Does the Expansion of Space Mean Everything is Growing?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Saoist
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Expansion
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of cosmic expansion and its implications for objects within the universe. While the balloon analogy is commonly used to illustrate this expansion, it raises questions about whether everything, including galaxies and local objects, expands simultaneously. It is noted that local gravitational forces, such as those from Earth and the Milky Way, counteract cosmic expansion, preventing these bodies from expanding with the universe. Einstein's work is referenced to support the idea that the solar system does not co-expand with the universe. Ultimately, the conversation highlights the complexity of understanding how expansion affects different scales and structures in the cosmos.
Saoist
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
while i have no problem with the whole universe expanding thing, i have qualms with the balloon idea.

you take an uninflated balloon, draw a dot on it, and blow it up. as well as the balloon increasing in size, the dot does also.

if (ignoring the X^2/3 law :P) the human body was expanding gradually so proportions stayed the same, you wouldn't perceive your feet getting further from you, because they're getting larger as well. assuming no external reference, you'd never realize the expansion was occurring.

i guess what I'm tryna ask is: if space is expanding surely everything, objects etc, must be expanding as a consequence, so how can it be stated that "galaxies are moving away as a result of *the expansion*," because we'd never perceive it.

hope this makes sense
 
Space news on Phys.org
This question has been asked many times before in these Forums it is; "If space is expanding then what expands with it?"

As I said before:

It is generally accepted that gravitational attraction of the local gravitational fields, of the Earth, Sun, Milky Way galaxy, and possibly the Local Group, overwhelm the cosmological expansion and these bodies do not expand with the universe.

Einstein himself wrote a paper in the 1940's to prove that the solar system was not co-expanding with the universe. He did so by cutting out a spherical volume from the cosmological model and replacing it with a void with a spherical mass inserted in the middle; thus embedding a Schwarzschild solution inside a cosmological one. The question is how do you take the limit of the Schwarzschild metric as r \rightarrow \infty

Garth
 
Hi Saoist! It would be better to picture the dots as ink droplets resting on the balloon surface, not embedded. Surface tension will prevent the droplets from being pulled apart as the balloon inflates.
 
Plus, there are no "dots" in our 3-d spatial Universe, except for maybe particles by their lonesome. So, what you envision as a "dot" would really be an accumulation of particles. It then should be a question of whether the other forces overwhelm/keep those particles together over what is causing the Universe to expand.
 
If you have heard of Theory of Relativity, it points out a star as a massive object deforming the "fabric of space-time".
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...
Back
Top