An interesting theory has recently been proposed within my research that suggests that the very nature of an expanding universe is what hosts 4 dimensional space. Last month I made several posts regarding the nature of TIME and how we can include TIME as a very real dimension.
The theory is some what difficult to prove, yet NOT impossible and does provide a very rich mechanical explanation to many of nature’s phenomena.
First we must understand what the math tells us about “expansion!” It is a common misconception that as the universe grows it is creating new space IE “new” 4 dimensional space, were as the rest of the universe remains static and unchanged.
However; the true effect of expansion is as it is said “expanding” IE 4 dimensional space is in effect stretching, and at a phenomenal rate. In fact it is possible to reason, with the use of GR & SR that the rate of expansion is the speed of light.
This provides an interesting and fitting solution to the TIME dilation phenomena. When we buzz around (IE provide motion) in an environment of expanding 4 dimensional space, we are in fact resisting expansion and therefore within that domain we are traveling “relatively” slower in 4 dimensions than the rest of the expanding domain.
The theory goes that the universe, IE 4 dimensional space is in a state of expansion. This even includes matter and energy. You me and everything around us is expanding at the + speed of light (since motion, time and velocity are all relative I will use a plus or minus symbol to denote relative velocity IE slowing down at the speed of light or speeding up at the speed of light.)
It is fascinating to imagine that we ourselves our expanding at a phenomenal rate, which brings me to the nature of matter and gravity.
As 4 dimensional space continues to stretch and expand, the domain occupied by matter is under-mind. Matter has a quality to resist expansion of 4 dimensional space, therefore creating its very own sub-domain of compressed 4 dimensional space. Imagine HEIGHT, WIDTH, LENTH and TIME, that is in a state of expansion, being dragged back by matter. The effect is of courses known as GRAVITY…
Quantum mechanics is a headache for many theorists. The strange behavior of quantum particles has invited many attempts of explanation, yet all have fallen short as a true description of what is really happening.
Expansion theory does offer a very controversial idea which is very hard to swallow; however quantum weirdness is hard to swallow anyway, so why not apply a weird solution.
For all those familiar with the 2 slit trick will know that by the simply ACT of observation we can change the out come of the experiment by braking down the wave function. For those you don’t know about the 2 slit trick, check it out on youtube.com, there is a great animation that explains it.
With expansion theory we can suggest that sub-atomic particles inhabits a 4 dimensional domain that is out of sync with ours IE since a sub-atomic particle has less resistance to expansion than us, the observer! Their domain of expansion is running faster than ours.
Imagine the sub-atomic 4D domain, HEIGHT, WIDTH, LENGTH and TIME is expanding faster than the 4D domain that we inhabit.
It is incredible to imagine and very well fitting that our observation of waves are from a perspective operating on a delayed TIME line. Waves show us all possible paths and out comes the sub-atomic particles can mathematically take.
It truly is tremendous to think that when we choose to observe the path of a single quantum particle, we choose to observe the path of 1 out of an untold amount of possible out comes, hence we see the wave function collapse when we observe 1 path opposed to the billions of possible paths when we CHOOSE not to observe.
M-theory suggest that all possibilities are played out which is supported by expansion theory. When we witness a wave, we are in fact witnessing sub-atomic particles passing us through a faster TIME LINE.
I can imagine many eyebrows are being raised as you read this. Due to the complicated nature of the theory I have explained with limited detail. It is good to hear your feed back so I can slowly elaborate…
Happy pondering
NEVERDRY
I would submit that, as the universe "sees" it, time is only a half dimension(in a ten or eleven dimensional whole), with the other half "rolled" up and only accessible in the point singularity of a black hole. This other half dimension would connect that point singularity to the Big Bang, such that all the energy sucked into a black hole reappears at the BB. Since time stops under the conditions in a black hole, everything that has ever fallen in has not yet reached the singularity, and will not for zillions of years to come(if ever, as we see it). Thus it is possible to travel backwards in time, but the only destination is the BB, and paradox is avoided.
Your thoughts???
Grumpy
I would submit that, as the universe "sees" it, time is only a half dimension(in a ten or eleven dimensional whole), with the other half "rolled" up and only accessible in the point singularity of a black hole. This other half dimension would connect that point singularity to the Big Bang, such that all the energy sucked into a black hole reappears at the BB. Since time stops under the conditions in a black hole, everything that has ever fallen in has not yet reached the singularity, and will not for zillions of years to come(if ever, as we see it). Thus it is possible to travel backwards in time, but the only destination is the BB, and paradox is avoided.
Your thoughts???
Grumpy
And by what physical process does space 'stretch'?
You're not pulling my leg here NEVERDRY? in fact this expanding you describe is what i always thought it to be :) Some week(s) ago i learned to my surprise that the accepted way to treat it was that it only happened in the 'Voids' (space). And now you that says that this is new ??? 'SH** I've gone around with this 'misconception' for decades ::))
But it have at the same time given me a headache as if it is so how can we really prove this expanding universe as we too are expanding, which to my eyes implicate that every thing's relative size stays the same. I mean redshift is the light being drawn out because of the objects sending them out are moving from us right? And that, in this case, shouldn't have anything to do with our universe expanding from every point in every direction, do you see how i think? (Who said - Badly :)
On the other hand if you see it as one particle becoming two four eight (in every 'point' of our spacetime) etc etc, then redshift works as an 'inclination' of proof i think, as the 'distance' for a wave constantly are expanding, but on the otherelyfifth hand, so are the wave (expanding, that is :) On the third hand it still means a relatively unchanging universe as we all expands at the same rate. As i said it gives me a headache :) Ah well, at least i can have my idea back now :::)))
Also: what about time, as i at least see it, as being a direct effect of spacetime existing. It should be affected by the 'expanding' too, shouldn't it?
But it have at the same time given me a headache as if it is so how can we really prove this expanding universe as we too are expanding, which to my eyes implicate that every thing's relative size stays the same. I mean redshift is the light being drawn out because of the objects sending them out are moving from us right? And that, in this case, shouldn't have anything to do with our universe expanding from every point in every direction, do you see how i think? (Who said - Badly :)
On the other hand if you see it as one particle becoming two four eight (in every 'point' of our spacetime) etc etc, then redshift works as an 'inclination' of proof i think, as the 'distance' for a wave constantly are expanding, but on the otherelyfifth hand, so are the wave (expanding, that is :) On the third hand it still means a relatively unchanging universe as we all expands at the same rate. As i said it gives me a headache :) Ah well, at least i can have my idea back now :::)))
Also: what about time, as i at least see it, as being a direct effect of spacetime existing. It should be affected by the 'expanding' too, shouldn't it?
yor_on, the 'expansion' we have detected, is not of space, but of matter (galaxies) moving outwards (outwards from us) in all directions.
It is a misconception which people have, when it's said that "The universe (is expanding)", because it makes people think that the entire universe, space and matter, is expanding, when there is no evidence for spatial expansion whatsoever, but merely material movement (outwards) in all directions.
Of course, some took this evidence of material expansion, and then slapped on some relativity, and claimed that space is expanding, without providing any experimental verification of spatial expansion, or method to detect spatial (non-material) expansion.
It's akin to Zephir saying "The aether is expanding, but we can't see the aether, or even prove that it exists". And the question you should ask in reply to that, would be: "So how do you know the aether is expanding?"
It is a misconception which people have, when it's said that "The universe (is expanding)", because it makes people think that the entire universe, space and matter, is expanding, when there is no evidence for spatial expansion whatsoever, but merely material movement (outwards) in all directions.
Of course, some took this evidence of material expansion, and then slapped on some relativity, and claimed that space is expanding, without providing any experimental verification of spatial expansion, or method to detect spatial (non-material) expansion.
It's akin to Zephir saying "The aether is expanding, but we can't see the aether, or even prove that it exists". And the question you should ask in reply to that, would be: "So how do you know the aether is expanding?"
Bryn Richards :) You are quite right in pointing out that even if we believe us knowing that everything containing restmass moves away from each other and thereby expands we can't say for sure (by observation) that spacetime in itself expand.
But if we are to accept the theory of 'mass' constantly being produced inside our spacetime then the most logical thing to expect would be that spacetime contracts and in the end forms a 'black hole' or some similar singularity as with increased concentration of restmass spacetime bends.
On the other hand the big bang did a lot of very strange things including expanding faster than 'C' . Now if motion (acceleration) in spacetime are locked to the concept of mass, does that include the Big Bang, what proof have we that the 'membrane' of spacetime doesn't still travel faster than 'C'.
We can only see so far out in spacetime and we ,as far as i know, don't have anything more than hypothesizes describing that motion. If we now put together those two concepts we will either find us self very alone, and nothing will 'matter' as far as we can see (as matter creation takes more 'time' than the expansion). Or we will find us at a very crowded place sooner or later where all matter(s :).
Speaking for myself though i believe in an expanding universe and? Perhaps this matter creation could be explained as some kind of entropic reaction (Nature abhors emptiness, if i got it right :) But you are still correct in pointing out the limits of our knowledge (mine, and hopefully, others too. Ah well, ignorance is such a two edged thing :)
another thing that confuses me, why couldn't 'spacetime' in itself be created in those 'points'. It seems more logical to expect the creation of something 'whole' than singular forces (restmass) being created. And if it is so then the expansion are two fold if one as me believe there to be one, and one fold(?) if one like you decide that there are no direct proof of it.
on the forty fifth tentacle I'm naturally confused any way ::))
But if we are to accept the theory of 'mass' constantly being produced inside our spacetime then the most logical thing to expect would be that spacetime contracts and in the end forms a 'black hole' or some similar singularity as with increased concentration of restmass spacetime bends.
On the other hand the big bang did a lot of very strange things including expanding faster than 'C' . Now if motion (acceleration) in spacetime are locked to the concept of mass, does that include the Big Bang, what proof have we that the 'membrane' of spacetime doesn't still travel faster than 'C'.
We can only see so far out in spacetime and we ,as far as i know, don't have anything more than hypothesizes describing that motion. If we now put together those two concepts we will either find us self very alone, and nothing will 'matter' as far as we can see (as matter creation takes more 'time' than the expansion). Or we will find us at a very crowded place sooner or later where all matter(s :).
Speaking for myself though i believe in an expanding universe and? Perhaps this matter creation could be explained as some kind of entropic reaction (Nature abhors emptiness, if i got it right :) But you are still correct in pointing out the limits of our knowledge (mine, and hopefully, others too. Ah well, ignorance is such a two edged thing :)
another thing that confuses me, why couldn't 'spacetime' in itself be created in those 'points'. It seems more logical to expect the creation of something 'whole' than singular forces (restmass) being created. And if it is so then the expansion are two fold if one as me believe there to be one, and one fold(?) if one like you decide that there are no direct proof of it.
on the forty fifth tentacle I'm naturally confused any way ::))
Thank you all for your contributions.
In answer to Bryn Richardson in regards to “What physical process is responsible for expansion” can be half answered by the mysterious dark energy to which we know make up over 70% of the universe. I say half answered because know one really knows what Dark Energy really is, yet we know it exists.
It is reasonable to describe the physical process of expansion a bit like placing a sealed balloon filled with a small amount of air inside a vacuum. We can imagine the balloon expanding and when we think of the rubber fabric stretching we can understand the physical process of 4 dimensional space stretching. The amount of balloon remains the same, yet the volume increases dramatically.
Expansion theory suggests that the force of expansion is credit to the process of “Something filling Nothing” the force is NOT within the domain of the universe
In answer to Bryn Richardson in regards to “What physical process is responsible for expansion” can be half answered by the mysterious dark energy to which we know make up over 70% of the universe. I say half answered because know one really knows what Dark Energy really is, yet we know it exists.
It is reasonable to describe the physical process of expansion a bit like placing a sealed balloon filled with a small amount of air inside a vacuum. We can imagine the balloon expanding and when we think of the rubber fabric stretching we can understand the physical process of 4 dimensional space stretching. The amount of balloon remains the same, yet the volume increases dramatically.
Expansion theory suggests that the force of expansion is credit to the process of “Something filling Nothing” the force is NOT within the domain of the universe
QUOTE (NEVERDRY+Aug 11 2007, 08:30 AM)
In answer to Bryn Richardson in regards to “What physical process is responsible for expansion” can be half answered by the mysterious dark energy to which we know make up over 70% of the universe. I say half answered because know one really knows what Dark Energy really is, yet we know it exists.
I'm not so sure about the whole 'dark energy' thing, but I don't really have a problem with there being dark matter, because I posit that the dark matter is black hole ejecta, which happens to be more fundamental than photons, and we can therefore not detect it, except by it's gravity, when there's enough of it in space.
But following on from your answer, I asked you what physical process was responsible for expansion, you answered dark energy, and so now I shall ask you by what physical process this dark energy is able to expand space - How does it do it?
and btw, if I may interject my own theory for expansion - I argue that the universe was created with a fixed amount of energy. That since all forms of energy are fundamentally kinetic. A fixed amount of kinetic energy was present at the moment of creation, along with a fixed amount of matter. Gravity was simply unable to hold back all of this matter, because 1. It was made of fundamental particles, which black holes simply won't be able to hold, 2. The matter was given kinetic energy, and as a consequence, moved outwards in all directions.
The latter, the total kinetic energy of the universe, is what started the expansion of matter. If there was no kinetic energy, then nothing would have moved, and therefore nothing would have moved/expanded.
That's essentially all there was at the moment of the big bang - Fundamental particles (All the matter in the universe), and kinetic energy.
I'm not so sure about the whole 'dark energy' thing, but I don't really have a problem with there being dark matter, because I posit that the dark matter is black hole ejecta, which happens to be more fundamental than photons, and we can therefore not detect it, except by it's gravity, when there's enough of it in space.
But following on from your answer, I asked you what physical process was responsible for expansion, you answered dark energy, and so now I shall ask you by what physical process this dark energy is able to expand space - How does it do it?
and btw, if I may interject my own theory for expansion - I argue that the universe was created with a fixed amount of energy. That since all forms of energy are fundamentally kinetic. A fixed amount of kinetic energy was present at the moment of creation, along with a fixed amount of matter. Gravity was simply unable to hold back all of this matter, because 1. It was made of fundamental particles, which black holes simply won't be able to hold, 2. The matter was given kinetic energy, and as a consequence, moved outwards in all directions.
The latter, the total kinetic energy of the universe, is what started the expansion of matter. If there was no kinetic energy, then nothing would have moved, and therefore nothing would have moved/expanded.
That's essentially all there was at the moment of the big bang - Fundamental particles (All the matter in the universe), and kinetic energy.
QUOTE (Grumpy+Aug 10 2007, 06:08 PM)
NEVERDRY
I would submit that, as the universe "sees" it, time is only a half dimension(in a ten or eleven dimensional whole), with the other half "rolled" up and only accessible in the point singularity of a black hole. This other half dimension would connect that point singularity to the Big Bang, such that all the energy sucked into a black hole reappears at the BB. Since time stops under the conditions in a black hole, everything that has ever fallen in has not yet reached the singularity, and will not for zillions of years to come(if ever, as we see it). Thus it is possible to travel backwards in time, but the only destination is the BB, and paradox is avoided.
Your thoughts???
Grumpy
It always becomes very difficult to contemplate dimensions once we get passed the first 3. Expansion theory provides a unique perspective on the inclusion of TIME as a very real dimension.
The properties that are unique to the first 3 dimensions are easy to comprehend since we are able to freely move in all 3 directions. A popular argument against the inclusion of TIME as a 4th dimension is that we can not move backwards in TIME therefore time does NOT have the qualifying properties of a real dimension.
Expansion theory offers an alternative perspective. If the universe is expanding we too are expanding with it, therefore when we move freely through 3 dimensions we are actually just speeding up or slowing down within the domain of expansion. TIME also displays the properties with the TIME dilation phenomena and GR & SR. TIME can also be geometrically applied as a curve, which completes a 3 dimensional cube into a 4 dimensional sphere. If the curved dimension of TIME is not a real dimension then gravity would accumulate matter into cubes and not spheres.
Another point that expansion theory suggests is the very structure of dimensions is only credited to expansion… if there was no expansion there would be NO dimensions. GR & SR also suggests this, that when we travel close to the speed of light TIME slows down. With expansion theory we can elaborate on this. When we travel AT the speed of light TIME completely stops, the same way black holes have an escape velocity of the S.O.L we are presented with an event horizon/singularity. When we increase our velocity we are in effect resisting expansion, therefore TIME, HEIGHT WIDTH & LENGTH also slows down back to nothing.
Happy pondering…
I would submit that, as the universe "sees" it, time is only a half dimension(in a ten or eleven dimensional whole), with the other half "rolled" up and only accessible in the point singularity of a black hole. This other half dimension would connect that point singularity to the Big Bang, such that all the energy sucked into a black hole reappears at the BB. Since time stops under the conditions in a black hole, everything that has ever fallen in has not yet reached the singularity, and will not for zillions of years to come(if ever, as we see it). Thus it is possible to travel backwards in time, but the only destination is the BB, and paradox is avoided.
Your thoughts???
Grumpy
It always becomes very difficult to contemplate dimensions once we get passed the first 3. Expansion theory provides a unique perspective on the inclusion of TIME as a very real dimension.
The properties that are unique to the first 3 dimensions are easy to comprehend since we are able to freely move in all 3 directions. A popular argument against the inclusion of TIME as a 4th dimension is that we can not move backwards in TIME therefore time does NOT have the qualifying properties of a real dimension.
Expansion theory offers an alternative perspective. If the universe is expanding we too are expanding with it, therefore when we move freely through 3 dimensions we are actually just speeding up or slowing down within the domain of expansion. TIME also displays the properties with the TIME dilation phenomena and GR & SR. TIME can also be geometrically applied as a curve, which completes a 3 dimensional cube into a 4 dimensional sphere. If the curved dimension of TIME is not a real dimension then gravity would accumulate matter into cubes and not spheres.
Another point that expansion theory suggests is the very structure of dimensions is only credited to expansion… if there was no expansion there would be NO dimensions. GR & SR also suggests this, that when we travel close to the speed of light TIME slows down. With expansion theory we can elaborate on this. When we travel AT the speed of light TIME completely stops, the same way black holes have an escape velocity of the S.O.L we are presented with an event horizon/singularity. When we increase our velocity we are in effect resisting expansion, therefore TIME, HEIGHT WIDTH & LENGTH also slows down back to nothing.
Happy pondering…
In answer to Bryn Richardson about the physical process of an expanding universe.
Expansion theory suggests that expansion is related to a force not within our domain, similar to a balloon placed inside a vacuum, if there is a compressed amount of gas within the balloon the effect of a vacuum is responsible for the expansion.
It is the negative force beyond the confinds of our universe that pulls the universe and expands the positive force within it... In a simply sense we can say the force of expansion is "something filling nothing" positive force IE the universe filling the void of negative force IE the NOTHING/SINGULARITY...
I do however give up on attempting to explain how something was born out of nothing (the big bang) if i did i should expect the Nobel peace prise.
Expansion theory suggests that expansion is related to a force not within our domain, similar to a balloon placed inside a vacuum, if there is a compressed amount of gas within the balloon the effect of a vacuum is responsible for the expansion.
It is the negative force beyond the confinds of our universe that pulls the universe and expands the positive force within it... In a simply sense we can say the force of expansion is "something filling nothing" positive force IE the universe filling the void of negative force IE the NOTHING/SINGULARITY...
I do however give up on attempting to explain how something was born out of nothing (the big bang) if i did i should expect the Nobel peace prise.
Neverdry :) " . If the curved dimension of TIME is not a real dimension then gravity would accumulate matter into cubes and not spheres. " that one i kind of believe :) It would be a rather quaint universe though ::))
and the argument of time not being a dimension on its own when comparing it to the other three also made kind of sense, but not really:) When you take apart those three (four in fact, as i see it:) dimensions and try to treat them as an invisible line (one dimensional) , which they in fact will be in our spacetime then i would strongly suggest that as there will be nothing existing 'here'at all to prove it. There will also never be possible to introduce a movement back or forth. Even when introducing time (as then being 'non dimensional') you will not succeed in proving that theory, and having all the time in the world won''t help you :)
But " Another point that expansion theory suggests is the very structure of dimensions is only credited to expansion… if there was no expansion there would be NO dimensions. GR & SR also suggests this, that when we travel close to the speed of light TIME slows down. With expansion theory we can elaborate on this. When we travel AT the speed of light TIME completely stops, the same way black holes have an escape velocity of the S.O.L we are presented with an event horizon/singularity. When we increase our velocity we are in effect resisting expansion, therefore TIME, HEIGHT WIDTH & LENGTH also slows down back to nothing."
This statement confuses me somewhat, do you see it as all acceleration no matter where directed in spacetime are the same? This 'expansion' seems to move from any chosen point in a similar manner, and the end result being all points moving away from each other simultaneously in all directions, but when we introduce acceleration we are directing it over a ever expanding spacetime.
If we treat it as three dimensional matrix filled with 'points' then spacetime will expand from them all, our accelerating spaceship included. I'm not sure how you think here? If one only treat it as a 'similarity' i think i can understand it, but if one accepts all 'points' forever being created at every point acceleration doesn't seem to matter. There will still be 'points' created even though as you come closer and closer to 'c' time will 'stop' for you and possibly that would mean that where you are (your frame of reference) no 'points' should be able to be created as observed from you
But that would be highly debatable i think, as 'you' in your frame still have the 'same' amount of time to play with as you had when not accelerating. If one want to say that time is something different from those dimensions we normally play with i would totally agree ::))
In the frame of the observer of 'you' accelerating 'you' would seem to move slowly in time and needing an awful long 'time' to reach your goal, even though 'you' yourself would believe it to be just 'moments' :) right. And from that observers side the 'points' creating 'you' would still accumulate, as I believe it would even from 'your' 'point(s)' of reference (pun intended :)
The real question here being, would they accumulate at the same rate or not? If there would be a discrepancy between the amount (pretending here) observed by the observer and the amount observed by you? How would one explain it?? By treating it as different 'world lines' ??? Or.
Sh**. My headache is back :::)))
and the argument of time not being a dimension on its own when comparing it to the other three also made kind of sense, but not really:) When you take apart those three (four in fact, as i see it:) dimensions and try to treat them as an invisible line (one dimensional) , which they in fact will be in our spacetime then i would strongly suggest that as there will be nothing existing 'here'at all to prove it. There will also never be possible to introduce a movement back or forth. Even when introducing time (as then being 'non dimensional') you will not succeed in proving that theory, and having all the time in the world won''t help you :)
But " Another point that expansion theory suggests is the very structure of dimensions is only credited to expansion… if there was no expansion there would be NO dimensions. GR & SR also suggests this, that when we travel close to the speed of light TIME slows down. With expansion theory we can elaborate on this. When we travel AT the speed of light TIME completely stops, the same way black holes have an escape velocity of the S.O.L we are presented with an event horizon/singularity. When we increase our velocity we are in effect resisting expansion, therefore TIME, HEIGHT WIDTH & LENGTH also slows down back to nothing."
This statement confuses me somewhat, do you see it as all acceleration no matter where directed in spacetime are the same? This 'expansion' seems to move from any chosen point in a similar manner, and the end result being all points moving away from each other simultaneously in all directions, but when we introduce acceleration we are directing it over a ever expanding spacetime.
If we treat it as three dimensional matrix filled with 'points' then spacetime will expand from them all, our accelerating spaceship included. I'm not sure how you think here? If one only treat it as a 'similarity' i think i can understand it, but if one accepts all 'points' forever being created at every point acceleration doesn't seem to matter. There will still be 'points' created even though as you come closer and closer to 'c' time will 'stop' for you and possibly that would mean that where you are (your frame of reference) no 'points' should be able to be created as observed from you
But that would be highly debatable i think, as 'you' in your frame still have the 'same' amount of time to play with as you had when not accelerating. If one want to say that time is something different from those dimensions we normally play with i would totally agree ::))
In the frame of the observer of 'you' accelerating 'you' would seem to move slowly in time and needing an awful long 'time' to reach your goal, even though 'you' yourself would believe it to be just 'moments' :) right. And from that observers side the 'points' creating 'you' would still accumulate, as I believe it would even from 'your' 'point(s)' of reference (pun intended :)
The real question here being, would they accumulate at the same rate or not? If there would be a discrepancy between the amount (pretending here) observed by the observer and the amount observed by you? How would one explain it?? By treating it as different 'world lines' ??? Or.
Sh**. My headache is back :::)))
Thank you all for your contributions…
The use of a rubber sheet is a popular thought model to describe the effect of gravity, however expansion theory puts an extra twist to what’s happening.
The rubber sheet describes the fabric of space/time in a 2D format, with expansion theory we can also think of the rubber sheet as time and we can visualize the speed thought this thought model. In the expansion theory case we can use a spot of glue placed on the rubber sheet to represent gravity.
If we were to now stretch the rubber sheet in all direction we would see the spots of glue resisting the expansion in the same way matter resists expansion.
Expansion is the true fundamental force that powers the universe and the rate of expansion gives us physical laws…
When we ask the time scale of expansion of a dot matrix, expansion theory suggests that the expansion rate is NOT simultaneous but relative to districts of gravitational fields. When we slow down expansion, we slow down 4 dimensional space IE TIME, HEIGHT, LENGTH and WIDTH.
Happy pondering
The use of a rubber sheet is a popular thought model to describe the effect of gravity, however expansion theory puts an extra twist to what’s happening.
The rubber sheet describes the fabric of space/time in a 2D format, with expansion theory we can also think of the rubber sheet as time and we can visualize the speed thought this thought model. In the expansion theory case we can use a spot of glue placed on the rubber sheet to represent gravity.
If we were to now stretch the rubber sheet in all direction we would see the spots of glue resisting the expansion in the same way matter resists expansion.
Expansion is the true fundamental force that powers the universe and the rate of expansion gives us physical laws…
When we ask the time scale of expansion of a dot matrix, expansion theory suggests that the expansion rate is NOT simultaneous but relative to districts of gravitational fields. When we slow down expansion, we slow down 4 dimensional space IE TIME, HEIGHT, LENGTH and WIDTH.
Happy pondering
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.