Scanning the Universe, Round Two

National Science Foundation ^ | 12 July 2005 | Staff

[USCG SimTech]

Now I just have a thought or two..

What is the final effect of the ONE infinite expanse, and the unlimited number of infinitesimalities, that fill the opposite end of this expanse, imposing their near equal devisive "draw" force upon a, any, finite subject. One being mathematically additive and multiplicative (expansing), the other devisive and subtractive (hell, sorry (let it slip), infinitesimality(s)), in all eleven dimensions.

Does this impose a BB? Relative perspective. An "explosion" that requires 4 billion years, does it fit OUR desired definition of explosion? Must it be such a quick transition of matter composition and structure in space/time to fit OUR criteria to be valid?

Is just this, in our sensor region that we assume this is the whole Universe, the whole Universe?

How dare we place our limitations on an Infinite.

Such pride in our valuation over the judgements, witness, and influences of the Infinite!

I am pea-on boy, know it, and have no problem with it.

I'm lucky to lurk in the lack of glow from the shadow of the Master.

[bobdsmith]

F=MA applies to objects with mass, not the expansion of the universe.

And even if the 2nd law of motion was applicable there would be no force required if the expansion of the universe is not increasing.

So when balrog666 points out that "no force is needed" he is correct on two counts.

[balrog666]

F=MA comes from a beginning Physics book. Had you ever read and comprehended such a tome, then you would have known that already. Perhaps this debate is over your head. Little else would explain why you seem unable to use formulae in a physics discussion.

I stand corrected - you are stuck in the 19th century and still can't understand it. Wow, that's really stupid!

[Southack]

"F=MA applies to objects with mass, not the expansion of the universe. And even if the 2nd law of motion was applicable there would be no force required if the expansion of the universe is not increasing. So when balrog666 points out that "no force is needed" he is correct on two counts."

That's incorrect. For one thing, our universe has mass. For another thing, our universe is expanding at an increasing rate.

Try accelerating a rocket *without* applying a Force. Can't do it. Now try *increasing* the acceleration rate of a rocket. Even more Force is necessary (though reducing Mass could briefly help in some limited cases).

Our universe is expanding at an ever *increasing* rate. Its acceleration rate is speeding up.

Thus, balrog666 is incorrect.

[Southack]

"I stand corrected"

Indeed.

[balrog666]

Indeed.

If you can't read, or are afraid to do so, just say so and we will just treat like that retarded kid down the street.

[Southack]

You seem to have filled this thread with ad hominems. Moreover, your posts are all devoid of science and logic.

Simple formulae such as F=MA are beyond you, yet you toss around words such as "retarded."

Tsk. Tsk. You have much to learn of the ways of Science.

[RightWhale]

It is not accepted

Got something better?

[RightWhale]

Our universe is expanding at an ever *increasing* rate. Its acceleration rate is speeding up.

What you say? The acceleration is accelerating?

[balrog666]

You seem to have filled this thread with ad hominems. Moreover, your posts are all devoid of science and logic. Simple formulae such as F=MA are beyond you, yet you toss around words such as "retarded." Tsk. Tsk. You have much to learn of the ways of Science.

As long as you realize it's simply beyond your understanding, as we already know, just take your crap somewhere else.

[RightWhale]

That's right. The primary investigator has exclusive property rights for a definite period of time. Then the data becomes public and may be mined by anyone. That is datamining. The primary investigator probably had something specific in mind and the data may well contain other information that has remained untouched; undoubtedly does. The same data might be mined over and over in light of various models, resulting in production of yet more information as models evolve, possibly without limit.

[Southack]

"What you say? The acceleration is accelerating?"

Aye. Even the rate of acceleration is increasing.

Why is the Universe expanding at an accelerated rate? Click Here

[RightWhale]

Some of the BB cosmologists say that the inflation phase that produced more or less the present aspect of the universe was caused by gravity itself acting in repulsive mode. Gravity can repel as well as attract depending on circumstances. Now, while gravity is acting in the attraction mode over short distances such as between our galaxy and the Andromeda galaxy, local space, over much greater distances it seems to have fallen back into the repulsion mode and is still growing in strength, which would lead to increasing acceleration. What is happening beyond the light barrier, which is most [10¹⁸ to one] of the whole universe, can only be guessed at, and we guess there is a uniformity of behavior.

[Southack]

"Some of the BB cosmologists say that the inflation phase that produced more or less the present aspect of the universe was caused by gravity itself acting in repulsive mode. Gravity can repel as well as attract depending on circumstances."

What are the circumstances that permit Gravity to repel?

[RightWhale]

The conditions during the inflation phase of the BB, as well as the conditions now in the universe at large. Gravity is modelled as a force, but it is really a curvature in several dimensions of the continuum.

[Southack]

"The conditions during the inflation phase of the BB, as well as the conditions now in the universe at large. Gravity is modelled as a force, but it is really a curvature in several dimensions of the continuum."

A "curvature" by itself does not repel.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[AndrewC]

Got something better?

Yeah, keep plugging and don't make things up.

[bobdsmith]

That's incorrect. For one thing, our universe has mass. For another thing, our universe is expanding at an increasing rate.

The universe does not have mass. This is where you are going wrong. Does space have mass? No. The matter in the universe has mass, but that isn't what is expanding. It is the space that is expanding, and so the 2nd lom does not apply. If you don't believe me take your claim to a physicist (there must be a few on FR). Just ask them does F=ma apply to the expansion of the universe and see what they say.

[RadioAstronomer]

I noticed he did not ping me to his questions. LOL!