2D Model of the Universe as an expanding ball

In summary, the conversation discusses the possibility of a simplified 2D model of the universe as an expanding ball, with time as the vector normal and light moving at a 45 degree angle. The size of the ball would have to be very large to explain the lack of convergence of parallel lines in our observations. However, this model does not work with time as the radial component. The relationship between expansion and curvature is described by the Friedmann equation, and dark energy is responsible for the current accelerating expansion. Without dark energy, the universe would still be expanding but at a slower rate.
  • #1
darkdave3000
242
5
TL;DR Summary
Can an expanding ball describe our universe in a simplified 2D model?
Can a simplified 2D model of our universe be an expanding ball? Where the surface of the ball is the 2D universe time is the vector normal of the ball measured in imaginary number i. So light will move at 45 degree to any vector normal. The expanding ball gets bigger because time is causing it to expand outward and this is why the universe expands because of material flying out into time. Also if you travel far enough in one direction you come back to your origin like on Earth (warped space).

Would this be an accurate model of the universe?

I recall the universe was discovered to be "flat" so how big would this ball have to be so that the fact that we haven't seen parallel lines converge at any distance can be explained away that the universe is just too big for us to observe it?David
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
One of the possibilities thrown up by the theory of General Relativity is a finite closed universe, as opposed to an infinite flat universe. The current observations suggest that if the universe is closed, then it must be very large, as there is no evidence of large scale spatial curvature.

Moreover, our universe appears to have the critical matter-energy density required for an infinite flat universe:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedmann_equations#Density_parameter
 
  • #3
darkdave3000 said:
Would this be an accurate model of the universe?
It's tempting to imagine the spherical geometry that way, but it doesn't work with time as the radial component. The scale factor does not grow linearly with cosmic time, as it would have to be doing in this scenario.

darkdave3000 said:
I recall the universe was discovered to be "flat" so how big would this ball have to be so that the fact that we haven't seen parallel lines converge at any distance can be explained away that the universe is just too big for us to observe it?
If you forget about including time in there, and instead treat the radius of the sphere as just the radius of its curvature, then this radius would have to be at least ~205 Gly (this comes from the error bars on the density parameter, mentioned above, as per the latest Planck data).
 
  • Like
Likes PeroK
  • #4
So is there a relationship between the expansion of the universe and curvature? Change in Surface Area Vs Change in Radius? And is dark energy (expanding universe) merely caused by the passage of time?
 
  • #5
darkdave3000 said:
So is there a relationship between the expansion of the universe and curvature? Change in Surface Area Vs Change in Radius? And is dark energy (expanding universe) merely caused by the passage of time?
Everything is related by the Friedmann equation:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedmann_equations

The universe is a 4D manifold (three space plus one time). It's only a crude analogy to compare it to an expanding sphere in 3D space.

It's not dark energy that causes expansion; expansion is a result of the laws of GR and the Friedmann equation. Dark energy, however, is responsible for the current accelerating expansion. Without dark energy, the universe would still be expanding - but the expansion would be slowing down.
 

1. What is a 2D model of the universe as an expanding ball?

A 2D model of the universe as an expanding ball is a simplified representation of the universe that is often used in scientific studies and simulations. In this model, the universe is represented as a two-dimensional surface that is constantly expanding, similar to the surface of a balloon being blown up.

2. How is this model different from other models of the universe?

This model differs from other models of the universe, such as the 3D model or the flat model, in that it is a simplified representation that only takes into account two dimensions. This makes it easier to visualize and study certain aspects of the universe, but it may not accurately reflect the complexity of the real universe.

3. What evidence supports the idea of an expanding universe?

One of the main pieces of evidence for an expanding universe is the observation of redshift in distant galaxies. This indicates that the galaxies are moving away from us, which is consistent with the idea of an expanding universe. Other evidence includes the cosmic microwave background radiation and the abundance of light elements in the universe.

4. Can this model explain the origin of the universe?

No, the 2D model of the universe as an expanding ball is not meant to explain the origin of the universe. It is simply a simplified representation of the universe and does not take into account the complex processes and theories surrounding the origin of the universe.

5. How does this model relate to the Big Bang theory?

This model is closely related to the Big Bang theory, which is the prevailing scientific explanation for the origin and evolution of the universe. The 2D model of the universe as an expanding ball is often used to illustrate the concept of the universe expanding from a single point, as proposed by the Big Bang theory.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
970
Replies
80
Views
8K
Replies
2
Views
999
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
27
Views
2K
Replies
44
Views
4K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top