Acceleration of Universe: centrifugal force?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of whether the observed acceleration in the expansion of the universe could be attributed solely to centripetal force resulting from a rotating universe, as opposed to the need for dark energy. Participants explore the implications of this model in relation to established cosmological principles.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that the acceleration of the universe's expansion could be explained by centripetal force resulting from a complex spinning or rotating universe, initiated during the Big Bang.
  • This participant draws an analogy to an ice skater pulling in their arms to spin faster, suggesting that the universe's expansion could similarly be influenced by its rotational dynamics.
  • Another participant asserts that the proposed model has been debunked multiple times, citing violations of the Cosmological Principle and known experimental results.
  • A different participant emphasizes that it is the responsibility of the proposer to provide positive evidence for their model, rather than requiring others to disprove it.
  • This participant also argues that a rotating universe would lead to anisotropic observations, which contradicts the isotropy observed in the universe.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the validity of the proposed model of a rotating universe. Some participants maintain that it has been previously falsified, while the original proposer continues to question the necessity of dark energy.

Contextual Notes

The discussion references prior threads on the topic of a rotating universe, indicating that similar arguments have been made and addressed in the past. There is an implication of unresolved mathematical or theoretical considerations related to the proposed model.

petermoose
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Is it 'possible' (that is, if you say not, can you conclusively show the negative), that the entire observed acceleration in the expansion Our Universe, created some 13.7 x 10^9 years ago in the Big Bang, is due solely to centripetal force throughout, caused by a complex spinning/rotating/tumbling (initiated in the Big Bang, but, itself, slowing over time as the Universe expands--much as would an ice skater, who, after first initiating her spin and then gradually pulling her arms in tight to her chest in order to spin faster and faster, might then--instead of stopping suddenly in her finale--choose to reverse the process by gradually letting her arms stretch out--this last movement being comparable, in its 1-dimensional way, to our Universe's many-dimensional rotation rate slowing over time with its accelerated expansion), all relative to a surrounding massive Multiverse (say, of other--perhaps distant, perhaps not so--surrounding universes, probably created in other separate 'big bang' events), so that this acceleration is then observed by us in the actual middle of our 'Observable' (i.e., the 93 Gly in diameter) Universe (somewhere in the midst of--and probably no more than a speck within--our entire Big Bang Universe) in the form of distant galaxies and galaxy clusters rushing away from us in all directions and at increasing velocities with distance, so that, thereby, there is actually no need to posit some 'dark energy' continuously creating new space within Our Universe, as all of the acceleration in the expansion is due to said centripetal force pulling apart our (non-rigid) Universe?
 
Space news on Phys.org
No, it is not. This has been debunked on this forum numerous times. It would imply a preferred frame of refrence thereby violating the Cosmological Principle and all known experiments.
 
petermoose said:
Is it 'possible' (that is, if you say not, can you conclusively show the negative)

That's not how it works. If you are proposing a model for the universe, it's up to you to justify it based on some kind of positive evidence. It's not up to us to "conclusively show the negative".

However, in this case the model you are proposing has already been considered and falsified; it makes predictions that we know to be wrong. See below.

petermoose said:
that the entire observed acceleration in the expansion Our Universe, created some 13.7 x 10^9 years ago in the Big Bang, is due solely to centripetal force

No. Any model in which the universe is "rotating", so that what we see as "accelerated expansion" is due to the effects of the rotation, would not be isotropic; things would look different in different directions. They don't.

(If you search PF for threads on "rotating universe", you will find previous discussions where this same point was made.)
 
Thread closed as this topic has already been discussed in multiple PF threads.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad How do you get to the conclusion that there is accelerating expansion?
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
High School Estimates — True Size of the Universe?
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
8K
Graduate Form of energy at time of big bang
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
High School Accelerated expansion of the universe
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Undergrad Deviations of conservation laws in cosmological evolution?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Undergrad Did cosmic inflation happen everywhere in the Universe?
  • · Replies 80 ·
3
Replies
80
Views
12K
High School The observable and non-observable parts of the Universe
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
7K
High School Expansion or Attraction: What's Driving Our Universe?
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
Graduate Late Photons from the Early Universe?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad Some questions about Cosmic Inflation
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K