Is the Universe moving?

Technology, computers, sciences, mysteries and phenomena of all kinds, etc., etc. all here at The Loresraat!!

Moderator: Vraith

User avatar
aTOMiC
Lord
Posts: 24961
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 6:48 am
Location: Tampa, Florida
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 13 times
Contact:

Is the Universe moving?

Post by aTOMiC »

Is the Universe moving?

I ran across this question somewhere on line and thought it was interesting.

I read in more than one location that the question of whether the universe, as a whole, is moving through space is irrelevant since there is no way to detect movement where there is no frame of reference. Which I have to admit makes perfect sense.

Then something occurred to me that seemed interesting to consider.

What if, in the deep vastness of infinite space and far beyond our ability to detect, was another universe on a collision course with our universe? Or perhaps multiple universes, all self expanding but also moving through open space independently.

Of course you'd have to accept that the universe that we know has infinite space beyond the borders of known matter that is expanding outward from the Big Bang point of beginning and isn't a massive dark sphere that is itself expanding only as the outer edges of expanding matter expands and no more. Or some other theoretical limitation.

Since light travels so slowly relative to the massive distances involved its also possible that the universes could have already begun to collide into each other. It could have started last Tuesday and we would never learn about it in a hundred lifetimes.

Just something fun to kick around.

:-)
"If you can't tell the difference, what difference does it make?"
Image

"There is tic and toc in atomic" - Neil Peart
User avatar
Hashi Lebwohl
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19576
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm

Post by Hashi Lebwohl »

Your first response of "it is irrelevant" is as close to the truth as we can get. We are inside the universe so if it is moving (relative to something else) we can never detect it.

The fact that every point in the universe seems to be moving away from every other point could be indirect evidence that two membranes (or whatever you want to call them) are still in the process of "colliding" and their increasing volume of collision is creating more space in which our universe resides.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
User avatar
Vraith
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 10623
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 8:03 pm
Location: everywhere, all the time
Been thanked: 3 times

Post by Vraith »

Hashi Lebwohl wrote:Your first response of "it is irrelevant" is as close to the truth as we can get. We are inside the universe so if it is moving (relative to something else) we can never detect it.

The fact that every point in the universe seems to be moving away from every other point could be indirect evidence that two membranes (or whatever you want to call them) are still in the process of "colliding" and their increasing volume of collision is creating more space in which our universe resides.
See...I'm not so sure...and here's why:
Many things are piling up that peeps, even really smart cutting-edge peeps, are saying "could be true, can't prove/measure/detect it."
But others...a small group so far...are starting to say..."no, wait...maybe we CAN detect it."
And here is a rule for humans so far: if we can detect/measure it, we figure out a way to DO things with it.
So, if we're moving only relative to something "outside" and gazillions of light-years away, [like two near infinite basketballs bouncing off each other]...that might not mean much.
But if all the space, everywhere, is expanding cuz it is colliding right here and now...well, that's something we can do something with.
I don't know WHAT...but something.
Much like peeps are starting to think we might be able to do real and useful things with virtual particles. [or at least with the underlying physical laws/forces/math that cause/necessitate virtual particles.]
[spoiler]Sig-man, Libtard, Stupid piece of shit. change your text color to brown. Mr. Reliable, bullshit-slinging liarFucker-user.[/spoiler]
the difference between evidence and sources: whether they come from the horse's mouth or a horse's ass.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
the hyperbole is a beauty...for we are then allowed to say a little more than the truth...and language is more efficient when it goes beyond reality than when it stops short of it.
User avatar
sgt.null
Jack of Odd Trades, Master of Fun
Posts: 48329
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:53 am
Location: Brazoria, Texas
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Post by sgt.null »

well if the universe is moving I hope it leaves a forwarding address...
Lenin, Marx
Marx, Lennon
Good Dog...
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 62038
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 32 times
Contact:

Post by Avatar »

Vraith wrote:

But others...a small group so far...are starting to say..."no, wait...maybe we CAN detect it."
All science grows out of the attempt to measure things.

--A
User avatar
Vraith
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 10623
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 8:03 pm
Location: everywhere, all the time
Been thanked: 3 times

Post by Vraith »

Avatar wrote:
Vraith wrote:

But others...a small group so far...are starting to say..."no, wait...maybe we CAN detect it."
All science grows out of the attempt to measure things.

--A
heh...that's what I said. ;)

On this thing, though, it matters cuz for quite a long time now most of the very best minds have been saying the things we need to see are literally impossible for us to measure.
But now some of those great brains [instead of just a few quacks] are saying maybe it is possible.
It is almost impossible to overstate the significance of the ability to measure things related to strings, supersymmetry, 'branes and such, and the physical, material, engineering/build-able stuff that could come out of it.
[spoiler]Sig-man, Libtard, Stupid piece of shit. change your text color to brown. Mr. Reliable, bullshit-slinging liarFucker-user.[/spoiler]
the difference between evidence and sources: whether they come from the horse's mouth or a horse's ass.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
the hyperbole is a beauty...for we are then allowed to say a little more than the truth...and language is more efficient when it goes beyond reality than when it stops short of it.
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Post by wayfriend »

The "universe" includes all of space - the points in three dimensions in which things exist.

There is no space outside of the universe. Therefore, I don't think the universe can move ... there is no space for it to move into or leave behind.

The space in our universe would not be coextant with space in another universe. Therefore, there cannot be another universe "over there" that we could detect -- at least, not in the manner of observing something that is very far away.

In fact, if any phenomena could go from one universe to another, such that we could detect another universe -- then they wouldn't be universes.
.
User avatar
Vraith
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 10623
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 8:03 pm
Location: everywhere, all the time
Been thanked: 3 times

Post by Vraith »

wayfriend wrote:The "universe" includes all of space - the points in three dimensions in which things exist.

There is no space outside of the universe. Therefore, I don't think the universe can move ... there is no space for it to move into or leave behind.

The space in our universe would not be coextant with space in another universe. Therefore, there cannot be another universe "over there" that we could detect -- at least, not in the manner of observing something that is very far away.

In fact, if any phenomena could go from one universe to another, such that we could detect another universe -- then they wouldn't be universes.
If it can't move, how can it expand? [nothing to expand into]
I know this leads to ineffableness...yet it remains:
If it expands, some-no-thing-space is expanded into. [and if it reverses that same...whatever it is...crushes us...or at least fills in the hole/whole left behind.]
"Where" ever that border is it must be detectable.
It doesn't have to be far away [though it might, depending on how things work out] It might very well be in/among/beside everything all the time.
Just because a thing is a Uni- by nature, does NOT mean something else cannot figure out how to see/touch/cross into it.
[spoiler]Sig-man, Libtard, Stupid piece of shit. change your text color to brown. Mr. Reliable, bullshit-slinging liarFucker-user.[/spoiler]
the difference between evidence and sources: whether they come from the horse's mouth or a horse's ass.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
the hyperbole is a beauty...for we are then allowed to say a little more than the truth...and language is more efficient when it goes beyond reality than when it stops short of it.
User avatar
Hashi Lebwohl
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19576
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm

Post by Hashi Lebwohl »

It is expanding without moving because two or more membranes are continuing to intersect and their intersection is creating more space/volume as we recognize that concept.

Some estimates place the "border" of the universe at 40 billion light-years away; whether that number is accurate or not is irrelevant. The space in between here and there is stretching so this border is moving away from us at faster than the speed of light, meaning that even if that border had a healthy glow we will never see it because the photons it emits are also moving away from us.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
Cozarkian
Ramen
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 7:00 pm

Post by Cozarkian »

wayfriend wrote:The "universe" includes all of space - the points in three dimensions in which things exist.
Well, what if we envision a fourth dimension of space? If we were 2-D dots on a plane, the plane could move up and down the z-axis without us necessarily being aware of the third dimension of space. You could also have a second plane, which if it moved too far in one direction could crash into our plane of existence.

Is there any reason this same train of thought can't apply if we are 3-D objects in a 4-D world but are currently unable to detect the fourth dimension of space?
User avatar
Vraith
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 10623
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 8:03 pm
Location: everywhere, all the time
Been thanked: 3 times

Post by Vraith »

Hashi Lebwohl wrote:It is expanding without moving because two or more membranes are continuing to intersect and their intersection is creating more space/volume as we recognize that concept.

Some estimates place the "border" of the universe at 40 billion light-years away; whether that number is accurate or not is irrelevant. The space in between here and there is stretching so this border is moving away from us at faster than the speed of light, meaning that even if that border had a healthy glow we will never see it because the photons it emits are also moving away from us.
EXCEPT: there are few reasons, and even fewer observations to show that there is a "border" "out there" at some given distance related to various expansion rates [depending on flip-flops and early super-expansion, and current increasing rate, as opposed to all the previous assumed steady/slowing rates].

What it does tend to show is the 'brane "borders" increasing space [itself, which seems to be a thing with properties, not an emptiness without properties] are happening everywhere all the time.
Local, curved/held spaces seem roughly "contained"...yet, in the fullness of time, according to a fair number of brane-type theories, IIRC, the stretching of "space" will rip matter apart...from the INSIDE OUT.
AND...not just matter, which everyone worries about, will also, in some unfathomable [for me] way, rip apart energy. Including light. Which I mention, because I want people to try to imagine it...what does "yellow" look like, what is it, NOT when it is in shrinking space [which makes it blue-er] nor expanding space [red-er], but when ripped in half?
IF, as seems in most models to be so, space is TRYING to expand everywhere, but local forces are opposing it...that should be detectable, somehow.
If EVERYTHING is the "center," everything is ALSO the border.
The expansion is not happening "out there" and not moving faster the further "out there" it is. It is happening "right here," and WE are moving faster the further out of reach we get from "there."


I can't give a visual any better than any others anyone has given.
The visuals just don't work. The balloon is better than most...but, in fact leads to false understanding...just like the model of the atom drawn like a tiny solar system leads to a bunch of false conclusions even if better than what came before.
[spoiler]Sig-man, Libtard, Stupid piece of shit. change your text color to brown. Mr. Reliable, bullshit-slinging liarFucker-user.[/spoiler]
the difference between evidence and sources: whether they come from the horse's mouth or a horse's ass.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
the hyperbole is a beauty...for we are then allowed to say a little more than the truth...and language is more efficient when it goes beyond reality than when it stops short of it.
User avatar
Hashi Lebwohl
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19576
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm

Post by Hashi Lebwohl »

The "balloon" metaphor is simply a way for people, usually students in junior high school, to understand an expanding universe. It is a good start but certainly doesn't describe reality.

If space itself is stretching everywhere, which seems to be the case, then couple that with the fact that both energy and matter are simply locally-compressed spacetime then yes--at some point it is conceivable that matter and energy could be stretched apart from "the inside". The idea of "compressed spacetime" is really weird but it is accurate--not only are you made of the same stuff as the coffee cup on your desk, but both you and the coffee cup are made of the same stuff as the space in between the two of you.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 62038
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 32 times
Contact:

Post by Avatar »

Cozarkian wrote:Is there any reason this same train of thought can't apply if we are 3-D objects in a 4-D world but are currently unable to detect the fourth dimension of space?
Isn't time the 4th dimension?

Anyway, if we're M-Theorying, they're up to 11 dimensions, although they can't be detected, so I suppose we could well be moving through them without knowing it.

--A
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Post by wayfriend »

Cozarkian wrote:
wayfriend wrote:The "universe" includes all of space - the points in three dimensions in which things exist.
Well, what if we envision a fourth dimension of space? If we were 2-D dots on a plane, the plane could move up and down the z-axis without us necessarily being aware of the third dimension of space. You could also have a second plane, which if it moved too far in one direction could crash into our plane of existence.

Is there any reason this same train of thought can't apply if we are 3-D objects in a 4-D world but are currently unable to detect the fourth dimension of space?
You know, as soon as I said "three dimensions" I knew that that would be a contended point. But I wanted to stick to my point.

Anyway ... however many dimensions you want to consider, 3 or 4 or 11, they are all part of the universe, not something that the universe sits on. The big bang created Time as well as Space, and it created all dimensions as well.

There's nothing outside the universe. As has been recently discussed, we humans do a poor job of imagining nothing. Notions that the universe might be moving, or intersect with another universe, arise I feel out of this problem.

But if you stick to logic and math, you must see that there is nothing outside of the universe, not even dimensions - because by definition anything that you posit being 'out there' is by definition 'something' and therefore by definition is 'part of the universe' and therefore by definition is 'in the universe' ... a contradiction. Any idea that leads to contradiction must be wrong.

If the universe is expanding, then internally we have more and more space. This space isn't coming from outside. It's just becoming more. There is no such thing as conservation of space or conservation of extent, so this is not as illogical as it sounds.

Sometimes I wonder if gravity is really space being sucked up by mass, like a vacuum hose sucking up a silk cloth. This is another thing that's quite possible because we're dealing with space, not mass, so there's nothing impossible about shrinking it down to nothing, just as there's nothing impossible about it expanding.
.
User avatar
Vraith
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 10623
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 8:03 pm
Location: everywhere, all the time
Been thanked: 3 times

Post by Vraith »

wayfriend wrote:
But if you stick to logic and math, you must see that there is nothing outside of the universe, not even dimensions - because by definition anything that you posit being 'out there' is by definition 'something' and therefore by definition is 'part of the universe' and therefore by definition is 'in the universe' ... a contradiction. Any idea that leads to contradiction must be wrong.
But logic and math can be wrong. And as far as we know, are ALWAYS incomplete.

On the contradictions, of course contradictions can be right.
Some geometry has sum of angles of triangle exactly 180, another less than or equal to 180, another greater than or equal to 180.
They are all true depending on what one is describing/using them for...and they contradict. It isn't possible to completely reconcile/integrate them all.
And the whole idea of Unified theories is to cover everything with one set of rules...yet it may well be that such a set of rules doesn't exist. Not in the sense of "we just can't discover/comprehend/prove it." In the literal sense of does not/can not exist at all. That we will always need more than one discrete system, and each system will contradict others. AND remain forever incomplete.
[spoiler]Sig-man, Libtard, Stupid piece of shit. change your text color to brown. Mr. Reliable, bullshit-slinging liarFucker-user.[/spoiler]
the difference between evidence and sources: whether they come from the horse's mouth or a horse's ass.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
the hyperbole is a beauty...for we are then allowed to say a little more than the truth...and language is more efficient when it goes beyond reality than when it stops short of it.
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Post by wayfriend »

Vraith wrote:But logic and math can be wrong. And as far as we know, are ALWAYS incomplete.
Granted. I am sure Gödel's theory applies here somewhere.
.
User avatar
aTOMiC
Lord
Posts: 24961
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 6:48 am
Location: Tampa, Florida
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 13 times
Contact:

Post by aTOMiC »

Okay. So the universe isn't moving within a limitless expanse like a giant ship afloat on the open ocean.
But who's to say the the universe isn't spinning around like a hurricane?
I suppose you'd be left with the same problem in that you have no point of reference to measure the movement.
Makes me dizzy just thinking about it.
"If you can't tell the difference, what difference does it make?"
Image

"There is tic and toc in atomic" - Neil Peart
User avatar
Vraith
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 10623
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 8:03 pm
Location: everywhere, all the time
Been thanked: 3 times

Post by Vraith »

aTOMiC wrote: Makes me dizzy just thinking about it.
It might be worse than you think...
From here, it looks "your head a splode!"
[spoiler]Sig-man, Libtard, Stupid piece of shit. change your text color to brown. Mr. Reliable, bullshit-slinging liarFucker-user.[/spoiler]
the difference between evidence and sources: whether they come from the horse's mouth or a horse's ass.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
the hyperbole is a beauty...for we are then allowed to say a little more than the truth...and language is more efficient when it goes beyond reality than when it stops short of it.
Cozarkian
Ramen
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 7:00 pm

Post by Cozarkian »

Avatar wrote:
Cozarkian wrote:Is there any reason this same train of thought can't apply if we are 3-D objects in a 4-D world but are currently unable to detect the fourth dimension of space?
Isn't time the 4th dimension?
I saw you coming a mile away, that's why I said a fourth dimension of space.
Avatar wrote: Anyway, if we're M-Theorying, they're up to 11 dimensions, although they can't be detected, so I suppose we could well be moving through them without knowing it.

--A
You basically repeated everything I know about M-theory in that very short paragraph. But yeah, that's the point. Couldn't the entire 3-D space/time continuum object we refer to as the universe be moving through other universes that we cannot or have not been able to detect. And couldn't there be another 3-D space/time object moving through those same dimensions that could potentially collide with ours?
Cozarkian
Ramen
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 7:00 pm

Post by Cozarkian »

wayfriend wrote: Anyway ... however many dimensions you want to consider, 3 or 4 or 11, they are all part of the universe, not something that the universe sits on. The big bang created Time as well as Space, and it created all dimensions as well.
...

not even dimensions - because by definition anything that you posit being 'out there' is by definition 'something' and therefore by definition is 'part of the universe' and therefore by definition is 'in the universe' ... a contradiction. Any idea that leads to contradiction must be wrong.
Nah, that's just begging the question. The original post used terms like "multiple universes" and "the universe that we know." That implies a definition that the universe is the conceptual 3-D space/time object comprised of galaxies. Is that object moving and could there be other such objects? You can't answer those questions by examining them under the definition of "everything that exists in any dimension" when that wasn't the definition used in the original premise.

If you want to argue the assumed definition of universe is inaccurate, go ahead, but we can just invent another word that has the original definition and ask the question again. So, is it possible that the 3-D space/time object is moving (including movement through other dimensions) and could there be other similar objects in other dimensions that could potentially crash into ours?
Post Reply

Return to “The Loresraat”