Exploring the Debate: The Truth About the Universe's Expansion

  • Thread starter Holocene
  • Start date
In summary: Wouldn't matter, even "dark" matter, only further halt the expansion?Matter would only halt the expansion if it were the only thing in the universe.
  • #1
Holocene
237
0
I have read that the present expansion of the univesre is slowing down, due to the gravitational attraction of the matter in contains.

Other times, I read that the expansion of the univesre is actually speeding up. For instance, light from the more distant galaxies are redshifted more than closer galaxies?

Which idea is thought to be true?
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
I think the general consensus is that the universe is speeding up due to an unknown force which we call "dark matter."
 
  • #3
waht said:
I think the general consensus is that the universe is speeding up due to an unknown force which we call "dark matter."

Wouldn't matter, even "dark" matter, only further halt the expansion?

Maybe you meant dark energy?
 
  • #4
Hi Holocene, yes waht meant dark energy.

An easy way to think about it is that the universe is both decelerating and accelerating at the same time. In the past the deceleration dominated the acceleration; in late times the acceleration dominates the deceleration.

The gravitational deceleration parameter remains constant over time: gravity continues to assert a slowing force. But the total amount of dark energy increases in direct proportion to the amount of volume in the universe, since every cubic meter of "new" space adds to the cosmological constant. Since effective gravity decreases at a rate of r-2 while total dark energy increases at a rate of r3, it's only a matter of time until the effect of dark energy comes to overwhelmingly dominate the effect of gravity. That's the phase we are in now.

Jon
 
  • #5
Holocene, I hope to get you to ask more questions. Generally, a galaxy sufficiently far away has been moving away from us at the same speed for the entire life of the universe. There are exceptions to this. The three biggies are inflation, acceleration and shape. Inflation affected the early universe and has very little effect today.

The shape of the universe is often described as very flat and may be perfectly flat. Flat means galaxies move away from each other at a steady speed. If it’s not flat, it’s either curved in like a ball and will someday collapse in on itself or it’s curved out like a potato chip or saddle. If it’s curved in, that other galaxy will slow down at a steady rate and eventually stop and then head towards us. When we collide, we will collide with every other galaxy. It’s the opposite of the Big Bang.

So you might thing that a saddle shaped universe would explain the acceleration. But no. General Relativity predicts a smooth, consistent acceleration. And that’s not what’s observed. Instead, it looks like the acceleration kicked in a little more recently.
 
  • #6
Holocene said:
I have read that the present expansion of the univesre is slowing down, due to the gravitational attraction of the matter in contains.

Other times, I read that the expansion of the univesre is actually speeding up. For instance, light from the more distant galaxies are redshifted more than closer galaxies?

Which idea is thought to be true?

The acceleration is speeding up.
 
  • #7
Acceleration is the consensus view these days. The Permutter supernova papers [e.g., http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9812133 and http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9812473] [Broken] are the gold standard to date.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

What is the definition of "conflicting viewpoints"?

Conflicting viewpoints refers to situations where there are differing opinions or perspectives on a particular topic, issue, or problem. These differences may arise from varying beliefs, values, experiences, or sources of information.

Why is it important to consider conflicting viewpoints in research?

Considering conflicting viewpoints in research allows for a more thorough and comprehensive understanding of a topic or problem. It encourages critical thinking and can lead to new insights and discoveries. It also promotes objectivity and helps to identify potential biases in the research.

How can conflicting viewpoints be resolved?

Conflicting viewpoints can be resolved through open and respectful communication, considering evidence and logical arguments, and finding common ground. It is important to listen to and understand the perspectives of others and to be open to changing one's own viewpoint based on new information.

What are the potential challenges of addressing conflicting viewpoints in research?

Some potential challenges of addressing conflicting viewpoints in research include navigating personal biases and emotions, dealing with stubbornness or close-mindedness, and finding a balance between considering all viewpoints and maintaining scientific rigor. It may also be difficult to come to a definitive conclusion or agreement when there are conflicting viewpoints.

How can scientists effectively handle conflicting viewpoints in their work?

Scientists can effectively handle conflicting viewpoints by remaining open-minded and objective, actively seeking out and considering different perspectives, and using critical thinking skills to evaluate evidence and arguments. Collaborating with other researchers or experts with different viewpoints can also help to address conflicts and find common ground.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • Cosmology
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
19
Views
669
  • Cosmology
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
23
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top