Cosmological expansion question

Invinoveritas
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
I am working off the premise that:

If Cosmological expansion is really occurring a redshift (as we currently observe) can only be obtained if (stars, planets, atoms) do not expand.

See Misner, Thorne and Wheeler comment:
"Only later does he realize that the atom does not expand, the meter stick does not expand, the distance between the sun and Earth does not expand. Only distances between clusters of galaxies and greater distances are subject to the expansion. No model more quickly illustrates the actual situation than a rubber balloon with pennies affixed to it, each by a drop of glue. As the balloon is inflated the pennies increase their separation one from another but not a single one of them expands!" [MTW, 1997, p.719].

I am looking for math or physics to justify this belief.

Thany you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
http://www.lightandmatter.com/html_books/genrel/ch08/ch08.html#Section8.2

See subsection 8.2.5.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
bcrowell said:
http://www.lightandmatter.com/html_books/genrel/ch08/ch08.html#Section8.2

See subsection 8.2.5.

Thank you for the link, I read the page and it does clear up some things, but brings up another question.

1. I don't see where they give the cause or the supporting data that universal expansion is not occurring.
Brooklyn may be expanding and if so it would not produce a red shift under the current theories.

Also

Barry Parker stated and John Peacock agreed that:
The redshift of galaxies exists because their light waves are stretched as space is stretched, and therefore their wavelength is increased"

If the expansion of space-time causes light waves to belengthened, why would atoms be excluded from this expansion?

There must be something that locally overcomes this expansion if Space-Time is truly expanding.

The article basically seems to say it is not because it cant.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There's a bunch of references listed at the end of this entry from the Usenet Physics FAQ, you could check some of those for the math.
 
Invinoveritas said:
If the expansion of space-time causes light waves to belengthened, why would atoms be excluded from this expansion?

There must be something that locally overcomes this expansion if Space-Time is truly expanding.
The "something" that locally overcomes the expansion is the electromagnetic force and the strong and weak nuclear forces.
 
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'
See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...
Abstract The gravitational-wave signal GW250114 was observed by the two LIGO detectors with a network matched-filter signal-to-noise ratio of 80. The signal was emitted by the coalescence of two black holes with near-equal masses ## m_1=33.6_{-0.8}^{+1.2} M_{⊙} ## and ## m_2=32.2_{-1. 3}^{+0.8} M_{⊙}##, and small spins ##\chi_{1,2}\leq 0.26 ## (90% credibility) and negligible eccentricity ##e⁢\leq 0.03.## Postmerger data excluding the peak region are consistent with the dominant quadrupolar...
Back
Top