tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7963792203425657974.post9093035593129619960..comments2023-11-03T09:11:57.033-04:00Comments on 19 Bernard: Space : a discussion.Woody Esplanadehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05876564000863863065noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7963792203425657974.post-66137481870031925792011-04-07T12:20:22.411-04:002011-04-07T12:20:22.411-04:00There's a couple of things. First we see shit ...There's a couple of things. First we see shit from all over time all around us because we're not on the edge of the universe but rather somewhere inside of it. We don't know where but we know we're not on the edge (it's trivial to show this because galaxies are more or less equally distributed in all directions).<br />So the radiation we see from the big bang so to speak is radiation that started at a central point and has expanded in all directions at once simultaneously. Because we expand at the same time as that radiation expands and because of some rotational properties of the universe (read basically everything more or less rotates) the data we get is coming from all around us and not just in a single direction as would be expected.<br /><br />More to your question though is that the big bang is actually an expansion of space rather than an explosion of matter. <br />The best way to explain this is imagine a water balloon filled with sparkles. Initially the volume is small and the sparkles are fairly concentrated in the middle (in the extreme case there is no water and there's only sparkles in which case you could argue the sparkle/water density is infinite). As you fill the balloon with water the volume expands but the sparkles don't stay on the edge of the balloon rather they'll tend to spread around evenly. <br />These sparkles are clumps of matter (probably hundreds if not thousands of galaxies) and they are formed not only at the center or the edge but all over the place.<br />This is a gross over simplification of course. There are other factors at play that would take too long to explain.Master of the Crawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10193515962306860345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7963792203425657974.post-55450386698491033962011-04-06T19:20:43.887-04:002011-04-06T19:20:43.887-04:00Here's one article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wi...Here's one article:<br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_expansion_of_space<br /><br />I forgot to mention Dark Energy, yet another recourse for having no idea.Napoleon Bonerpantshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03618118803259041646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7963792203425657974.post-70482436156788541592011-04-06T19:14:35.183-04:002011-04-06T19:14:35.183-04:00Good question! I once had a perfect article that e...Good question! I once had a perfect article that explained it. I’ll look for it. But it has to do with the accelerating rate of expansion. The universe is supposedly expanding in such a way that galaxies or clusters of galaxies (not bound by the effects of gravity) are moving away from each other at an increasing speed.<br /><br />This principle is the basis for the use of red shift in the Doppler Effect to determine the distance of a galaxy. The faster a galaxy is moving away from us, the farther away it is. Should this principle be proven wrong, we're all fucked but anyways…<br /><br />There is no point relative to us for where the Big bang occurred. All galaxies are still within that point (imagine an expanding chocolate chip cookie). The universe is, however, way more than 13.5 billion light years in radius. We don't see the entirety of the cosmos; we only see the part for which the light has caught up to us (equates to the speed of light minus the speed of our expansion from the light source). And because the expansion of the universe supposedly isn’t bound by the limits of the speed of light, it is possible to only now see objects that once were closer to us. I think that the theory of inflation best explains this phenomenon. And objects outside of our field of view will never be seen again as our expansion relative to them is greater than the speed of light.<br /><br />So yeah, they have no fucking clue.Napoleon Bonerpantshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03618118803259041646noreply@blogger.com