Is gravity driving the expansion of the universe? If so

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the question of whether gravity is driving the expansion of the universe, exploring concepts related to gravitational effects, dark energy, and the implications of general relativity on cosmic expansion. Participants express varying interpretations of these phenomena, including the nature of the universe's acceleration and the role of geometry in understanding cosmic distances.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that if gravity drives the expansion, it might imply the universe is in free fall towards a larger mass, though they struggle to reconcile this with the observed acceleration of the universe.
  • Another participant counters that the universe is not falling towards anything, explaining that galaxies are observed to move away from us at increasing speeds due to dark energy, which has properties akin to anti-gravity.
  • A different viewpoint emphasizes that general relativity (GR) should be understood as a theory of dynamic geometry rather than just gravity, suggesting that the expansion of distances is a result of changing geometric relations rather than motion through space.
  • This participant elaborates on how GR explains the evolution of geometry and distances, asserting that galaxies are not moving in the traditional sense but that distances between them are changing due to the laws of geometry.
  • One participant expresses appreciation for the insights shared in the discussion, indicating engagement with the concepts presented.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of the universe's expansion and the role of gravity and dark energy. There is no consensus on whether gravity is the driving force behind the expansion, and the discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing interpretations.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of understanding cosmic expansion, the unusual properties of dark energy, and the implications of general relativity, which may not be fully addressed in the discussion. The relationship between density, geometry, and cosmic behavior is also noted as a point of consideration.

NWH
Messages
107
Reaction score
0
Is gravity driving the exapansion of the universe? If so, would it be safe to assume that the universe is in fact in free fall towards a (hypothetical) larger "body" of mass? Trying to come to terms with what's actually driving the expansion is hard, but when I think about it, gravitational acceleration would be a possible answer to my un-educated mind. I can easilly come to terms with Einstein's universe, where the big bang starts off violent, but then slows down and eventually collapses in on it's self. But to comprehend that the universe is actually accelerating is hard for me to come to terms with unless I think of it in this way.
 
Space news on Phys.org
No, the Universe is not falling anywhere. When we speak of an accelerated Universe, we mean that we can observe that Galaxies far away not only move away from us (no matter in what direction we look), but they are doing so in a way that the speed with they move away at, increases with time. Note that an observer living in any other Galaxy would observe exactly the same thing.
And yes, the current understanding is that gravity is responsible for this. You are right when you say you are having trouble to comprehend this, because it needs a component with very unusual properties: Dark Energy. This dark energy, which we don't have a clue what it is, has to have negative pressure and therefore acts like anti-gravity, driving the universe apart.
 
if you need to think of something "driving" the pattern of expanding distances, try thinking that general relativity is driving.

And think of GR not as a theory of gravity but as a theory of dynamic geometry. It explains why we observe the geometric relations we do, where we do, and how geometry changes.
It explains, for example, why in most places and situations, the sum of the angles is 180, and pythagoras, and stuff like that. And explains why and how distances between apparently stationary things can increase, when GR says, and decrease when they have to. All this contained in the idea of curvature.

The main GR equation tells how geometry evolves. And once it gets started expanding, the equation makes it continue (although the eq. allows it to speed up gradually or slow down, depending on stuff etc.)

Try thinking that way, as dynamic geometry. See how it works.
====================

Try saying to yourself "geometry is autonomous."

You should realize that except for small random motions the galaxies are not moving.

Most galaxies we can see have redshift z > 1.7. And if a galaxy has redshift over 1.7 then the distance to it is increasing at a rate faster than c. So the distance to a typical galaxy is increasing faster than c. But the galaxy is not going anywhere, it is not ordinary motion where the galaxy would be approaching some destination. It is simply distances between stationary objects changing as required by the Law of Geometry. (the main GR equation, that is)
======================

In school, 14-year-olds learn pythadoras and that triangles add up to 180 degrees, which is approximately true at least in this neighborhood of space, and a very useful approximation---what it says is that locally our space is approximately FLAT.

But they aren't told why it is flat.

It is flat because the density is about right for flatness. The main GR equation explains what makes it flat, and what the critical density has to be.

At the present epoch the average largescale density has to be about 0.86 nanojoules per cubic meter. If it were significantly different then you wouldn't have pythagoras or 180 degrees.

GR says there are reasons for basic features of how things are, why are that way. Off hand you have no right to expect some things to be true that you learn as a 14 year old, without something causing them to be that way.

And you can't expect distances to stay the same, because they evolve according to a pattern as part of autonomously evolving geometry. (which the initial conditions and the density of matter does influence!)
 
Last edited:
Excelent post, thank you!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K