Is gravity really a force in the expansion of the universe?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ascending One
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Expansion Universe
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around whether the expansion of the universe is considered a force and how this phenomenon is represented in various physical models. Participants explore the mechanisms behind cosmic expansion, including references to dark energy, general relativity, and initial conditions in cosmology.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the expansion of the universe is not a force but a response to a force, though they do not specify which force this might be.
  • There is uncertainty about the mechanisms of expansion, with some suggesting dark energy as a possible explanation, while others express skepticism about its role.
  • A participant notes that the expansion theory relies on the assumption that relative radial velocity is the sole explanation for observed redshift, despite gravitational redshift being a factor in general relativity.
  • Some participants assert that the universe was not always expanding, suggesting that this is a misconception, while others reference the initial conditions of the standard model of cosmology.
  • One participant explains that the expansion is a consequence of Einstein's equations, indicating that matter and energy couple to spacetime to generate expansion, rather than being a force in the classical sense.
  • Another participant emphasizes that in general relativity, gravity is described as a geometric relationship rather than a traditional force, complicating the notion of expansion as a force.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the nature of the expansion of the universe, with no consensus reached on whether it should be classified as a force or how it is fundamentally understood within physics.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in current theories explaining cosmic expansion, including unresolved assumptions about forces and the dependence on specific definitions related to redshift and expansion.

Ascending One
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Is the expansion of the universe phenomenon considered a force or what? Basically I'm wondering how the mechanism of the expansion of the universe is represented in the standard model or any models of physics.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
"the expansion" is not a force, its a response to a force (presumably).
The mechanism is not fully understood or agreed upon according to any theory - many aren't convinced that it is fore-sure expanding (although it really does seem to be).

The most popular theory is dark energy - to my knowledge a magic aether that permeates the universe magically causing accelerated expansion... surely the details are better-understood - but certainly not by me.
 
It's a response to a force? Which force? Is it one of the 4 fundamental forces? I read on Wikipedia that it is gravity, but how can that be?
 
The inadequacy of all current theories for explaining the expansion of the universe is the driving force behind HEP (high energy Particle physics) lzkelley is right when he suggests that the expansion theory is not universally accepted. The expansionist theory depends upon the notion (often included in the definition of Doppler) that relative radial velocity (rrv) is the only basis for explaining the excess of redshift observable.
This is in spite of the fact that most scientists cling to a belief in GR which asserts that "gravitational redshift" must occur.
 
lzkelley said:
The most popular theory is dark energy

Note that the universe "expanding" has nothing to do with dark energy; it is the present day acceleration of this expansion which dark energy is conjectured to explain.
 
well i woulnot consider it a force (such as i would gravity). The point is that it is expanding but that expansion started with the Big Bang and it wasn't constant, the uuniverse was not always expanding so i'd say No. But if you want to bring in dark matter and antimatter and all those things into the equation then i have't he foggiest idea.
 
rubecuber said:
the uuniverse was not always expanding so i'd say No.

What makes you say this? The expansion of the universe is an initial condition in the standard model of cosmology.
 
Hi Ascending One, I can help you.

Its a consequence of Einsteins Equations. Matter an energy couple to spacetime generating expansion...its as as simple as that.

Formally the metric for an FRW universe reads (in cartesian coordinates)
[tex]ds^2=dt^2-a^2(t)(dx^2+dy^2+dz^2)[/tex]

The expansion of the universe is 'controlled' by the scale factor a(t). To find a(t) you need to solve Einsteins equation:
[tex]G_{\mu\nu}=\frac{8\pi G}{c^4}T_{\mu\nu}[/tex]
This is pretty easy actually. Anyhow, you discover that a(t) is related to the energy density and pressure of the universe if you model it as a perfect fluid. Some fiddling with conservation of energy equations demonstrate that the pressure is negative which drives the expanding (accelerated) universe.

Summary - Forget what you know about forces and basic classical mechanics, matter and energy couple to spacetime and generate expansion. Thats it. I'm sorry of you find this hard to visualize or understand mechanically, but sadly general relativity is not really like that. That was Einsteins genius.
 
Robousy's answer is definitely the best so far (to the OP's question). All the solutions of Einstein's equation that describe homogeneous and isotropic universes describe expanding universes. If we modify the equation by adding the cosmological constant (which is equivalent to a non-zero density of vacuum), there are some solutions that describe a more complicated behavior (like an accelerating expansion).

How can the "force" be gravity? General relativity describes gravity as a relationship (expressed by Einstein's equation) between the geometry of space-time and its matter content. So in GR, gravity is not really a force. It's just geometry. Note that it's the geometry of space-time, not just space. The fact that time is involved is what makes things like expansion possible even though geometry is usually just about shapes.

I also agree with everything that Cristo said.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Undergrad How Does the Balloon Analogy Explain the Expansion of the Universe?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Undergrad How do gravitational waves differ from the expansion of the Universe?
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Undergrad Questions on Expansion of the Universe and Newtonian Physics
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Undergrad Accelerating universe explained by constant expansion?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad On Hubble's constant, the expansion of the Universe and vacuum energy
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
High School The accelerating expansion of the universe
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Undergrad Infinity vs Expansion: Is an Infinite Universe Compatible with Expansion?
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
High School Is an External Force Driving the Acceleration of Universe Expansion?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
High School I Need Help on Understanding Some Basic Astrophysics / Sand Clock Universe
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Undergrad Does the expansion of the Universe heat stars and bodies?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K