An extragalactic void is shoving our galaxy from behind

Most people I assume who read up on stuff like this have heard of the great attractor; that mysterious thingy that causes all our local group of galaxies to track to some point in space...Further more the great attractor is being pulled to another region of space some 600 million light years distant called the Shapley..... Well, there has now been discovered something we can think of as the Great Pusher but is being called the dipole repeller ! I like the Great Pusher better....

Astronomers have finally discovered why the Milky Way is barrelling through space faster than the universe’s rate of expansion. It is being pushed from behind by an enormous void dubbed the “dipole repeller”.

The work, published today in Nature Astronomy, fills a gaping hole in our understanding of the local universe.

Through mapping the ‘flow’ of galaxies in our pocket of the universe, the team realised out that besides being pulled in one direction by Shapley and the Great Attractor, the Milky Way is also being pushed from behind – most probably by a huge region of space almost completely empty of galaxies.

What’s more, the direction of this push aligns almost exactly with the direction we’re actually travelling.

By reading the article I would think the electric universe crowd might have gotten a boast ?
cosmosmagazine.com...

I would think that the "void" is the place where big bang took place.
It would make sense, as the momentum from the explosion is pushing everything away

Nice catch. I love the deeper knowledge of the universe. Makes me wonder what is causing the void, seems to be a very active emptiness. Is it just void because it is, and therefore has a unique capability toward further enhanced isolation? Always more questions!

a reply to: 727Sky

The work, published today in Nature Astronomy, fills a gaping hole in our understanding of the local universe.

And at the same time tearing it a new one.

Talk about pushy.

sheesh

a reply to: Spacespider

Fair observation.

like you say time space could still be expanding more rapidly in the region near to the area the white hole (big bang) formed in which case time there would seem to be moving faster than here though that would only be observable from outside the time space continuum since from our perspective it would probably not be detectable.

I always believed that some point after the big bang the force of that energy which of course became matter which was released and backed up onto itself, that is time and space itself may have formed a black hole around the white hole (and inside that as time and space were still spewing from the white hole this barrier (shell black hole - a kind of super black hole not a star if you think about it) then block's us from another part of our universe and inside that time space continuum near to the white hole another black hole would then form around it (like skin's of an onion but our time space continuum that we see with our star's and planet's and galaxy's etc is just one skin) and inside that time and space were still spewing from the white hole and that in turn formed another barrier separating that time space from yet another that would form yet again from the energy released by the white hole etc, etc, etc,. But if so then this unravelling would continue for a time then eventually the gravity of that black hole having blocked off the source (the big bang or white hole) would then eventually add to the background gravity which may still one day pull the universe (our time space continuum) back into it, after all the big bang only just happened from a true universal point of view and in fact may still be going on, if it is a white hole it may continue for a very long time indeed form our perspective (or perhaps never stop) and if so out universe would not be the oldest thing to be formed from it but there may be a shell black hole around us and outside that a time space continuum just like ours - in fact part of ours but divided and separated into a separate time space continuum by the surrounding black hole and it itself may be inside yet another black hole with an older time space continuum outside it etc, after all for it to actually exist the universe has to infinite even if it seems to be otherwise.

Through mapping the ‘flow’ of galaxies in our pocket of the universe, the team realised out that besides being pulled in one direction by Shapley and the Great Attractor, the Milky Way is also being pushed from behind – most probably by a huge region of space almost completely empty of galaxies. What’s more, the direction of this push aligns almost exactly with the direction we’re actually travelling.

How is this empty region of space pushing anything and how did they establish this? They didn't, this is just another made up scenario to explain the problems that their other made up scenarios can't explain.

a reply to: 727Sky

is barrelling through space faster than the universe’s rate of expansion.

Is our galaxy going to hit a brick wall? Does my head in.

one minute the universe is a hologram, one minute we're creating 'new matter based on time', and next minute this.
science is in a whirlwind of no absolutes.

a reply to: 727Sky

Man that title! Am I the only one who thinks that sounds dirty? I want to congratulate you to that string of words you chose and slap you in the face for it.

originally posted by: Spacespider
I would think that the "void" is the place where big bang took place.
It would make sense, as the momentum from the explosion is pushing everything away

The Big Bang happened right here! And there! And on the other side of the universe, too!


Because ultimately, if you go back in time to the moment of the Big Bang, it created the space itself - all kinds of energy and even early particles flew (in this totally absurd thing called "inflation") away from each other, taking the Big Bang with them all while expanding space like a ballon!

There is no point of "Big Bang's explosion", because ALL OF THE UNIVERSE was exploding/expanding in such a rapid, hot movement, that it does count as the explosion.

a reply to: ManFromEurope

But was there ever a bang? Is it maybe more like fluctuations between matter and antimatter universes?

originally posted by: ManFromEurope

originally posted by: Spacespider
I would think that the "void" is the place where big bang took place.
It would make sense, as the momentum from the explosion is pushing everything away

The Big Bang happened right here! And there! And on the other side of the universe, too!


Because ultimately, if you go back in time to the moment of the Big Bang, it created the space itself - all kinds of energy and even early particles flew (in this totally absurd thing called "inflation") away from each other, taking the Big Bang with them all while expanding space like a ballon!

There is no point of "Big Bang's explosion", because ALL OF THE UNIVERSE was exploding/expanding in such a rapid, hot movement, that it does count as the explosion.

There is always a starting point of everything..
Somewhere some place it all started.
So I guess the theory about "big crunch" and "big freeze" is wrong to ?

Did we drop the intergalactic soap or something?

Would explain the past few years

originally posted by: Spacespider
I would think that the "void" is the place where big bang took place.
It would make sense, as the momentum from the explosion is pushing everything away

I thought they disproved the Big Bang?

I dunno, most of this stuff is over my head....

But sometimes I picture a bunch of physicist sitting around a table just making up random crap trying to trying relevant lol

originally posted by: Spacespider

originally posted by: ManFromEurope

originally posted by: Spacespider
I would think that the "void" is the place where big bang took place.
It would make sense, as the momentum from the explosion is pushing everything away

The Big Bang happened right here! And there! And on the other side of the universe, too!


Because ultimately, if you go back in time to the moment of the Big Bang, it created the space itself - all kinds of energy and even early particles flew (in this totally absurd thing called "inflation") away from each other, taking the Big Bang with them all while expanding space like a ballon!

There is no point of "Big Bang's explosion", because ALL OF THE UNIVERSE was exploding/expanding in such a rapid, hot movement, that it does count as the explosion.

There is always a starting point of everything..
Somewhere some place it all started.
So I guess the theory about "big crunch" and "big freeze" is wrong to ?

Just as I said. Imagine yourself sitting inside a barrel full of TNT, and it explodes! You survive by a miracle. But where were the explosion? All around you.

The universe around us is uniform (homogenous and isotropic) which means that we can't even begin to point in any direction and say "THAT was the center of the Big Bang!" Here are some details in better sounding words than I can muster

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: Spacespider
I would think that the "void" is the place where big bang took place.
It would make sense, as the momentum from the explosion is pushing everything away

I thought they disproved the Big Bang?

No?

I am always curious about new theories, but the Big Bang has a lot of scientific "bang" behind it, so a new theory should be pretty bad-ass to counter it, I guess.

Source, please?

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: ManFromEurope

But was there ever a bang? Is it maybe more like fluctuations between matter and antimatter universes?

Where does the microwave background come from, then?
I am not talking about "how", I am talking about known phenomena, and how the Big Bang theory can explain them quite good.

Not so good with that damn CP-violation, but we are closing in on that, too ;-)

originally posted by: ManFromEurope

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: Spacespider
I would think that the "void" is the place where big bang took place.
It would make sense, as the momentum from the explosion is pushing everything away

I thought they disproved the Big Bang?

No?

I am always curious about new theories, but the Big Bang has a lot of scientific "bang" behind, so a new theory should be pretty bad-ass to counter it, I guess.

Source, please?

Came out last year, was a huge thread here on ATS, if you're THAT curious I would have thought you heard of it, was all over the news

I'm on iPhone at the moment and just got to work, bit hard to go source hunting sorry bud

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

It worked that way decades ago. Now they have the Internet

If they find a way to explain phenomena better and have even better predictions about not-currently-known facts, that theory will update the older one or replace it.