• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account
L onge C ity       Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


- - - - -

Questions about expanding universe.


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 01 June 2007 - 11:51 AM


Is the term "Expanding Universe" should be read as "Moving Universe"?

I mean, does it mean that the "space itself" is infinite but stars and everything else are moving away and that's why it's called "expansion"?

Or is there something actually expanding and not just moving away?

Also, are there newborn stars? any info on that?

#2 DukeNukem

  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 141
  • Location:Dallas, Texas

Posted 01 June 2007 - 03:24 PM

These are all basic questions that have been answered 1000 times in topical books. Wikipedia is likely also a good source to review.

In short, all objects in the universe are moving relative to each other, and yes their are new stars still appearing.

#3

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 01 June 2007 - 03:29 PM

I looked ALOT in wiki.
Seems claims says no new stars but only middle-aged stars..

Quite confusing..

And dosen't it dis-approved the big-bang?

#4

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 01 June 2007 - 04:23 PM

Another question, wouldn't creation and destruction of stars dis-proves big crunch/big rip/heat|cold death?

#5 bgwowk

  • Guest
  • 1,715 posts
  • 125

Posted 01 June 2007 - 04:40 PM

Space itself is expanding. Galaxies move farther apart from each other as space expands. If you project all this backward in time, there was a time when the whole universe was very small, compressed, and hot. That is the Big Bang.

No new matter is being created. Stars that are being born are being born in galaxies that already exist from left over matter from older stars that exploded. This will eventually stop when the universe runs out of hydrogen to burn in stars.

Thus, the universe had a very hot and bright beginning, and appears headed toward a very cold and dark end.

#6

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 01 June 2007 - 05:18 PM

If space expands and galaxies move away, howcome people forsee collision of 2 galaxies?

#7

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 01 June 2007 - 05:20 PM

And about hydrogen, dosen't it constantly recyle? gas to matirial, matirial to gas?
Can mankind interefere with this?

#8 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 01 June 2007 - 06:39 PM

And about hydrogen, dosen't it constantly recyle? gas to matirial, matirial to gas?


You are confusing chemistry and physics. Hydrogen isn't being *burned* in the star and chemically combined with other elements; it is undergoing nuclear fusion and becoming helium and other elements. These heavier elements undergo further forms of fusion reaction and are not *generally* returning to being hydrogen even when the atomic instability of the isotope involved induces fission easilly.

It is by this process that most of the heavier elements that compose the matter of solar systems was formed and like the old saying goes; "we are all made of star stuff".

#9 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 01 June 2007 - 06:43 PM

If space expands and galaxies move away, howcome people forsee collision of 2 galaxies?


Not everthing is moving away from everything else. Some objects are on collision courses and the massive gravity of galaxies and the super massive black holes at their centers increases the attractive force for collision once the bodies are reasonably close enough.

This is not a theory occurance since we can see galaxies colliding with telescopes and also measure that Andromeda is on a collison course with the Milky Way.

#10 bgwowk

  • Guest
  • 1,715 posts
  • 125

Posted 01 June 2007 - 07:10 PM

Yes, galaxy collisions are local effects. Like a cloud of expanding gas in an explosion, gas molecules can still bump into each other, but the overall trend is expansion. The farther a piece of space is away from another piece of space, the faster they recede from each other. The fabric of the universe is expanding.

#11

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 01 June 2007 - 07:18 PM

Still confusing about the expanding part, I mean, isn't space infinite and the stars and galaxies are just object?

And it means we have alot of work to do in order to really achieve immortality..

#12 bgwowk

  • Guest
  • 1,715 posts
  • 125

Posted 01 June 2007 - 08:37 PM

Still confusing about the expanding part, I mean, isn't space infinite and the stars and galaxies are just object?

No. In most cosmological models, which are based on General Relativity, the universe is unbounded but finite like the surface of an expanding sphere. It is however an extremely large "hypersphere", at least 10**20 (1 with 20 zeroes after it) larger than the visible part of the universe we see.

Concepts of the universe existing in a flat 3D space, extending forever backward and forward in time looking like it does now, are not correct. The present condition of the universe is evanescent. It was not always this way, and will not remain this way for very long (cosmologically speaking).

#13

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 01 June 2007 - 09:01 PM

Ok.. what are the impacts of this on immortality?
We need to stablize the universe in order to be safe?

#14 bgwowk

  • Guest
  • 1,715 posts
  • 125

Posted 01 June 2007 - 10:34 PM

This is really the least of your survival problems. But if you find interventive physical eschatology interesting, Google Frank Tipler and baryon tunneling. It really is difficult to predict the future of universes that contain intelligent life. Life changes everything.

#15

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 01 June 2007 - 11:39 PM

Hmm.. didn't quite get much..
The guy seems to opposed escape through virtual reality ??
And didn't find any info about tunneling.

#16 bgwowk

  • Guest
  • 1,715 posts
  • 125

Posted 02 June 2007 - 12:14 AM

http://en.wikipedia...._point_(Tipler)

Have fun.

#17

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 02 June 2007 - 08:37 AM

What does it mean? that we will live inside a computer insteads of reality?
Won't reality keep collapsing?
Still confusing..




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users