The Sciences of Time - Does Time Have A Beginning?

I can't care about everything, especially something that has had zero effect on humanity in the past nor will it in the near future... neither I or you see any benefit from knowing other than another curiosity satisfied...

 

!!

And, when we look at distant bodies, I think we're just looking back in time at objects that have as much claim to being at the center as we do - regardless of which direction we look.

 

The Big Bang is often described as an explosion. The problem with that picture is that an explosion has a central point where it starts;the Big Bang wasn't like that.There is no center because all positions in the Universe are equivalent. The Universe is homogeneous, which is part of the cosmological principle.
Light from the big bang, in the form of cosmic radiation, fills the sky in every direction.
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmo_02.htm

 

No.

 

As stated...the fabric of Spacetime must go in every direction from the bang.....just look at the CMI.

 

Neil deGrasse Tyson made this point in one of his podcasts. In essence we are limited by the speed of light as our "event horizon" for what we can observe. As the universe expands over time more and more objects will "disappear" over that event horizon.

Now reverse that thinking. How many objects have already disappeared over that event horizon that we will never be aware of since they disappeared before we could observe them?

What we currently observe is far from being the entirety of the universe. We can only speculate as to what is not observable just like we speculate as to what existed prior to the BB.

While Penrose has his "conformist cyclical universe model" my own is slightly different. The "missing matter" is beyond our observable event horizon and extends infinitely. (We are basing our sizing calculations on gravity which only pertains to what we observe.)

In my infinite universe we have what I call "cosmic weather" which are areas that are either warmer or cooler just like weather works here on earth. The warmer areas expand, as we are currently witnessing, while the cooler areas are contracting and condensing. This cooling and contracting results in the humongous black holes that eventually explode owing to the heat generated by the pressure within themselves.

That is what we call a BB event but in my model these occur throughout the universe at random times albeit beyond our own event horizon. While this is speculative on my part we have the dating of the globular clusters that vary from 11 to 18 billions year old which makes some of them 4+ billion years older than the universe! What if these are evidence of other BB's that are nearest to our own observable universe?

In essence this model solves the issue of dark matter and dark energy by placing it beyond our observable horizon and eliminates the need for there to be any "beginning of time" since space-time is infinite in all dimensions in this model.

 

Another 13.8 billion light years...then we need to add to this the expansion that is greater than the SOL...I think??

 

For sure the Big Bang when it was a cubic centimeter in volume cannot be seen now.

jk

 

In bold above...isn't this matter and energy theorized to be causing the expansion of the Universe equally in all directions? You're saying instead of dark matter and energy being omnipresent, from a central beginning or not, that it only exists 'beyond our observable horizon'? And, how does placing dark matter and energy beyond our observable horizon impact the calculation of total light and dark matter in our Universe?

 

Only relativityly.

 

I'm not so sure about that.

The cosmic background radiation gives us an age, as it is massively red shifted all the way into the radio spectrum.. Also, it's possible to calculate the time required for the observable universe to get where it is, I think.

The portion we don't see would have to conform as it has been affected by the same factors, I think. That is, the expansion rate is the same for all portions of the universe. So, it would seem to be a little like one of those expanding gates used to keep kids from stairs. If you collapse the first segment, all the others follow, because, like our universe, the expansion rate is additive over distance. (That's why objects can be receding at faster than the speed of light.) So, I don't believe we need to see the whole universe in order to date it.

I think I have heard that these measures are independent and correspond.

 

I think of this as a clear beach ball with a marble suspended in the middle. We can almost see the color of the marble but have no idea if the air behind it is as clear as the stuff on our side. Pretty sure there IS another side but....we cannot see it to "Know".

 

Space-Time only actually exists relative to matter. Space is, simply put, position relative to matter; and time, as simply put, is the progressive relative positions of matter. Apart from matter, there is no space-time.

 

It is only dark matter and energy because it is beyond our observable horizon. We can calculate that it must exist but we have no means of confirming that it exists via observation.

 

Horizon may be a confusing/inaccurate term in this, Dark matter/energy may or may not even exist and the entire concept is really just a way of saying "we do not know why". Perhaps someday, someone will figure this out and hypothesis will be advanced to theory but the "Dark" ideas are just hypothesis until then..

 

Understood! The meaning of the term "dark" in this context is "unknown" as in unknown matter/energy. Whether it exists within our observable universe or beyond our observable horizon is yet another unknown which is why I applied the term speculation to my own cyclical universe hypothesis.

 

If we can measure 'back to something/sometime, like the BB, and if the Universe is expanding equally in all directions, then if 'we' are in one direction from the BB, doesn't there need to be other directions pointing 360°from the BB? Meaning there would be another 13.8 billion light years?

If distant galaxies might be moving faster than the SOL, and faster than other objects, then the total distances cannot be linear based only on the SOL. Total distance would need to be t*SOL+x with x = speeds beyond SOL which we don't know.

It hurts my head thinking about this...

 

Isn't our observable horizon about 13.8 billion light years? If so, isn't there dark matter and energy spread throughout the 13.8 billion light years we can observe? I thought it was dark matter and energy that was causing/forcing the expansion?

 

There is a hypothesis that dark matter and energy are the cause of the expansion however since they are unknown that is just one possible hypothesis.

Perhaps the best analogy is the air around us. We are largely unaware of it unless it is a different temperature or pressure to our own body. We have identified that it comprises of a variety of gasses and has certain properties.

When it comes to dark matter and energy we are hypothesizing that it could be acting in the same manner if it were everywhere in the universe. We don't know what comprises of or any of it's properties.

The "space weather" hypothesis that I am speculating about is that the dark matter and energy is beyond our ability to detect and if it is colder than our universe then it would be a "low pressure" zone that our warmer universe, which is a "high pressure" zone, is expanding out into.

Alternatively if our universe were to be cooler than the surrounding dark matter and energy then it would be contracting and we would be able to observe the dark matter and energy objects as they came closer and reached the point where we could detect them.

 

Thanks...seems like gravity and dark matter/energy are both critical aspects of our Universe yet we can't bottle either of them. One force is holding everything together and the other force is pushing everything apart. Both have measured effects. Although there is expansion, there is also a quasi-equilibrium if gravity is slowing and/or mitigating the expansion. Also, since it seems everything in the Universe is spinning, and perhaps the Universe itself is spinning, why is this and does centrifugal force play a role with gravity and dark matter/energy?

 

Well, I think it's more like our whole universe being at the center of the big bang, since it is one big expansion. Here in my house I'm as much at the center as is some other galaxy. No other galaxy has more of a claim to the center than do I. And, you. Everything expanded out of a soup that had no particles like what we're made of - in fact, a soup where our laws of physics didn't exist. If you use the balloon analogy - where dots are drawn on a balloon and then air is added you can see the dots moving apart. So, you can think we were the third dot from the left (or whatever). But, the big bang started when there was only one dot.

The reason that objects are receding at faster than light speed is that space itself is expanding, not that they are traveling IN space at faster than the speed of light. The speed of light in a vacuum is still a hard limit.

But if each mile of space is expanding by some small amount every year, one would have to multiply that small amount by the number of miles to that distant object. That would give the total change in distance to that object every year (miles per year) which would be the speed due to expansion.

If the object is seriously far away, then that multiplication can result in a recession speed that is faster than the speed of light - even though there is a hard limit on the speed of light.

It's like you are pranking light. Light is an athlete running on a track. But, the expansion of the universe is stretching the track so light just won't ever complete the race.

 

Just to get technical for a moment gravity is more akin to a CENTRIPETAL force, not a centrifugal force.



https://www.livescience.com/52488-centrifugal-centripetal-forces.html

So the role of gravity is most certainly important in the functioning of the universe as described by Newtons laws of Motion. If there were no expansion then everything would remain the same distance apart.

I am of the opinion that what is forcing our universe to expand is the combined force of photons. As more and more stars are born they are emitting photons that drive them apart from each other.

https://www.zmescience.com/science/photon-force-measure-8253632/

 

It's not intuitive when I simply say 'everything cannot be at the center'. On the balloon analogy I can think about each dot being in the center as long as the dots are only on the surface of the balloon...on the same plane. If this is the case, then all of space-time sort of warps back on itself creating a hollow sphere??

Again with intuitive, if nothing can exceed the SOL, then nothing can exceed the SOL. I can think about an expanding Universe, expanding balloon, in which light is moving at the SOL but the lighted object is also moving through space at some speed, so to a stationary observer I guess we would add the SOL to the expansion speed to obtain the overall observable speed which would be something greater than the SOL...is this correct?

 

Thank you for the information. In the string analogy, if the string is elongating this is the same as dark matter forcing expansion? No matter the length of the string, or expansion of dark matter, the centripetal force remains the same? Or does this force weaken with distance?

Is the Universe expanding at the same speed in all directions? Are more stars born than stars that die?

 

I don't know how to take the balloon analogy that far. It's a curved 2d model of a 3d reality, isn't it? Does space curve back on itself? That's going to require more than the balloon analogy, I think.

Yes, I think what you are saying is correct.

I'm not so sure that the speed of the distant star/galaxy is very important. The big deal is that space is expanding so fast (over a vast distance) that it overcomes the speed of light. So, if we sent a message, a photon, a radio wave, or whatever toward that object, it would never ever get there. And, if that star were to go nova, nobody in our galaxy would ever see that, as the light wouldn't get here.

Distant parts of our universe are moving beyond all possibility of our observation.