Expanding Universe or, Shrinking matter?

[infamous]

I would like some help with this question, is the universe expanding or, is matter shrinking? This may sound like an impossible view of reality but, if one imagines for example that our universe is an enormous black hole, could tidal forces cause the illusion of expansion. And maybe this is not the only possible cause for a compression of matter, if in fact this event is really going on here. This may be a queer way of looking at things and I have to tell you, it sounds just as impossible to me also. But, how do we know, can anyone out there give me a good explaination about why this would be an impossible interpertation of actual events. This question just poped into my head, and I couldn't come up with and answer myself. What puzzles me is that, because our yardstick would also be shrinking and space between particles expanding, how could we distinguish between these two possible alternatives. I'm not trying to create a new theory here, I am just unable to to find a good answer to this question on my own. Help!

[pgrmdave]

If every effect would be the same, does it matter?

[AsaTaiyo]

My personal view on the universe is that it is curved. There is an angle to the universe that causes it to loop around. This means that we may be looking at ourselves but not know it. Causing us to believe that we are discovering new space. This is kind of a crack head view but I hope it kinda helps maybe.

[Aki]

In the last recent years, cosmologists have proven that the universe is flat. The curvature of space depends in the total energy in the universe.

 

The universe's expansion is actually ACCELERATING! And it is dark energy that causes this acceleration.

[jazzn85]

When you say matter shrinking, do you mean galaxies and planets just dimishing in size while remaining in their respective positions? If matter does remain in it's respective position, but simply compresses, the distance might seem longer by relation to our size, but if in effect, still the same. for this illusion to hold water, wouldn't some constants, like speed of light have to diminish proportionally? For example, if I presently sit 10 feet away from the wall opposite me, and bounce a sound wave off to calculate distance, I could use the speed of sound in roow temp air to determine I was 10 feet from the wall. If everything horribly shrank, to the point that in present terms, I'm 1 foot away, but still felt 10 feet in my shrunken stake, the speed of sound would have to slow down to still tell me I was 10 feet away. This would mean waves (or energy) would have to significantly alter, and alter in proportion to matter. This seems unlikely. Interesting question though

[GAHD]

Hmm, if matter was shrinking, wouldn't Terra's relative position to Sol proportionatly increse?

[infamous]

Good point GAHD, however relative to the size of our universe, it might be such a small value as to be indistinguishable.

[lindagarrette]

Good point GAHD, however relative to the size of our universe, it might be such a small value as to be indistinguishable.

If it's accellerating, the relative distance would be greater, so same difference.

[maddog]

I would like some help with this question, is the universe expanding or, is matter shrinking? This may sound like an impossible view of reality but, if one imagines for example that our universe is an enormous black hole, could tidal forces cause the illusion of expansion. And maybe this is not the only possible cause for a compression of matter, if in fact this event is really going on here. This may be a queer way of looking at things and I have to tell you, it sounds just as impossible to me also. But, how do we know, can anyone out there give me a good explaination about why this would be an impossible interpertation of actual events. This question just poped into my head, and I couldn't come up with and answer myself. What puzzles me is that, because our yardstick would also be shrinking and space between particles expanding, how could we distinguish between these two possible alternatives. I'm not trying to create a new theory here, I am just unable to to find a good answer to this question on my own. Help!

 

Aki, nailed it with the explanation of the expanding universe Acelerating. I am not sure what

you mean by "shrinking matter" ??? At what scale would you like to apply shrinking

behavoir ? {Atom, quarks, molecular bonds, stars, ?} The expansion happening appears

to be the expansion of space itself so does not directly need to adhere to SR speed limit.

 

Maddog

[lindagarrette]

Laboratory experiments in high energy physics have proven expansion going back to three seconds after the BB.

[BlameTheEx]

Linda

 

Tut tut. Where is the link for that statement?

 

Proof is a slippery concept. I am sure there is evidence, but there is no such thing as absolute proof, only varying degrees of proof. So the question is - how clear is the proof in this (or any other) case? The degree of proof is not easily quantifiable. I think you will find that it is a matter of individuals examining the evidence and making up their own minds, or committees debating whether or not to back a conclusion. We here are individuals, not committees so evidence please.

[Bo]

There is a difference between the 2 cases:

 

suppose 2 points A and B are at time=0 at a distance L(0)

(expanding space): at a later time, t, the space between the points has expanded, but also our concept of distance has increased proportionally, so we will measure the same L(t)=L(0). however, if we where able to look in the past (as we can with cosmology) and look at the point in time at t=0, we would measure the old distance, with our new concept of distance. so our measurement L'(0)<L(0), since our concept of distance has increased.

 

 

(shrinking matter): The story is (almost) exactly the same, but now everything (including the concept of distance) decreases, Only the last step now becomes L'(o)>L(0). Or, looking in the past we will see distances greater then we expect. Since this is not the case, we conclude that space is expanding.

 

Laboratory experiments in high energy physics have proven expansion going back to three seconds after the BB.

 

where did you find this? i am almost completely sure that this isn't the case...

 

Bo

[lindagarrette]

Sorry for using the term 'proven'. I should have said 'indicated'.

 

 

 

The weak and electromagnetic fundamental forces seem very different in the present relatively low temperature universe. But when the universe was much hotter so that the equilibrium thermal energy was on the order of 100 GeV, these forces have appeared to be essentially identical - part of the same unified "electroweak" force. It has been inferred from high energy experiments that the unification of the strong, weak, and electromagnetic forces occurred at energies above 1014 GeV. If the ordinary concept of thermal energy applied at such times, it would require a temperature of 1027 K for the average particle energy to be 1014 GeV. Early formulation of the theories estimated that the Higgs boson would have mass energy in excess of 1 TeV, making the energies for discovery almost unattainable on the earth. Now, since the discovery of the top quark, there is tantalizing evidence that the Higgs boson may have energies in the range of a few hundred GeV and therefore within the range of present day accelerators. At Fermilab, data from the D0 detector facility is used with the masses of the W and the T quark to estimate the mass of the Higgs boson. Suggestions that it may have a mass below 200 GeV have made it one of the high priorities for high energy physics. The following link has all the information about evidence for expansion, the timeline, and the required energy levels to achieve the model. hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/forces/unify.html - See also Steven Weinberg in "The First Three Minutes".

[maddog]

(shrinking matter): The story is (almost) exactly the same, but now everything (including the concept of distance) decreases, Only the last step now becomes L'(o)>L(0). Or, looking in the past we will see distances greater then we expect. Since this is not the case, we conclude that space is expanding.

 

Bo,

 

I would've considered Infimous' arguement if time could run backward. I guess in the book

by Paul Davies, About Time he mentions this can actually happen. It just only happens for

such a short time to make any measurement meaningless. So I also didn't buy it.

 

Maddog

[infamous]

Thanks folks for all the input, I also believe in the expanding model, just thought it might be an interesting topic to kick around for a while. I would like however, just for the adventure in it, to pretend for a minute that the universe is an enormous black hole. I understand that this is more than likely not the case, but bear with me on this one. Pretending that our universe is a black hole, and trying to then understand the effects of tidal forces on the matter all around us, how would things look. Because tidal forces would compress matter as we wind our way down into the bottomless pit, as it were, would it appear as though distance between objects was increasing? Just a wild thought, any ideas?

[lindagarrette]

Imagining other possibilities is a good way to understand reality although scientists usually pick simplest solution that fits the model until something contradicts it. Speculation is always part of the process but unless some resonable evidence to support a theory has been discovered, then it's not very worth pursuing.

[maddog]

Thanks folks for all the input, I also believe in the expanding model, just thought it might be an interesting topic to kick around for a while. I would like however, just for the adventure in it, to pretend for a minute that the universe is an enormous black hole. I understand that this is more than likely not the case, but bear with me on this one. Pretending that our universe is a black hole, and trying to then understand the effects of tidal forces on the matter all around us, how would things look. Because tidal forces would compress matter as we wind our way down into the bottomless pit, as it were, would it appear as though distance between objects was increasing? Just a wild thought, any ideas?

 

When I first learned about black holes in high school, I came up with that interpretation.

That would require though that the universe be closed. Both cannot be true... :hihi:

 

Maddog