AdolfOliverPanties: But what the fark is it expanding into?
UberDave: Great. Now we'll never make it to the adjacent galaxy.
Khellendros: AdolfOliverPanties: But what the fark is it expanding into?Nothingness. Void. The absence of something.
sxacho: So this is saying the expansion is linear?
Gnomaana: How is it possible that light that left a galaxy a billion years ago has any information about said galaxy's current state?
Ambitwistor: AdolfOliverPanties: But what the fark is it expanding into?That presumes that the universe is embedded in something else. This is not the case. "Expansion" can be define completely internally to the universe, without referring to any outside space or "nothingness".
AdolfOliverPanties: Funny, I thought "expand" meant "get bigger." You are suggesting the universe is expanding but staying the same size?
Jim DiGriz: I don't get that at all. Wouldn't the "speed" result be the same with either the universe currently expanding faster than in the past, or that the universe was expanding faster in the past than now?
gilgamesh23: We know the universe is expanding and that the expansion is accelerating, and that it all got started with the big bang. Isn't this consistent with the idea that the universe is something like a black hole in a larger dimensional space? Are there any theories that start from this idea?
gilgamesh23: Ambitwistor: Okay then, white hole. That sort of explains the dark energy bit, doesn't it? Negative pressure?
Ambitwistor: gilgamesh23: Ambitwistor: Okay then, white hole. That sort of explains the dark energy bit, doesn't it? Negative pressure?No, not a white hole either. See my link. Also, standard white holes don't have negative pressure. They're vacuum solutions without cosmological constant, like standard black holes.
omeganuepsilon: Matter at it's smallest form is simply a fold in space. As of you took a wormhole (visualize slinky) end to end, it becomes a torus, and tightened down it becomes an impenetrable sphere.
Jim DiGriz: Sorry, "speed" was probably a bad term. I was meaning the overall expansion of the universe would have the same value whether expansion was faster now, and slower in the past, or slower now, and faster in the past.
Ambitwistor: omeganuepsilon: Matter at it's smallest form is simply a fold in space. As of you took a wormhole (visualize slinky) end to end, it becomes a torus, and tightened down it becomes an impenetrable sphere.There have been attempts to describe elementary particles as spacetime geometry, such as wormhole mouths (technical reference, or some geometrical or topological "defect" in spacetime (e.g., geons). In general relativity, none of these solutions end up being stable, like matter is. They also have trouble describing matter particles with half-integer spin, i.e. particles that obey the Pauli exclusion principle.The "single fold stabilizing" idea bears some superficial resemblance to the emergence of forces by the phenomenon of spontaneous symmetry breaking.I can't make much of your description of black holes. It doesn't seem to bear much resemblance to modern theories. Of course, modern theories can't deal with what happens at black hole singularities in the first place.
Want more news before we break it? Try
See what's behind the green doorand help keep the tap flowing
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Sep 25 2017 02:51:28
Runtime: 0.207 sec (207 ms)