The universe 'will expand forever', new Nasa study on 'dark energy' concludes

**The Bold Rodney** · 20-08-2010, 09:38 PM

Thanks for that I think I've got it now, but when I fold it there is no distance from A to B because they're touching.

I'll keep trying it until I understand...bloody interesting experiment though!

**Bogon** · 20-08-2010, 09:57 PM

^It's the bloody touching bit that makes space and time irrelevent!
You can measure a flat piece of paper from A to B but once folded A meets B thus it equates to this.
A+B=Enough already!

**crippen** · 20-08-2010, 10:06 PM

How about a 3 dimension Mobius curve?

If you follow the surface round,you eventually arrive back on the opposite side of the
glass .The inside becomes the out side. It's called the Klein bottle. The universe is like this.It keeps expanding,but actually ends up back in the middle and starts again.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
If you understand this,take two tablets and go to bed NOW.

**The Bold Rodney** · 20-08-2010, 11:21 PM

Looks like a complicated glass jug to me, I think the more sofisticated amongst us may describe it as a wine Carraffe that doesn't pour well?

I don't understand the Universe and I'm still gonna take two tablets and go to bed!

**Bogon** · 20-08-2010, 11:39 PM

Originally Posted by crippen

How about a 3 dimension Mobius curve? If you follow the surface round,you eventually arrive back on the opposite side of the glass .The inside becomes the out side. It's called the Klein bottle. The universe is like this.It keeps expanding,but actually ends up back in the middle and starts again.

See a flaw here.............
If I followed the surface around the jug I would end up where I started and not on the opposite side (360 degrees).
Simple maths really. The radius is from the centre to the furthest point of a circle thus the diameter is twice the size of the given radius.
The outside would still be the outside and nothing would change except time.
If the jug was rotating and I followed the same rotation pattern at half the speed then I would be at the opposite end of the jug.
If I done the same experiment using the same rotation speed equaled with a linear movement on a spherical object then I would be travelling inside the object and not just cirumnavigating the object.
Try using the jug method with a pice of paper under it and then you get the two tablets and bed result!

**The Bold Rodney** · 21-08-2010, 01:06 AM

Yep, I see it too its an air bubble on the left hand side.

I gave the tablets a miss and I'm on my 8th bottle of Chang, suddenly thing's seem so much clearer now!

**Panda** · 22-08-2010, 07:29 AM

Most people seem to have a fairly earthly view of what "space" is as big vacuum with lots of things scattered among it. Or, to put it another way "space is the space between the things in the Universe.

I see it differently, with "real space" and the "universe" being two different things.
The size of the universe can only be measured by the objects in it. The furthest objects being at the edge of the known universe. Even the spaces between objects in our universe are filled with all kinds of EM radiation, eg: light, Gama rays, x rays etc.. So its not really space. Its actually pretty full up with matter and EM radiation. But if our universe does in fact have a limit where matter and EM radiation expanding from the big bang hasnt yet reached, -- well, then whats outside that limit? The answer is simple really, -- its the "real nothingness" that we commonly and mistakenly call "space".

Consider where we are sitting right now in the universe as a distance from the starting point when the big bang occurred. Right after the the big bang there was nothing here. No matter or even EM radiation. It was just a big empty void. It was outside the "universe" as we like to think of things. Now its chock a block full of stuff whizzing around.

Outside the "universe" and into the big nothingness there are no outer boundaries, simply because you cant measure "nothing". The "nothingness" doesnt have to have a beginning or an end. It just isn't there in the first place to be measured or quantified until some matter or EM radiation expands into that empty void. And of course there is no "time" in the "nothingness" as there is nothing there to change.

We humans have a hard time getting our head around this concept as everything we know of has a beginning and an end, and can be measured. Even the term "space" is confused with "nothingness" .

Pretty simple really.

**Humbert** · 22-08-2010, 07:49 AM

Originally Posted by Bogon

Originally Posted by Humbert

Where does all the light and matter go that is sucked into black holes?

Are you stupid or what Humbert?
I watched "Aliens" and some bloke explained it.
Basically think of a sheet of A4 paper laying flat on a table. The distance of the most Northern point to the most Southern point of the sheet of paper can be measured in a straight linear movement, but imagine if you picked the paper up and folded it in half? The two points of North and South meet each other, so therefore distance and time is irreleveant. This basically means that all light and matter is sucked to where it was before,where it is going to be or where it is now because time and space doesn't matter due to the "paper folding" bit.
Man. Watch some Star-Trek or Deep Space 9 to educate yourself!

We'll that's what I thought all along.

**Panda** · 24-08-2010, 06:45 PM

Einstein postulated the theory of curved space where if you travel in a straight line you end up back where you started from. That makes space like a big egg encapsulated and autonomous from whatever it is outside its shell boundary. Maybe that is true and "space" really is curved due to the effect matter occupying it has on the the matrix we call "space". But whats outside the egg shell out there in the big nothingness?

**noelbino** · 24-08-2010, 07:51 PM

I was going to post my explanation of all this, but the missus is calling me to bed. Some things are more important.
Besides this place is going to blow-up in 4 billion years, so what matters.

**Norton** · 24-08-2010, 07:56 PM

Originally Posted by noelbino

but the missus is calling me to bed.

The big bang theory explained in a nut shell.

**Chairman Mao** · 24-08-2010, 08:06 PM

Originally Posted by Panda

But whats outside the egg shell out there in the big nothingness?

An extremely large chicken?

Einstein postulated the theory of curved space where if you travel in a straight line you end up back where you started from. That makes space like a big egg encapsulated and autonomous from whatever it is outside its shell boundary. Maybe that is true and "space" really is curved due to the effect matter occupying it has on the the matrix we call "space".

Yes, learn how to bend space/time, learn how to travel to any where in the universe instantly.

Would be a nifty party trick.

**Takeovers** · 24-08-2010, 08:38 PM

Originally Posted by Panda

Einstein postulated the theory of curved space where if you travel in a straight line you end up back where you started from.

Yes.

Originally Posted by Panda

That makes space like a big egg encapsulated and autonomous from whatever it is outside its shell boundary.

You don't need an outside in that theory. There is none for the 3(+1, the time)-dimensional universe.

So no giant chicken. Not even a giant chick.

**Chairman Mao** · 24-08-2010, 08:57 PM

You don't need an outside in that theory.

Has to be something there, 3-dimensional time/space cannot be filling a place that does not exist.

**hazz** · 24-08-2010, 10:14 PM

Hard to visualise but most theories have it that there is no outside, the dimensions just wrap round creating the ballon shaped universe. The higher dimensions that string theory etc require are very weak and the wrap round in an unmanageably small space and that is why they are not perceived.

On the other hand there are other theories that suggest that, we are inside a back hole and that other universes exist in black holes within our universe. That our universe is a 3 dimensional shadow within a higher dimensional universe and other equally strange ideas. these do have stuff on the outside

**nikster** · 24-08-2010, 10:49 PM

Originally Posted by Jeremia

If we don't understand the beginning how can we understand the end? And if we continue to see things as only having a start and finish then we will never see the truth. Quote; Jeremia after 2 bottles of wine..

There's a new theory of the universe where time can be converted into mass and length - this model works without any big bang. There's also no beginning, and no end.

That's why I prefer it. The whole big bang thing is, frankly, just dumb. Does it make sense? No. So why should we have our best physicists working on "making it work anyway"? A waste of time, and I conclude with an Einstein quote: Imagination is more important than knowledge.

Details here: Model describes universe with no big bang, no beginning, and no end

This new model is not fleshed out in the full, there are many things that don't work. But the same is true for the big bang theory. In any case, until a better model comes along, this one's good to me.

**StrontiumDog** · 24-08-2010, 10:59 PM

The Universe within 14 billion Light Years - The Visible Universe

The Universe within 14 billion Light Years

The Visible Universe

**StrontiumDog** · 24-08-2010, 11:09 PM

The known universe....

Well worth the 6 minutes of your time. Avoid taking LSD prior to watching this...

Or take LSD for the full on 'out there' moment.

**StrontiumDog** · 24-08-2010, 11:41 PM

How large is the universe....

Looks at inflation, the big bang and dark matter/energy. Again a good view.

Those prone to headaches should avoid....

**Takeovers** · 25-08-2010, 12:03 AM

Originally Posted by nikster

There's a new theory of the universe where time can be converted into mass and length - this model works without any big bang. There's also no beginning, and no end. That's why I prefer it. The whole big bang thing is, frankly, just dumb.

Interesting and at least not for me immediately recognizable nonsense.
You say you have problems with the Big Bang. I can live with it. But I have problems with the Dark Energy. So I like every new theory that makes it unnecessary. Let us wait and see.

**StrontiumDog** · 25-08-2010, 12:19 AM

^ this will upset you then...

Astronomers use galactic magnifying lens to probe elusive dark energy

Astronomers Use Galactic Magnifying Lens to Probe Elusive Dark Energy

ScienceDaily (Aug. 19, 2010) — An international team of astronomers using gravitational lensing observations from the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope has taken an important step forward in the quest to solve the riddle of dark energy, a phenomenon which mysteriously appears to power the Universe's accelerating expansion

Their results appear in the 20 August 2010 issue of the journal Science.

Normal matter like that found in stars, planets and dust clouds only makes up a tiny fraction of the mass-energy content of the Universe. It is dwarfed by the amount of dark matter -- which is invisible, but can be detected by its gravitational pull. In turn, the amount of dark matter in the Universe is itself overwhelmed by the diffuse dark energy that permeates the entire Universe. Scientists believe that the pressure exerted by this dark energy is what pushes the Universe to expand at an ever-increasing rate.

Probing the nature of dark energy is, therefore, one of the key challenges in modern cosmology. Since its discovery in 1998, the quest has been to characterise and understand it better. This work presents an entirely new way to do so.

Eric Jullo, lead author of a new paper in the journal Science explains: "Dark energy is characterised by the relationship between its pressure and its density: this is known as its equation of state. Our goal was to try to quantify this relationship. It teaches us about the properties of dark energy and how it has affected the development of the Universe."

The team measured the properties of the gravitational lensing in the galaxy cluster Abell 1689. Gravitational lensing is a phenomenon predicted by Einstein's theory of general relativity, and was here used by the team to probe how the cosmological distances (and thus the shape of space-time) are modified by dark energy. At cosmic distances, a huge cluster of galaxies in the foreground has so much mass that its gravitational pull bends beams of light from very distant galaxies, producing distorted images of the faraway objects. The distortion induced by the lens depends in part on the distances to the objects, which have been precisely measured with large ground-based telescopes such as ESO's Very Large Telescope and the Keck Telescopes.

"The precise effects of lensing depend on the mass of the lens, the structure of space-time, and the relative distance between us, the lens and the distant object behind it," explains Priyamvada Natarajan, a co-author of the paper. "It's like a magnifying glass, where the image you get depends on the shape of the lens and how far you hold it from the object you're looking at. If you know the shape of the lens and the image you get, you can work out the path that light followed between the object and your eye."

Looking at the distorted images allows astronomers to reconstruct the path that light from distant galaxies takes to make its long journey to Earth. It also lets them study the effect of dark energy on the geometry of space in the light path from the distant objects to the lensing cluster and then from the cluster to us. As dark energy pushes the Universe to expand ever faster, the precise path that the light beams follow as they travel through space and are bent by the lens is subtly altered. This means that the distorted images from the lens encapsulate information about the underlying cosmology, as well as about the lens itself.

So why is the geometry of the Universe such a big issue?

"The geometry, the content and the fate of the Universe are all intricately linked," says Natarajan. "If you know two, you can deduce the third. We already have a pretty good knowledge of the Universe's mass-energy content, so if we can get a handle on its geometry then we will be able to work out exactly what the fate of the Universe will be."

The real strength of this new result is that it devises a totally new way to extract information about the elusive dark energy. It is a unique and powerful one, and offers great promise for future applications.

According to the scientists, their method required multiple, meticulous steps to develop. They spent several years developing specialised mathematical models and precise maps of the matter -- both dark and "normal" -- that together constitute the Abell 1689 cluster.

Co-author Jean-Paul Kneib explains: "Using our unique method in conjunction with others, we were able to come up with results that were far more precise than any achieved before."

The Hubble Space Telescope is a project of international cooperation between ESA and NASA.

The international team of astronomers in this study consists of Eric Jullo (Jet Propulsion Laboratory/ Cal Tech, USA and Laboratoire d'Astrophysique de Marseille, France), Priyamvada Natarajan (Yale University, USA), Jean-Paul Kneib (Laboratoire d'Astrophysique de Marseille, France), Anson D'Aloisio (Yale University, USA), Marceau Limousin (Laboratoire d'Astrophysique de Marseille, France and University of Copenhagen, Denmark), Johan Richard (Durham University, UK) and Carlo Schimd (Laboratoire d'Astrophysique de Marseille, France)

**hazz** · 25-08-2010, 01:21 AM

Originally Posted by Takeovers

Originally Posted by nikster

There's a new theory of the universe where time can be converted into mass and length - this model works without any big bang. There's also no beginning, and no end. That's why I prefer it. The whole big bang thing is, frankly, just dumb.

Interesting and at least not for me immediately recognizable nonsense.
You say you have problems with the Big Bang. I can live with it. But I have problems with the Dark Energy. So I like every new theory that makes it unnecessary. Let us wait and see.

Every time if hear the words I am reminded of 'the ether' the medium though which victorians thought that electromagnetic waves must travel, on the basis that their knowledge of sound waves told them that waves need a medium to travel through. I know they have found it via cosmological observations, but I would be so much happier if they found in the lab.

**hazz** · 25-08-2010, 01:26 AM

Originally Posted by jandajoy

any statement including the words

forever

and

infinity / infinite

are essentially flawed and meaningless.

Actually one of the more important mathematical discoveries of modern times is that there are many infinities and that mathematical operations on infinity are meaningful, i.e infinity +1

**Takeovers** · 25-08-2010, 02:22 AM

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

^ this will upset you then...

I have read about it already. The evidence for Dark Energy is strong with the current cosmologic theories wether I like it or not. Not saying that I understand the math behind them.

And it would take something very new and very convincing to replace them.

**keda** · 25-08-2010, 08:49 AM

Originally Posted by nikster

Originally Posted by Jeremia

If we don't understand the beginning how can we understand the end? And if we continue to see things as only having a start and finish then we will never see the truth. Quote; Jeremia after 2 bottles of wine..

There's a new theory of the universe where time can be converted into mass and length - this model works without any big bang. There's also no beginning, and no end.

That's why I prefer it. The whole big bang thing is, frankly, just dumb. Does it make sense? No. So why should we have our best physicists working on "making it work anyway"? A waste of time, and I conclude with an Einstein quote: Imagination is more important than knowledge.

Details here: Model describes universe with no big bang, no beginning, and no end

This new model is not fleshed out in the full, there are many things that don't work. But the same is true for the big bang theory. In any case, until a better model comes along, this one's good to me.

I prefer the big bang. Quite aside from the evidence, as far as that can go with current understanding, it provides for a logical beginning and a logical end.

The only alternative that offers a plausible though absurd beginning are the god, or so called intelligent design theories. For starters, consider the intelligence of an infinite power and wisdom stranded in nothingness for an absolute eternity. Not very bright at all. Then suddenly it is struck by first the concept and then the thought to create a universe. And anyway, those thoughts could not have originated without at least a spark of energy, which could not have existed in nothingness.

As to the end, in terms of god theory, a bit implausible that having taken the trouble to create an entire universe, which has to be perfect since otherwise god is imperfect, that there's any point in ending it. Unless the infinite wisdom has second thoughts and decides to restore its previous status of being suspended in emptiness.

So it's the big bang for me, and anyway the big bang theory is a brilliant series.

Thread: The universe 'will expand forever', new Nasa study on 'dark energy' concludes

Thread Tools

Display

Try this!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions