Did Space Really Expand or Is It Just a Misinterpretation?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the debate between the Field Theory of Gravitation (FTG) and General Relativity (GR) regarding the nature of space and cosmological expansion. Participants argue that the fractal distribution of galaxies challenges the Friedmann cosmology's assumption of homogeneity, suggesting that space may not be expanding as traditionally thought. The conversation highlights the complexities of cosmological models, including the implications for the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) and Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN). Ultimately, while some research indicates tensions between FRW models and observations, the consensus remains that the universe is well-described by FRW cosmology on a large scale.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of General Relativity (GR) and its principles
  • Familiarity with the Field Theory of Gravitation (FTG)
  • Knowledge of cosmological concepts such as the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) and Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN)
  • Awareness of galaxy distribution and fractal structures in cosmology
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of the Field Theory of Gravitation on cosmological models
  • Study the differences between Friedmann cosmology and fractal galaxy distribution
  • Examine the role of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) in supporting cosmological theories
  • Explore recent papers addressing tensions between FRW models and observational data
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, physicists, and cosmologists interested in the foundational theories of gravity and the structure of the universe, as well as those examining the implications of galaxy distribution on cosmological models.

waterfall
Messages
380
Reaction score
1
In a counterpart of General Relatlvity called Field Theory of Gravitation where spacetime is really flat and spin-2 fields cause gravity. See:

http://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9912003v1.pdf

Space is already there as the following description state:

"Cosmology is another field of application of gravitation theory. Present data about large scale galaxies distribution contradict to the main point of Friedmann cosmology — its homogeneity. It turned out that galaxies form a fractal structure with dimension close to 2 at least up to the distance scales bout 200 Mpc. This leads to a new possibilities in cosmology (see an analysis of FTG cosmological applications in the review of Baryshev et al., 1994). One of the main difference between FTG and GR is that the field approach allows the existence of the infinite stationary matter distribution (Baryshev, Kovalevskij, 1990). In a stationary fractal distribution the observed redshift has gravitational and Doppler nature and is not connected with space expansion as in Friedmann model."

Is there a possibility the above is the case and space didn't really expand but as I interpretated from the above.. space is already there? Or is space expansion 100% proven already beyond the shadow of a doubt? Thanks.
 
Space news on Phys.org
Wow. I'm amazed how wrong the 2nd sentence in the abstract is. The FRW cosmology describes a homogeneous universe. Is our universe homogeneous? That depends on the scale: on the scale of stars and galaxies, it is far from homogeneous. However, on the scale of the observable universe, owing precisely to the "fractal" nature of galaxy distribution, the universe is well-described by the FRW cosmology.

A stationary cosmology is going to have a hard time dreaming up the CMB and BBN.
 
First of all, physics does not "prove things 100%", so the answer to your topic is no.


bapowell said:
Wow. I'm amazed how wrong the 2nd sentence in the abstract is. The FRW cosmology describes a homogeneous universe. Is our universe homogeneous? That depends on the scale: on the scale of stars and galaxies, it is far from homogeneous. However, on the scale of the observable universe, owing precisely to the "fractal" nature of galaxy distribution, the universe is well-described by the FRW cosmology.

Actually there has been some legitimate research done in this area, and there is some tension between FRW models and observations, see for example http://arxiv.org/abs/arXiv:0805.1132. I do agree with you that the sentence is ridiculous, but on a scale of wrongness, it could be more wrong :-)

bapowell said:
A stationary cosmology is going to have a hard time dreaming up the CMB and BBN.

and BAO, and fitting all of them together.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
11K