First, Thank you both for your responses. You're very welcome!
I am not trying to 'win' an argument, rather I am trying to expand my knowledge.
Me neither, and I've found your questions to be quite mind expanding.
That would appear to contradict your earlier statement that 'mass' entering a black 'hole' does not contribute to a loss of mass in our 'universe'.
I was attempting to draw a distinction between the cause, matter, and it's effect, gravity. I didn't explain it very well and I'm probably wrong anyway...
As a side note, the use of 'our universe' would imply that there is more than one 'universe', which does rather violate the meaning of the word universe. The major reasoning, it seems, for other 'universes' is to explain things that we just don't understand yet about 'the universe' (imho).
Modern physics has resorted to multiple universes and dimensions to explain observable reality. The language gets a little strained in the process. 'Our' universe is part of the polyverse which really is universal, or something like that. Anyway, multiplying universes in an attempt to splict the inexplicable smells like violating Occam's razor to me.
'fabric', and 'stretch', as well as 'hole', imply a two dimensional model, which, unfortunately, is all we are capable of understanding, or using for abstract reasoning, at this time. For instance, given the description of a 'black hole', what would one 'see' if one approached it from the 'opposite' side ? Would it not have to be a hole open on 'all sides'?
Yes. My head hurts.
How could it then have a visible 'radius', or would that just be a manifestation of our limited vision?
Yes, exactly! Much the same way the visible size of the earth is only 6 miles in diameter to a guy standing on a raft in the middle of the ocean.
Then, one would assume that the universe must be in a constant state of collapse, and that the collapse is ever 'increasing'. Scientists used to claim the universe was collapsing, now they say it is expanding.
Yes.
IMHO it is only their awareness of the universe that is expanding.
We know from how much of red shift light has the relative velocity of the source related to us.
We know the further away a light source is, the higher the apparent velocity and the older the light is when it finally gets here.
What we didn't know was the distance to speed ratio. We knew the universe's expansion was slowing down under its own mutual gravitational attraction. We assumed this would be enough to eventually slow and ultimately stop the expansion, at which point everything would start falling back to the original point. Pesky gravity.
We now know the universal expansion is indeed slowing down, but not fast enough to ever fully stop it.
We claim to know the 'size' of the universe, yet our instruments will never be able to catch up with the 'expansion' of the universe (if it is truly expanding).
ASSUMING the speed of light in a vacuum really is constant, and it is one of the few fundamental constants underpinning everything we know about physics and knowing the age of the universe as calculated from observable conditions we know just how big the 'observable' universe is, some 26 billion light years across. That's our "six mile" horizon. We know there's more out there and we know we'll never see it.
Then, one might assume that a black hole would eventually become 'full'.
Only if the fabric reaches the limit of its stretch, and doesn't break. I'm with you, I would assume yes, it fills up.
If 'the bough breaks' the sight of space and matter above the break snapping back would be impressive to say the least!
We have evidence that this has happened, a cosmic inflation event that occurred within a few moments of the Big Bang itself.
If our little speculations here have any validity there's a Nobel prize awaiting someone with a better grasp of physics and math than I'll ever have! No only would it provide a physical explanation of that troublesome faster than light expansion, it would also tell us just how much strain the universe can take, a handy thing to know if one ever hopes to rip a hole or two in it to enable FTL travel...
I am not sure we have the capability to understand the 'entire universe',
I'm pretty sure we don't. Bits of it, sure, lots of it, maybe, but all? nahhh.
but you sure give it a good shot.
Couldn't have done it without you asking a deceptively simple question, while allowing me to explore and by providing wise critique.
Thanks
I was attempting to draw a distinction between the cause, matter, and it's effect, gravity. I didn't explain it very well and I'm probably wrong anyway...In an infinite universe, there are infinite possibilities.
Anyway, multiplying universes in an attempt to splict the inexplicable smells like violating Occam's razor to me.
I would agree.
Yes, exactly! Much the same way the visible size of the earth is only 6 miles in diameter to a guy standing on a raft in the middle of the ocean.
Or that what we 'see' is not necessarily how things really look.
... and the older the light is when it finally gets here.
Only in a 'relative' way.
We now know the universal expansion is indeed slowing down, but not fast enough to ever fully stop it.
Well, if 'they' are going to pick one answer, then that one was the 'safest'. : )
we know just how big the 'observable' universe is, some 26 billion light years across. That's our "six mile" horizon. We know there's more out there and we know we'll never see it.
Best summation of our current knowledge in layman's terms I have yet to see.
Only if the fabric reaches the limit of its stretch, and doesn't break. I'm with you, I would assume yes, it fills up. If 'the bough breaks' the sight of space and matter above the break snapping back would be impressive to say the least! We have evidence that this has happened, a cosmic inflation event that occurred within a few moments of the Big Bang itself.
We may be just a pimple on God's rear that popped.
If our little speculations here have any validity there's a Nobel prize awaiting someone with a better grasp of physics and math than I'll ever have! No only would it provide a physical explanation of that troublesome faster than light expansion, it would also tell us just how much strain the universe can take, a handy thing to know if one ever hopes to rip a hole or two in it to enable FTL travel...
OK, now my head hurts.
Couldn't have done it without you asking a deceptively simple question,
I'm a pretty simple guy.