Why Physics Can’t Totally Explain the Universe’s Expansion | SciShow News

Why Physics Can’t Totally Explain the Universe’s Expansion | SciShow News

{ ♪ INTRO ♪ } Since the moment it began, the universe has been expanding. It took humanity a while to figure that out, but over the last century, astronomers have gotten pretty good at calculating how fast it’s happening and how that speed has changed over the past 14 billion years. Right now, there are two main methods for measuring this: You can either observe astrophysical objects, like stars and supernovas, or you can use the laws of physics to extrapolate from data about the very old universe. Both methods are great, but they also don’t quite agree. And according to a new set of measurements to be published in The Astrophysical Journal, that might not be a mistake. The two numbers might actually be different. And to explain that we’d have to rethink
our understanding of physics. Right now, when we say that the universe is expanding, we mostly mean that the void between the galaxies and other large objects is growing. It’s a technical thing, but strictly speaking,
the universe isn’t expanding everywhere. Regardless, one of the tried and true methods of measuring this expansion requires calculating the distances to stars called Cepheid variables. A Cepheid is a star whose brightness changes over very regular periods of time. And the length of that period is directly
related to how bright the star is. So as long as scientists can measure how fast these objects change, they can figure out how bright they are up-close. Then, they can compare that number to how bright the stars look from Earth to determine their distance. Using sets of Cepheids at different distances, along with data about other kinds of objects, you can then figure out how fast the universe is expanding. There are a few other ways to measure this, but Cepheid variables were especially important for this new study. In it, researchers used the Hubble Space Telescope to look at 70 Cepheids in a nearby dwarf galaxy: the Large Magellanic Cloud. It’s only about 162,000 light-years away,
which is super duper close on a universal scale. Then, to make sure their brightness measurements were as accurate as possible, the scientists combined their data with results from a few other sources, including an international collaboration called the Araucaria Project. This group calculated the distance to the
Cloud a different way: by watching the light of binary star systems change as the stars moved around one another. That movement allowed them to figure out stuff like the stars’ masses and how big they are. And by combining that with data about how fast those changes happened and what kind of light the stars emitted, the scientists
could ultimately work out how far away they are. After looking at all this data, the authors
of this new paper reported that the universe is expanding at… drumroll please… about
74.03 kilometers per second per Megaparsec. In other words, an object 1 million parsecs away — or roughly 3.3 million light-years is moving away from us at about 74 kilometers per second. An object 2 million parsecs away is moving away at about 148 kilometers per second, and so on and so forth. 74.03 kilometers per second per Megaparsec that’s amazing! That’s amazingly specific! Now despite all the work that went into it, that estimate isn’t actually groundbreaking at first glance, since it’s basically in
line with previous measurements. But the key is that this number has far less uncertainty. And that’s causing a problem, because that estimate conflicts with other confident measurements about the universe’s expansion. Like I mentioned earlier, Cepheid variables
aren’t the only way we can figure out how the universe is growing. Another method is by studying the Cosmic Microwave Background, or CMB. This is the oldest light in the universe that
humanity will ever see. It dates back to when the cosmos was only about 380,000 years old, and studying it is the main objective of the European Space Agency’s Planck telescope. By studying temperature fluctuations in this light, scientists have been able to determine how fast the universe was expanding those 13-ish billion years ago. Then, they’ve been able to use that to extrapolate and figure out what the expansion rate should be today. Those extrapolations are all based on, like, really well-tested laws of physics, so you would think these results would match up pretty well with what we’ve observed with instruments like Hubble. Except, that they don’t. The Planck expansion rate is noticeably lower
than what we’ve gotten using sources like Cepheids. It’s only 67.4 kilometers per second per
Megaparsec. This discrepancy isn’t new, but there was
always a chance that it was a fluke. Like, last year, scientists estimated that
there was a 1 in 3000 chance something had just gotten messed up. But now, with this updated Hubble data, the
chance is 1 in 100,000. Which means that — while it’s not impossible
— it is pretty unlikely these numbers are wrong. In other words, scientists now have to explain
why the observed expansion rate is almost 10% faster than what physics predicts it should
be. One current hypothesis is that there was yet
another incident where mysterious dark energy caused an increase in the universe’s expansion
rate. Scientists don’t really know what dark energy
is, but they believe something like this has already happened twice — once for a brief
moment after the Big Bang, and again starting a few billion years ago. So maybe there was another incident like that
between those two points. Another idea is that dark matter interacts
differently with regular matter and light than we think. Dark matter is stuff that doesn’t interact
with light or charged particles, so it’s basically invisible. We only know it’s there because of the gravitational
effect it has on regular matter and light. But we could be wrong about how strong its
influence is on that stuff. If its influence is stronger, it could have
countered the universe’s expansion early-on. Then again, both of these ideas could also
be wrong — maybe there’s some exotic particle we haven’t discovered yet that’s responsible
for all of this. Ultimately, this is yet another example of
answers in science just spurring more questions. But there are ways scientists could explore
this further, including using gravitational waves produced in black hole and neutron star
mergers. Those are ripples in spacetime that squish
you know, like everything, like…. Everything that exists in space-time including
earth just a teeny bit as they travel through the cosmos. Since they don’t rely on light, measuring
those waves would give us a totally new set of data to study the expansion rate — but
right now, this field of astronomy is really young, so we can’t draw any conclusions. In our day to day lives, narrowing down these
big-picture cosmological factors doesn’t always feel that important. Like, knowing how fast the universe is expanding
isn’t going to help you write a paper or get through another day at work. But this field is all about discovering and
understanding the fundamental rules for how everything works — from Cepheids way out
in space to the gravity that keeps you on the Earth. And in a lot of ways, being curious and exploring
those big questions is a big part of what makes us human. Thanks for watching this episode of SciShow
Space News, and thanks to all our patrons on Patreon for helping us make it! We wanted to give a special shout-out to this
week’s President of Space, SR Foxley. Thanks for supporting us! If you want to become our next President of
Space — or just help us keep making more episodes of SciShow, you can head over to
patreon.com/scishow. { ♪ OUTRO ♪ }


100 thoughts on “Why Physics Can’t Totally Explain the Universe’s Expansion | SciShow News”

  • Emilio Murillo says:

    dark matter is the skin that separated anti-matter from matter at prime point of the big bang and dark energy is what the dark matter used to keep the skin from collapsing. This explains the differences in the expansion speeds as the skin escaped with the expansion

  • Maybe expansion is cyclic in nature rather than constant acceleration. The younger the universe, the faster the hubble constant is. Going back to the "Big Bang" inflation was infinite. Conversely as the universe gets older, the cycles of inflation occur further apart until the universe's entire energy density reaches a hydrostatic equilibrium, rather than the so called "Big Rip" which is what is expected based on current observations. But that could be wrong, if what I just explained is right, that the hubble constant is variable. The acceleration is possibly just the second cycle for our relatively very young universe.

  • Probably caused by the cumulative effects of gravitational pull from vast numbers of black holes. We have already detected the gravitational waves from great distances so there’s fluidity in space and I’m willing to have a bet that gravity and dark matter are related probably In defining how dark energy is used by gravity to warp space.

  • I keep hearing people asking why we are bothering to study the universe, dark matter, dark energy, {insert theoretical/astrophysics thing}, and I think "Well, what would the world be like today if Henri Bequerel and the Curis thought 'meh, who cares about radiation, it doesn't make potatoes grow any faster'?"

  • Galaxies or galaxy groups move apart from one another because the space progression (outward) is greater than gravitation (inward). Study the Reciprocal System and prove it for yourself! www.reciprocalsystem.guru

  • GOD Questionnaire says:

    Twin Universe model has plausible qualitative and quantitative explanations:

  • Whenever I have to deal with conspiracy theorists and crackpots that make claims about scientists trying to exert influence to bury some kind of truth, this is exactly the kind of thing I like to show them.

    No matter who you are or what you believe, (A) the truth is much more complicated than you think it is, and (B) nobody with any legitimacy will ever claim to have all the answers. A real scientist is merely a person with an open mind who’s only trying to do their best.

  • Where are we expanding from and to? And how can we tel? And where are we in this cosmic dance? Gimme answers gawds damn it!!!

  • MultiverseMedia Space says:

    Perhaps we could consider the CMB to be analogous to a form of torroidial flow, with a singularity located at the point we identify as the Big Bang. This could explain differential rates of expansion within a massive (possibly closed) system, but I'm getting further into hypothesis, so I will just say because we can not see beyond the CMB it could be analogous to a centralized black hole that is of such magnitude it's "ecreation" disk appears as a sphere because of the intense exchange of forces, and the current expansion is a symptom of this universal flow mechanism.

  • I watched Kurzgesagt’s video about strange matter the other day. How do we know if dark matter is different than strange matter? Anybody know? @scishow

  • If spacetime expands faster and faster the further out we observe, how quickly is spacetime here on earth expanding in reference to someone viewing the milky way from 5.6 billion light years away?
    Obviously we wouldnt be here to have emitted photons to be detected there but still.

  • Are you serious? Called heat expansion. Got really hot things in a really big cold thing. The heat is gonna dissipate into the colder regions. Gravity and inertia w things being flung all around w weakening gravitational forces leaves the inevitable fact that things are gonna get wobbled out of place. Plus who says that Things are actually speeding up in the process? Could be slowing down w the data always being proven incorrect constantly. Maybe this is how it always has been. Been here for like 35 years. Stupid speed bumps.

  • Galactic red shift isn’t a reliable means to “theorize” an expanding universe.

    We have an electric dominant universe but gravity only universe. True from macro cosmos down to micro cosmos otherwise known as atomic and particle level.

    Why electric force dominance?
    Simply due to ratio of e and g. Where e is 2.26×10^29 times greater than g.

    Red shift is an electric effect related to age of a galaxy and the associated e energy but Doppler shift .. per Sir Halton Arp an astrophysicist, we name him Galileo Galilei of our time.

    If prospect and carrier opportunity are good for you in the g force society keep at it but wasting time in the electric universe, little to no finding. Otherwise if you seek truth about science then eu is for you.

  • How odd that these theories can't quite be explained.. In fact all of them.. Perhaps its because the entire mathematics system being used is fundamentally flawed perhaps..?

  • Mihai Moghioros says:

    Maybe it's just the way of the Universe of keeping us grounded on our planet, so by the time we're scientifically advanced enough for fast interstellar travelling, it won't be fast anymore, so we won't go laying waste to other planets, like we did ours…

  • Layperson here.
    Call me crazy, but if it's believed that there's a multiverse, wouldn't GRAVITY of every other universe pull on ours aka expanding it?

  • Proteus Augustus says:

    The universe is an M-brane(U); not, a P-brane. It is accelerating because the void beyond view has mass/energy. The farther the mass/energy in the visible universe(u) gets closer to such mass/energy, its pull increases. U(m:E) >> u(m:E).

  • Alejandro Andretti says:

    Once it’s done expanding it’ll either implode and shrink back down to a NEW BIG BANG or it’ll settle and drop.. where will it drop?! Who know but that’s my theory

  • halcyonsandiego says:

    Im guessing there may be a place that is stationary/ non-expanding nor moving (relative to moving areas)…what is gravity like in that locality?

  • Garnet Campbell says:

    A new theory is that the Universe is a torus (donut shape) that keeps circling back in on it's self. The torus shape has been found naturally in the galaxies.

  • Freeda Peeple says:

    The first thing they need to do is drop the absurd idea that SPACE is expanding. SPACE is not a thing, it is a place where things happen. This apparent expansion is something happening IN space, not TO space.

  • Roberto Carvalho says:

    Question… So we were told that one of the reasons the space is expending is dark matter… We were also told that all matter we can interact with and observe are shocking low.. 5 or so percent. One thing that I don't understand is the amount of matter altogether is it constant? Is the matter and the dark matter constant? Coz if so how would a constant amount of dark matter is still pushing the expansion of the universe? I would assume that the amount of dark matter is growing somehow.. if so wtf? How?

  • What if the great attractor isn't attracting anything it's being pushed by the expansion of other "big bangs" but in a 4 dimensional fashion assuming space is a separate 3 dimensional object in itself.
    If place the speed of light to be a variable depending on how the big bang works and so forth explaining cool spots etc

    Just a thought of mind, anyone got numbers to disprove This?

  • Menachem Salomon says:

    Dark energy is actually the Dark Side of the Force. Here's my rationale: (1) The Force, according to Obi Wan, "holds the universe together." (2) Yet Obi Wan can tell things that are only "true, from a certain point of view."

    Therefore: the Light side of the Force holds the universe together, but the Dark Side works to push galaxies apart. Unfortunately, with no one on Earth having any midi-chlorians, no one can detect this properly.

  • Mark Peterson says:

    This is the front line of people trying to convince you that their 200 year old propaganda is still the truth.

    Listen, if you really wanted to know the facts, they're out there. But if you want to keep hearing theories and lies that feed your confirmation bias, by all means keep watching scishow.

    "God of the gaps"… Smh, you use Time. You throw time at any problem you have with your belief. Which is why you try so hard to "prove" the universe is 20 billion years old.

    In 20 Billion years anything can happen, right? A fish can turn into a human… Despite the fact, that is literally impossible. Have you ever seen how a cell works? How DNA works? How RNA works?… If you do, than you should know how improbable your belief is. If you don't, then you shouldn't have so much faith in it.

    Science is a method to understand the universe we live in. It shouldn't be used to lie to people. You're being lied to folks. The scientific method has debunked evolution and a 20 billion year old universe that came from nothing.

    You just don't hear about it. But it can be found all over the internet. Scientists have to "go along to get along" if they want their job or funding.

    You're naive if you think a scientific discovery proving the earth is young or that we were design or created would get any airtime on this channel.

    Has this channel ever just ate up and delivered you the truth about soft tissue found in dinosaur remains? Have they ever told you how completely, ridiculously improbable the first cell ever existing would be?

    It's stupid unlikely btw. A mathematical impossibility! No transitional fossils.. Have they told you how hard it is to make a fossil? Or that we have fossils dating back only a few hundred years? Or how different parts of the same animal were carbon dated thousands of years apart?

    Or how accretion doesn't work past small pebles.. Or how Jupiter should be dead cold by now… Look! I could keep going. But I won't bother. Because if you don't know these things yet you hold fast to your belief in "science" as you put it, then you have proven my point.

    "Time of the gaps"…

  • NeoN - Verse says:

    So, I've a question?:- If we take a RIGHT ANGLED TRIANGLE of base of 1cm and height of 1cm, we will have √2cm hypotenuse. But the thing is, √2 has somewhat INFINITE VALUE [1.414213562373…….](?). Is it fine if I'm freaking out.???

  • Maybe the increased expansion is because our universe has collided with another and they’ve warped causing an acceleration

  • DeadmaN 2112 says:

    One thing that doesn't make sense is…
    If light can push an object through space then wouldn't dark energy just be the tiny push from light over billions of years?

  • Jenn Worthington says:

    Yeah, but…. Nothing is moving away from center at the same rate. And the discrepancy exists because it doesn't take gravitational pull and other variables into consideration.

  • Endrank luvs da 4 loko says:

    I really think there's a reason space is expanding and yet "empty" space isn't getting warmer even though stars are putting out all that energy. I think all empty space has all the super positions of matter that can exist there since it's not being observed, kinda like that old slit experiment with the light behaving as waves unless it's being observed. As stars decay, they're actually creating more empty space so everything seems to be moving away from everything else.

  • A simple fact about how physics works is that it's impossible to expand a volume of space to the universe, due to it would require previously existing space to displace.
    Don't be an enabling moron all your life. There's no real afterlife to recoup for the damages.

  • Utkarsh Kumar says:

    Maybe life after few billions year after the big bang,another insident occured like the big bang itself,but we don't find evidence about that or know that it existed because we didn't thought that after the birth of universe something same might have happened.

  • Hey here's a good one for y'all , had a conversation with a friend about the age of the universe science vs religion . She jokingly said the universe was a failed science experiment that wiped out the previous universe .

  • Summary:
    You set out on a trip across the universe 14 billion years ago and hit cruise control and then take a picture on your speedo at that time as proof
    – 13.8 billion years later a NASA Cop radars your ship at 74kph as you're doing a flyby
    – you send him an inter-galactic email showing him a picture inside your ship of the speedo and it says 67.4kph

    Who's right?

  • The Red Jelly Theory ( proposed by A.Z.London ) suggests the accelerating red shift is the hallmark of a pulsating universe and that it is only in its early inflation phase.At some point the red shift will slow to its maximum value and then deminish back to zero ,this will designate the maximum size of the cosmos. From this point it will begin (like Picasso ) it's blue shift phase as the cosmos deminishes back to its former more compact volume and this can be tracked by the blue shift of absorption lines in the light spectrum..So in this indemic cycle blue shift will follow red shift will follow blue shift in an eternal cycle as the universe pulsates (thus preventing stagnation in the heavens) in a time period yet to be established. Sadly this throws a spanner in the works for calculating the age of the universe (soss Coxxy …..er .. Sorry Professor Cox ) The 'Big Bangers' may need to reconsider Nebular Theory and a more finessed origin to the universe as it rolled into existence … like mist on the sea… and from which clouds the stars were (and still are) born.This pulsating phenomenon Azl named 'Winnie's Wave' to honour his and all mums everywhere and to the glory of Yahweh the creator of all.

  • Anudda weetard in da mix boys n gurls :[) u gaw calcuwate a bang yo, a avewage bang on earf is millions times greater dan da bang your calcuwating yo', do da bang and yul know da trufes yo' 🙂

  • It's simple. Make a theory based on a centrist model of the furthest observed light from earth. Then once it's discovered that 85% of space is empty and moving, just invent something called "dark matter" in order to try and reconcile the equation contradictions. Just in case this sounds unintelligent, I am typing this while wearing a lab coat with a nasa patch and master of physics badge.

  • the idea of literally nothing existing in the universe except for that one speck of matter that started it all is truly mind boggling to me. did our definition of time start when the universe started expanding? did time stand still before then?

  • Dark matter/energy seem like the good of science; we have little to no proof of their existence but can see the effects everywhere we look.

  • Glenn Ratcliffe says:

    Dark matter is (invisible) evidence of gravity, yes? And gravity is mass pulling (sucking) mass together, yes? And dark energy, the expantion of the space in the universe, yes?

    So: What if gravity (G) & dark matter (DM) don't exsisst…… But dark energy (DE) dose, and this explains why we think DM & G are real. An optical illusion of a sort (bit like only seeing one side of a coin, and not seeing the whole coin).

    I guess it's obvious that the math is beyond me, but the thing that occurred to me is: That G & DM are concluded as result of DE 'hateing' matter.

    By 'hateing' I mean: DE (GOR) has but one constant……. To push matter away (from itself). To do this: DE (GOR) will increase over time (forming stuff/moons/planets/suns/nova's/Bholes/ect), thus we see the universe, as is.


    While I've aheap more on this conception I could ask, I'd totally accept a 'why this can't be so' statement……………


  • Mathematicians have ruined science. Try observation and reason. Can space expand such that the Earth is at the centre of expansion? What if matter is expanding at 1/1000th per second, that would explain gravity!

  • I don't trust any data from Cepheid variables or type-1a supernovas, as they are rife with assumptions of constancy, which don't make any sense when things like spin and fields are at play. This is not to mention they have lead us on wild goose chases for several decades, including collapsing universe, followed by merely slowing-down universe, followed by an expanding universe, and then followed by an expanding universe at an increasing, accelerating rate.
    I do trust the data from GAIA, and parallax measurements, because inferences on those data use assumptions from math (geometry), and not some crazy assumptions like all supernova of a particular type will have a fixed brightness, regardless of spin, orientation, or any other thing. Let's see what future, larger baseline systems than GAIA say about positions and velocities. The large Magellanic cloud is too close to make any deductions on, as it is not even outside the gravitationally bound Virgo supercluster. If you can use the Magellanic cloud to estimate expansion, I can use the Earth-moon system (which is expanding noticeably, by the way), or even a hydrogen atom (which has not expanded noticeably since we've been observing it).

  • Glenn Ratcliffe says:

    Try again here for an answer.
    Dark matter is (invisible) evidence of gravity, yes? And gravity is mass pulling (sucking) mass together, yes? And dark energy, the expantion of the space in the universe, yes?So: What if gravity (G) & dark matter (DM) don't exsisst…… But dark energy (DE) dose, and this explains why we think DM & G are real. An optical illusion of a sort (bit like only seeing one side of a coin, and not seeing the whole coin).I guess it's obvious that the math is beyond me, but the thing that occurred to me is: That G & DM are concluded as result of DE 'hateing' matter. By 'hateing' I mean: DE  has but one constant……. To push matter away (from itself). To do this: DE  will increase (expanding space more) over time forming stuff (moons/planets/suns/nova's/Bholes/ect), thus we see the universe, as is.~~~~~~~~~~~While I've aheap more on this conception I could ask, I'd totally accept a 'why this can't be so' statement…………… ——————
    Side note with Link below:Astronomers theorize that the faster expansion rate is due to a mysterious, dark force that is pulling galaxies apart. One explanation for dark energy is that it is a property of space.&A last possibility is that Einstein's theory of gravity is not correct. That would not only affect the expansion of the universe, but it would also affect the way that normal matter in galaxies and clusters of galaxies behaved. This fact would provide a way to decide if the solution to the dark energy problem is a new gravity theory or not.

  • Expansion of the universe
    Imagine a book, a truth that science could discover only 100 years ago, that is 1,400 years ago. And imagine a human being, a truth that scientists have discovered recently, reporting 1,400 years ago. Is there any doubt that this book is a divine book and this person is a remarkable person?

    The Holy Quran reports that the universe was expanding 1,400 years ago. In verse 47 of verse Zariyat, it is said: “We have built the heavens with our might and certainly we are expanding it. In esiz Surely we are expanding it. In

    The Arabic language is لَمُوسِعُونَ إِنَّا. The word مُوسِعُونَ is derived from the verb أَوْسَعَ which means “expand“. The “lâm ındaki at the beginning is l lâm-ı tekit, and adds“ too much ”meaning by emphasizing the name or adjective it follows. So this statement means: “We are expanding the universe too much..

    After analyzing the Qur'an's verse, which informs the expansion of the universe, let us now look at what science says about it:

    Until the beginning of the 20th century, there was only one view that dominated the world of science. This view was that the universe had a static structure and that it has been going on for ever since. Until the 20th century, no scientist had ever spoken of the expansion of the universe, perhaps even imagining it.

    The Russian physicist Alexander Friedmann and the Belgian cosmologist Georges Lemaitre theoretically calculated that the universe was constantly moving and expanding in the early 20th century. This fact was proved observationally in 1929. As the American astronomer Edwin Hubble explores the sky with a giant telescope, he discovers that stars and galaxies are constantly moving apart. The stars and galaxies were moving away from each other, not only from us. As the universe was expanding, it became clear with the observations made in the following years. A universe in which everything is constantly distant from one another means a universe that is “constantly expanding..

  • Chapter ath-Thaariyaat of the Qur’an also seems to allude to one of the most imposing discoveries of modern science, the expansion of the Universe.

    “I built the heaven with power and it is I, who am expanding it.” Qur’an,51:47

    The expansion of the universe was first suggested by the general theory of relativity and is supported by the calculations of astrophysics. The regular movement of the galactic light towards the red section of the spectrum is explained by the distancing of one galaxy from another. Thus, the size of the universe appears to be progressively increasing.


  • Panagiotis Papadimitriou says:

    A theory that predicts nothing, considered though correct, and requires new and new parameters to be explained.

  • I know what is causing space throughout the universe to expand. With that said, I was able to predict that the Hubble constant and lambda (cosmological constant) will be found to be in error, especially noted with galaxies found to be positioned the same distance away from us. I also found an error in Einstein's field equation. It is missing a very important variable.

  • The figure for the Hubble Constant had changed from 100 km/sec. to 71km/sec., then to 70km/sec., then to 68.9 km/sec. and now to 74km/sec.. Is this really a constant? Does this figure really describe how the universe is expanding? All it really means is that the Doppler red shift of light spectrum signifies that galaxies further away by a mega parsec seems to move away at a higher velocity and the increase in velocity is the value of the Hubble constant. But general relativity teaches us that the farther away a celestial object is, the faster it appears to be moving. Thus, if we only look at 10 meters around ourselves, everything seems to be static. If we look at the entire Earth from a space station sufficiently far away, the Earth will be seen to be moving at 29790 meters/sec. revolving round the Sun. If we look at both the Earth and the Sun from a sufficiently far away position in space, the Earth will be seen to be moving at 230 kilometers/sec ( the Earth's velocity plus the Sun's velocity orbiting the Milky Way) If we can still see the Earth and the Sun from a nearby galaxy, say, the Large Magellan Cloud, the Earth will be seen to be moving at 300 kilometers/sec. together with the Sun and the Milky Way towards the Local Galaxy Cluster, and so on……, that is, faster and faster. This arises from the fact that we use the position where we view a celestial object as the local inertial frame of reference according to the general relativity theory, not because of any expansion of space. Finally when we view a celestial object billions of light years away, the object will be moving at light speed, and somebody, if any looking at the Earth( if he can still see the Earth) from that far away object, will likewise see the Earth moving at the speed of light, with the corresponding Doppler red shift.

  • Craig Mckinney says:

    We've heard this before but I haven't heard you mention the problem of paralax. Postulate an infinite balloon. draw 2 dots on the lax surface. Add x amount of air the points are 2 inches apart. Keep inflating. At some point, add 2 points near you. When the inner points have moved 2 inches the outer will move much farther eventually orders of magnitude farther. They will seem to move faster and faster although the expansion is constant. Simple geometric progression. I remember an mass ejected from a supernova that seemed to move FTL. They finally decided it was coming directly at us at nearly light speed. thereby compressing its light trace to seem to be FTL. The opposite effect of what I am proposing.

  • Yes and no – The universe does not expand "into" anything and does not require space to exist "outside" it. Consider the referenced use of a universal singularity as the point of creation for the universe. Rather than considering the singularity as a point, think of it as a singular dimension of the space-time fabric. Then we could think of space-time as unfolding into two dimensions, then three dimensions, and so on. And since the predominant condition of the universe is dark energy, in which there is no baryonic matter, it could be better understood as a dimensional ramification of these earlier dimensions. In this way, everything is just evolving and maturing within infinite space-time.
    As for the expression of accelerating expansion, consider the time dilation of a black hole. To a distant observer, clocks near a black hole would appear to tick more slowly than those further away from the black hole. Due to this effect, known as gravitational time dilation, an object falling into a black hole appears to slow as it approaches the event horizon, taking an infinite time to reach it.
    Reversing this perspective from a black hole observer, clocks further away from the black hole would appear to tick more quickly than those further away from the black hole.
    This theoretical hypothesis is being proposed just to theorize upon the concept of time dilation as the rational justification for emulating the condition of an increasingly expanding universe. From anywhere in the cosmos, the universe is seemingly expanding faster rather than slower due to the perspective of time dilation. Therefore validating the expansion of the universe as the increase of the distance between two distant parts of the universe with time. It is an intrinsic expansion whereby the scale of space itself changes.

  • Weird question. If Stars are moving and are so far away their light is out of date. Is there a map somewhere that shows the stars where they should be right now vs how their out dates light indicates?

  • Fariborz Moradi says:

    Maybe we got a wrong conclusion, and the universe is not expanding, but the expansion is decreasing :/ . Let me explain, The farther away galaxy is the greater it's redshift, so the faster moving away. But the farther away you looking the more back in time you are seeing … In the other hand the closer to the presence time you looking the lower redshift. Which should results that the expansion of the universe decreasing as the time passes toward the presence and to the future! Just a simple logic !! Or :O :/ ?

  • MYESSYALLYAH Cbssjr says:

    The visible universe is expanding because the galaxies we can't see are so huge they might be bigger then the universe that we can currently see but obviously are all still part of the same universe but what we can see is likely just an ultra mega galactic serial cluster that's being ripped apart by many competitors that surround us omnipotently and pull through nano gravitrons that you mightvcall dark gravity or the dievisionall supradark bubble. I go further because the universe always does further then what's detectable forever, eternity spectral eyesonevor is a tool not buildable but in imagination. Your eyes on your can never perceive it. Its beyond visual and further away then clear. Its notatal . Its later in the dictionary and not an illusion

  • MYESSYALLYAH Cbssjr says:

    Glass can be defined as clear. But not at all. Notatal is not at all measurable or perceivable other then reading it here. Its notatal. It never exist but as a word. You couldn't imagine it more then just that. It has no definition. No notatal. Its definition in the dictionary and ouldnt ever be written as it has nothing to define it. Its simply notatal. And its real. But only as a word more mysterious then God. God has many description. But notatal has none. Its beyond Allah. Its indescribable. Other then as its puritantwo exact spelling. So pure its hardly worth mentioning.

  • MYESSYALLYAH Cbssjr says:

    Tuolome river reminds me of my friend Brian tuoey who wanted to fight me in eight grade because I was horsing around and hurt him on accident. He wanted to fight after school. I met him and told him I didn't want to fight because I didn't mean to hurt him in the first place and apologized for the accident. The next day he was still one of my good friends. I don't mean to hurt people and I don't understand people who do. Brian tuoey was fortunate not to be in the car accident I was in. Nobody apologized for that nor was i compensated. I've been penalized for my back problem though like I caused it when I've never been hit hard enough since then to have caused it, but when I was poisoned in 2003 and In 2006 in 2008 and in 2016 each time it got worse. 2016 was the most disabling event of my life. And the worst tragedy I could imagine. Except that it still is happening as there has been no closure that I've found. My country seems to be addicted to stealing from me. That's the biggest surprise. I never thought that justice would die or be so downgraded in my lifetime. But it has been. That's all I've been allowed to see. I never owed a thing except to try my best to father hope. But hope no one person could ever garentee on his own or even with all the help of those currently living. Hope is a long way away and all kinds of shot can go wrong. Just like my accident at ten years old. I wish it hadn't happened but I still hope for the best life I can manage. I am not happy alone. Allah is not meant to be all one its a push out and expansion its a spreading of life. Trapped in a prison since 6 16 2016 is a fate I didn't deserve. Its been a prison because in surrounded by people I can't trust and with being so robbed I've got no escape from. And yes my life is one I wish is not lived because of hope dying in December 2017 and remaining dead ever since. I alone can't raise the dead. It would take like a 77 generations to raise hit from the dead and at least one woman alive right now I could trust. I don't think I have met her yet. If I did then I missed her name. Because she wouldn't of hid so long from me if I could trust her. I couldn't imagine one reason why she would if she could be trusted she wouldn't of robbed me. I don't like the way my life's made me feel. Its the thieves that hurt me the most. I always do everything I possibly can for a reason that i can justify if any God were to show up knocking on my head asking questions.

  • It could just be that we are totally wrong and the only reason we see think this is happening is because we live in a huge void.

  • Seriously, do I need to drop an apple on your head or what? GRAVITY. Why can't anyone imagine that the center of gravity of the universe is beyond the visible event horizon. In every direction you can look of course.

  • Physics falls apart in space. Honestly it barely works here on Earth. According to physics, bumblebees can't fly, clouds are impossible and bikes shouldn't work. These are just off the top of my head. So to look up into space and say this is how it is because physics says it does, well it isnt the smartest thing to do. But it does has a lot right though. Anyway, we may never know how fast it's expanding for a very long time. Hell maybe the universe is an egg with a shell and we are the stuff bouncing around off of it. ✌

  • If we are looking at the universe dose that not make it a progection rather than a perseption do we see the world as we imagine it or are we observing what is already their if their if reality is a projection what happens when the sources concesness is absent can we tell the difference between actualality and illusion…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *