Theories of the universe
- Thread starter stevenazari1
- Start date
here we get into the fact that you can have different sizes of infinity. If you have infinity and then divide it by say 2. You get infinity again, however the first infinity is twice as big as the 2nd.......
again showing that the human brain struggles with such concepts!here we get into the fact that you can have different sizes of infinity. If you have infinity and then divide it by say 2. You get infinity again, however the first infinity is twice as big as the 2nd.......
No you can't, infinity divided by two is exactly the same amount as infinity.
it's like saying 0 divided by 2, it's still 0.
The problem with modern rational thought is that it's based on objectivity and measurement. I don't believe the Universe is objective entity and that's why scientists hit a brick wall when tackling the bigger questions of why it all exists and where it came from.
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 1,518
you cant say density has no impact, if that was the case the universe would fizzle out to nothingness.
its like a glass of water, if you tip it out the water spreads out to cover as much space as possible, if it was more dense it would hit the sides, if it was more dense than that it would spread out more. but if it was less dense it would seperate into small puddles, if it was less dense again it would seperate even more.
well if it was so dense the glass would not be able to "squash" it. Water's density doesn't change when inside a glass or not.
and the table analagy is both wrong, and 2D.
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 1,518
here we get into the fact that you can have different sizes of infinity. If you have infinity and then divide it by say 2. You get infinity again, however the first infinity is twice as big as the 2nd.......
actually division by 2 would always result in 2 evens as it divides it at a single point where time has no implications as it is standing still. if you was to divide by an odd amount like 3 then you would get more on one side than the other but you cant be sure which side is the more mature thus you cant say if the older side will always have more to it.
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 1,518
there we get into compression. I was using water as an example - if you wish to think about compression think of gas in a confined area and your feeding more into it. e.g hydraulics.
yes, but you can't compress a liquid like water by merely restricting it's flow.
what has the properties of matter got to do with the universe expanding exactly, if you must use a dodgy analagy atleast exaplain it's link to the topic.
Thing is, the theory that the Universe is expanding IS that it's volume is increasing, not it's density. The reason the expansion theory exists is because the galaxies appear to be moving away from each other. This is expansion by volume, not density.
I recommend you read Lila: An Equiry into Morals. It is perhaps the pivotal book on the matter.
exactly, hence why i said earlier that volume is different from density in response to a poster saying it could be "expanding" in density.
an increase in overall density would require an increase on matter or a decrease in space.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 1,518
which is my point. if the galaxy was more dense, it would fill out more. galaxies are of disc shape (or what it is thought) but density doesnt require this as it can go up/down also.
as these galaxies are expanding, the more dense they are, the further appart they will go as they expand. get it?
take 2 points of an explosion. point A is at the very begining of the explosion, point b is half way through. point A is more dense as the particles are much closer together, point b is less dense as the particles are more spread out. but the key is both sets have the same amount of particles.
if you take a 2nd explosion that is 300 times more dense, the radius it will cover will be a lot more.
this theory can be applied to a galaxy etc.
Last edited:
that doesn't make sense, your essentially saying it's volume is increasing through more matter being created.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 1,518
I didnt say it was expanding in density, the argument was if the universe is already at full mass it cant get bigger (more of) where as it can in density. I then said to the expansion theory that if a galaxy is high in density it will expand more than that of a galaxy low in density.
but mass = density
but getting back to the water analagy you used, when the water is on the table, it's no more dense whether it's a puddle or a lake, because it's the spreading of the water that counters the density.
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 1,518
no Im not. to my knowledge universes never create matter it is burned/fused away/pushed away.
your theory says the universe is expanding, where as your theory would only be correct if there was matter being created - my belief is that it is dissapating by being forced outward to nothingness.
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 1,518
no mass does not equal density at all. most dense = solid > liquid > gas = less dense
Wait, this isn't my theory, I don't beleive any of it.
Unless you beleive in eternity then a universe can create matter.
something can increase in volume by keeping the same amount of matter/mass but decreasing in density.