|
|
Post by Sarge on Apr 18, 2021 5:32:51 GMT
Space isn't nothingness, it isn't empty. It's a common misconception. When our universe begin expanding it wasn't just matter-energy but also space-time and all the physical laws, the universe is a thing, a place. If space is something that exists, then I am including it when I say the universe is everything that exists. If there is nothing for something to expand into, then it must be expanding into something other than itself if it is indeed expanding.
What is it you image space is expanding into?
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 18, 2021 6:17:05 GMT
If space is something that exists, then I am including it when I say the universe is everything that exists. If there is nothing for something to expand into, then it must be expanding into something other than itself if it is indeed expanding. What is it you image space is expanding into?
I can't even imagine, but I have a hard time believing it's expanding into more of itself. 
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Apr 18, 2021 7:08:56 GMT
What is it you image space is expanding into?
I can't even imagine, but I have a hard time believing it's expanding into more of itself. Actually I would think that's the easiest thing to believe. It's a common misconception that space is empty, a void, nothingness, but that isn't true. Space-time (note "time") is a thing, a place, a something that includes all matter, energy, time, gravity, and physical laws.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 18, 2021 7:28:23 GMT
I can't even imagine, but I have a hard time believing it's expanding into more of itself. Actually I would think that's the easiest thing to believe. It's a common misconception that space is empty, a void, nothingness, but that isn't true. Space-time (note "time") is a thing, a place, a something that includes all matter, energy, time, gravity, and physical laws. To say that something can expand into itself is to say it exists outside of itself. universe --> | not universe
|
|
|
|
Post by dividavi on Apr 18, 2021 8:36:17 GMT
...Everything? Shouldn't that be "everything else" if "universe" doesn't already cover it? The word universe means everthing that exists. There can be nothing outside the universe because if that thing exists it is, by definition, part of the universe. Oh, some may ask, does that include ghosts, angels, immaterial beings who are purely mental? If Heaven, Hell and perhaps other post-death abodes exist are they necessarily part of the universe? Parallel worlds may exist where bearded Spock is evil, where Hitler won WW2, where Dinosaur civilizations dominate the Earth; are they part of the universe? The answer to all these questions is this: Yes! If parallel worlds exist they're part of the universe. There's no need to speak of a multiverse, a megaverse or anything else. My belief is that people who use the word multiverse are doing nothing more than pretending to be erudite by using Greek words as a prefix.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 18, 2021 8:39:51 GMT
...Everything? Shouldn't that be "everything else" if "universe" doesn't already cover it? The word universe means everthing that exists. There can be nothing outside the universe because if that thing exists it is, by definition, part of the universe. Oh, some may ask, does that include ghosts, angels, immaterial beings who are purely mental? If Heaven, Hell and perhaps other post-death abodes exist are they necessarily part of the universe? Parallel worlds may exist where bearded Spock is evil, where Hitler won WW2, where Dinosaur civilizations dominate the Earth; are they part of the universe? The answer to all these questions is this: Yes! If parallel worlds exist they're part of the universe. There's no need to speak of a multiverse, a megaverse or anything else. My belief is that people who use the word multiverse are doing nothing more than pretending to be erudite by using Greek words as a prefix. Well said. Neil's t-shirt sucks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2021 10:14:26 GMT
...Everything? Shouldn't that be "everything else" if "universe" doesn't already cover it? The word universe means everthing that exists. There can be nothing outside the universe because if that thing exists it is, by definition, part of the universe. Oh, some may ask, does that include ghosts, angels, immaterial beings who are purely mental? If Heaven, Hell and perhaps other post-death abodes exist are they necessarily part of the universe? Parallel worlds may exist where bearded Spock is evil, where Hitler won WW2, where Dinosaur civilizations dominate the Earth; are they part of the universe? The answer to all these questions is this: Yes! If parallel worlds exist they're part of the universe. There's no need to speak of a multiverse, a megaverse or anything else. My belief is that people who use the word multiverse are doing nothing more than pretending to be erudite by using Greek words as a prefix. I suppose it depends on your audience. Different wording can make things easier to mentally grasp
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2021 10:33:21 GMT
Had to really think about this, been a while. Interesting ideas. I have to agree, the universe cant be expanding into itself. That makes no sense logically or scientifically.
Although if there is really nothing outside the universe and I mean absolutely nothing and the universe is expanding, then it might also be contracting in certain places. So always the same 'volume' but changing shape
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2021 10:40:50 GMT
I can't even imagine, but I have a hard time believing it's expanding into more of itself. Actually I would think that's the easiest thing to believe. It's a common misconception that space is empty, a void, nothingness, but that isn't true. Space-time (note "time") is a thing, a place, a something that includes all matter, energy, time, gravity, and physical laws. Yes, time the '4th dimension' apparently. It's interesting though re the definition of a 'thing' in physics as I believe they still dont know if light is a particle or a wave. Similarly with gravity and the graviton (it's own particle) theory but I could be wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Apr 18, 2021 15:42:34 GMT
Actually I would think that's the easiest thing to believe. It's a common misconception that space is empty, a void, nothingness, but that isn't true. Space-time (note "time") is a thing, a place, a something that includes all matter, energy, time, gravity, and physical laws. To say that something can expand into itself is to say it exists outside of itself. universe --> | not universe You are arguing with yourself, not me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Apr 18, 2021 16:07:58 GMT
Actually I would think that's the easiest thing to believe. It's a common misconception that space is empty, a void, nothingness, but that isn't true. Space-time (note "time") is a thing, a place, a something that includes all matter, energy, time, gravity, and physical laws. Yes, time the '4th dimension' apparently. It's interesting though re the definition of a 'thing' in physics as I believe they still dont know if light is a particle or a wave. Similarly with gravity and the graviton (it's own particle) theory but I could be wrong.
I believe Issaac Newton first said space is a thing itself and not the lack of anything. After many people trying to prove him wrong, Einstein proved him right. I learned that light behaves like a particle and wave, but I also picked up somwhere that waves are mathmatical constructs to describe a behavior, not a thing itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 18, 2021 21:23:20 GMT
To say that something can expand into itself is to say it exists outside of itself. universe --> | not universe You are arguing with yourself, not me. Actually I was countering your statement that it’s easy to believe by reiterating that it’s impossible. But now that we’re not talking about it at all, I’ll be moving on. Thanks for the chat. |
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Apr 19, 2021 18:16:35 GMT
You are arguing with yourself, not me. Actually I was countering your statement that it’s easy to believe by reiterating that it’s impossible. But now that we’re not talking about it at all, I’ll be moving on. Thanks for the chat.
In all seriousness I didn't feel like you were participating because you hardly responded to anything I wrote. Dictionaries summarize things in a sentence or two and provide only an elementary understanding of concepts like "universe," it's not a substitute for an education. The universe can be everything that exists and still be expanding, and it is expanding, there is no doubt about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Apr 21, 2021 13:24:19 GMT
What is it you image space is expanding into?
I can't even imagine, but I have a hard time believing it's expanding into more of itself. It's expanding in the sense that objects in space are getting far and far away from each other. A good example is that we on Earth can see the lights from stars that travel billions of miles from their location to ours. At some point in the future, the distance between Earth and those stars will be so great that we won't be able to see the light because the distance is so big that even light will be unable to reach our planet I don't remember who it was, but he said that if humans had emerged on this planet later billion of years later, we would've concluded that there was nothing outside the solar system because we wouldn't be able to see any stars or galaxies. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expansion_of_the_universe
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Apr 22, 2021 5:44:57 GMT
Actually I would think that's the easiest thing to believe. It's a common misconception that space is empty, a void, nothingness, but that isn't true. Space-time (note "time") is a thing, a place, a something that includes all matter, energy, time, gravity, and physical laws. Yes, time the '4th dimension' apparently. It's interesting though re the definition of a 'thing' in physics as I believe they still dont know if light is a particle or a wave. Similarly with gravity and the graviton (it's own particle) theory but I could be wrong. Apparently, the current understanding is that gravity is not force but a result. Some suggest that because mass warps space-time, bodies fall toward a mass because of the "drag" from experiencing differential rates of time. Another explanation that goes back to Einstein that is a person in freefall is not experiencing gravity, but weightlessness, and it is the ground rushing up to meet them not the other way around. There is good experimental data for the latter. I don't believe gravitons are dead. My take is that we still don't fully understand gravity and it's a work in progress.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Apr 22, 2021 5:48:23 GMT
I can't even imagine, but I have a hard time believing it's expanding into more of itself. It's expanding in the sense that objects in space are getting far and far away from each other. A good example is that we on Earth can see the lights from stars that travel billions of miles from their location to ours. At some point in the future, the distance between Earth and those stars will be so great that we won't be able to see the light because the distance is so big that even light will be unable to reach our planet I don't remember who it was, but he said that if humans had emerged on this planet later billion of years later, we would've concluded that there was nothing outside the solar system because we wouldn't be able to see any stars or galaxies. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expansion_of_the_universe The universe is expanding because space-time between objects is expanding, not because the objects themselves are moving outward like an explosion. The big bang is understood to be an expansion, like dots on an inflating balloon, rather than debris in an explosion. I believe I used the phrase, "expanding into nothing."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2021 5:49:33 GMT
Ill get back to religion and science soon haha
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2021 12:44:03 GMT
Yes, time the '4th dimension' apparently. It's interesting though re the definition of a 'thing' in physics as I believe they still dont know if light is a particle or a wave. Similarly with gravity and the graviton (it's own particle) theory but I could be wrong.
I believe Issaac Newton first said space is a thing itself and not the lack of anything. After many people trying to prove him wrong, Einstein proved him right. I learned that light behaves like a particle and wave, but I also picked up somwhere that waves are mathmatical constructs to describe a behavior, not a thing itself.
So what is it then, light that is? A particle, wave or something else? Has it been confirmed?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2021 12:46:17 GMT
I can't even imagine, but I have a hard time believing it's expanding into more of itself. It's expanding in the sense that objects in space are getting far and far away from each other. A good example is that we on Earth can see the lights from stars that travel billions of miles from their location to ours. At some point in the future, the distance between Earth and those stars will be so great that we won't be able to see the light because the distance is so big that even light will be unable to reach our planet I don't remember who it was, but he said that if humans had emerged on this planet later billion of years later, we would've concluded that there was nothing outside the solar system because we wouldn't be able to see any stars or galaxies. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expansion_of_the_universe The expansion rate is also faster than the speed of light. Only a little bit though
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on May 8, 2021 6:59:29 GMT
I believe Isaac Newton first said space is a thing itself and not the lack of anything. After many people trying to prove him wrong, Einstein proved him right. I learned that light behaves like a particle and wave, but I also picked up somewhere that waves are mathematical constructs to describe a behavior, not a thing itself.
So what is it then, light that is? A particle, wave or something else? Has it been confirmed?
As I understand it, and I'm not a physicist, is that wave defines what something does but not what it is. So sports fans in a stadium can do a wave, but they are still people. So light can be both a particle and wave, although in this case I believe particle is also defining behavior. So light is energy that behaves like both a particle and wave.
|
|
