thinking about things like this, a LOT. I have a conclusion that at least quelled my own internal, obsessive-compulsive need to understand. That thinking is as follows.

Physical space - the space we, energy, matter, and all things perceivable to use - are like the inside of a balloon. A balloon that is currently expanding. We can detect the edge of the balloon but nothing beyond it. And, as basic logic tells us, the membrane of the balloon is certainly not the entirety of everything... but it could appear so to a being that lived its entire history within the balloon.

An article I read about a year ago used the same analogy, but cited holes in Swiss cheese as the example. And that theory indicated that, in reality, there may actually an infinite number of fundamentally infinite bubbles in the block of "Swiss Cheese" ( eternity, forever, the multi-verse - whatever term applies best ).

I truly believe that these literally impossible to comprehend concepts, such as infinity, can be understood, at least partially, if one can find a more easily understood analog - such as the balloon or Swiss cheese, as a means of approaching the subject.

If physics are correct then, for the most part, things on an unfathomably large scale, should work the same as similar things would on a smaller, more easily understood scale. As above, so below, so to speak.

So that's how I tend to approach these mind twisting concepts.

~Heff



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 04:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by jiggerj
 


It expands the same way mind expands. If you want to understand what is at the edge of the universe. Understand whats at the edge of the mind.


This is exactly why I'm re-visiting this question. Quantum physics is suggesting that when two particles in the microscopic world are entangled, if one particle is manipulated in any way, it instantly affects the second particle, even if the second particle is billions of light years away. One explanation for this is that information travels faster than light speed from one particle to the other.

The second explanation, however, is that space is an illusion, and no matter how far apart the particles seem to be, they are actually right next to each other.

If space is an illusion, the only way I can see this as possible is for us to be in a dream. When we dream we can imagine looking up at the stars and see how far away they are. We can be surrounded by buildings, with some of them close by and some further away, but everything we see in dreams is being fabricated in one tiny place in the brain. No space at all.

So, now I have to wonder, was the Big Bang merely the beginning of a dream in the mind of a supreme dreamer? I want to believe that this is totally absurd, but I can't disprove it.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 04:10 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Lol. I love this #.

keep hurting your brain bro. The only fix is a decent dose of quantum mechanics.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 04:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj
It's early for me, so if this doesn't make sense, just ignore: If Ed Hubble looked at one side of a busy highway, with all the cars of a morning commute heading in one direction, would he conclude that if he reversed the direction of the cars they would come from a single point? And would he also conclude that the highway is expanding because all of the cars are moving away from him? And yet, from his vantage point he wouldn't be able to see the highway and exits further down the road.
If you take the traffic analogy to the hubble constant, it's nothing like the morning commute.

it's more like:
the cars 1 block away are going 5 mph
the cars 2 blocks away are going 10 mph
the cars 3 blocks away are going 15 mph
....and so on

So if the highway was expanding, then yes this could be one explanation for the apparent movement of the cars if the cars weren't really moving.
And when he looks off in the distance, he sees the ocean so he figures the road ends either there or before it gets there, so it doesn't go on forever (the Ocean being analogous to the CMB)
edit on 29-9-2012 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 05:20 AM
link   
You would have to create the space for it to grow into wouldn't you !!!



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 05:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide

If physics are correct then, for the most part, things on an unfathomably large scale, should work the same as similar things would on a smaller, more easily understood scale. As above, so below, so to speak.

So that's how I tend to approach these mind twisting concepts.

~Heff


But that's what quantum physics ISN'T suggesting. Things in the sub-atomic world refuse to adhere to the laws in the Big universe (freakin' rebels!). What I once found amusing is how just by observing particles altered the way they behaved. Now the idea is just P-ing me off! lol I want to tear my clothes and run around screaming, "WHY WHY WHY!"



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 05:33 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Yeah, I agree. Once one goes subatomic it all seems to fall apart. How I rationalize that, in my own mind, is perspective. If we look at entire quadrants of the galaxy - HUGE chunks of space, they appear, to us at least, to be basically stagnant and still. So I figure perception of time has something to do with scale. And if the unfathomably large seems to not be moving at all - then it follows that the unfathomably small would be moving at such a fast pace as to seem incomprehensible and even contrary.

I am sure some science guy will come along and explain why I'm wrong - and the best defense I have is, even if I am technically incorrect, it helps me to understand things that are incredibly difficult to understand on a human ( non mathematical ) level.

So, I see it like a gravity function, where smaller things move faster than larger things. This helps me keep the whole concept of a fractal reality consistent, at least in my own head.


~Heff



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 05:43 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 

Because Quantum Mechanics and behavior is part of a MUCH larger system than just our One Universal Reality. Here is the real Brain Buster...Protons and Neutrons...the Particles of Mass inside the Nucleus of an Atom are COMPLETELY MADE UP OF QUANTUM PARTICLE/WAVE FORMS! That's right!

So the Particles which have Mass are made up of Massless Quantum Particle/Wave Forms. So the Macro Universal Laws which Gravity is key and defined as Mass being responsible for Space/Time Curvature and thus responsible for the creation of Stars and Planets and all objects of Matter...behave as a whole differently than the individual parts that comprise them.

These Quantum Particle/Wave Forms also BLINK IN AND OUT OF OUR UNIVERSAL REALITY. And MATTER of which the simplest form of being an ATOM OF HYDROGEN...having a nucleus of One Proton and an Orbiting Quantum Particle/Wave Form that is an ELECTRON...means that all MATTER is not just particles of Mass but also Particle/Wave Forms of Energy.

This is where a direct line of LOGIC begins to form to hint that the QUANTUM WORLD is part of a MULTIVERSAL SYSTEM and that even a 10 or 11 Dimensional Universe cannot account for Quantum Particles Blinking in and out of existence nor can it account for the complete and total failure of our ability to Unify the Fields. Einstein worked on the UNIFIED FIELD THEORY ON HIS DEATH BED...but could not figure it out. I believe as many others also believe...he was looking at the issue from too small a perspective.
Split Infinity



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 05:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by ubeenhad
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Lol. I love this sh#.

keep hurting your brain bro. The only fix is a decent dose of quantum mechanics.


LOL I admit I'm dumber than dirty dish water when it comes to quantum mechanics. But, let me say this about that: Even a fat Southern redneck with a 3rd grade education can be guzzlin' his brewski while standing before the leaning tower of Pisa and say, "Sumtin' juss ain't right wit that there buildin'."

So, whether I'm right or wrong, I'm kinda' comfortable with the idea that the big brains of science just might be abusing their math in order to force things to fit into their way of thinking. Something about gravity (I think?) doesn't work the way scientists want it to, so using their math (like a sledgehammer slamming a puzzle piece into the wrong space), they come up with a multiverse. Again, I have NO idea if it's right or not, but I am compelled to say, "Sumtin' juss ain't right wit that there theory."


So, this idea of manipulating one particle instantly affecting another particle begs the question: Are the quantum physicists looking at this and asking the wrong questions?
edit on 9/29/2012 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:04 AM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


Your whole reply was excellent, S.I. Meaning I understood the whole thing.


I'd like to address one part, though.




These Quantum Particle/Wave Forms also BLINK IN AND OUT OF OUR UNIVERSAL REALITY.


Where did science come up with this idea? How do they know that these particles aren't just popping around THIS universe? If these particles are moving THAT fast, why can't they pop in at one point, then pop out and appear a trillion light years away?



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Yeah, I agree. Once one goes subatomic it all seems to fall apart. How I rationalize that, in my own mind, is perspective. If we look at entire quadrants of the galaxy - HUGE chunks of space, they appear, to us at least, to be basically stagnant and still. So I figure perception of time has something to do with scale. And if the unfathomably large seems to not be moving at all - then it follows that the unfathomably small would be moving at such a fast pace as to seem incomprehensible and even contrary.

I am sure some science guy will come along and explain why I'm wrong - and the best defense I have is, even if I am technically incorrect, it helps me to understand things that are incredibly difficult to understand on a human ( non mathematical ) level.

So, I see it like a gravity function, where smaller things move faster than larger things. This helps me keep the whole concept of a fractal reality consistent, at least in my own head.


~Heff



Hey, even if we're totally out of our minds with this stuff, I like to think that we are an example of just how far mankind's intelligence has come. If a couple of average Joe's can even think of discussing things like particle/wave function, M-theory, the Higgs Field, the Drake equation...this is a sure sign that mankind has come a long, LONG way since the days of thinking evil spirits caused smelly farts.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Maybe space and reality is like a dream its something that would not exist unless we are looking at it. We create and sustain reality. It does not seem absurd to me it seems to make a lot of sense and explains the universe in much simpler terms.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 07:36 AM
link   
Here's are some good videos on the subject.






posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 07:48 AM
link   
When a ray of light dissolves into the dark-matter that we see in space we still see the
things very far away, the first things that existed that still emit light and we can only imagine the sight of looking into a mirror with the absence of dark and light. Without the radiation from the light that gives us the spectrum of colors, if we could travel further and faster than the sources of light and light, and go further than that and smash through the dark canvas that makes the end of everything we see...

We would be in a fun house.
edit on 29-9-2012 by Parksie because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by buster2010
Here's are some good videos on the subject.


Thanks, buster. Next time I come here to not have a conversation, I'll certainly look at the videos.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by buster2010
Here's are some good videos on the subject.


Thanks, buster. Next time I come here to not have a conversation, I'll certainly look at the videos.


It just that the videos explain parts that are left out of this thread. And you know what you can do with your attitude.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by davethebear
I don't know....................


The only true answer in this thread. Maybe the whole forum.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   
I don't know, either. I have enough problems contemplating "Schroedinger's kittens".

But maybe our Universe is all coming out of the other side of a 'Black Hole in an alternate Universe'. All that pulled in matter needs to go somewhere..... or eventually the black hole will fill up and overflow (won't it?). At the very least it leads to an imbalance.
If all the matter is compressed to infinity, and our Universe is an explosion of infinity out of nowhere, it balances.
Seems to me that physics ought to balance itself out along the road, or all is madness and there's no point even trying to formulate a theory to explain it.





new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join