Pjpic
- 235
- 1
If the universe had stayed the size of a baseball, would it have taken light 13.5 billion years to travel across it?
The discussion revolves around the hypothetical scenario of the universe being the size of a baseball and the implications for the travel time of light across that space. Participants explore concepts related to the expansion of the universe, the nature of spacetime, and the effects of energy density on light propagation.
Participants express disagreement on the assumptions regarding spacetime and the implications of energy density on light travel time. There is no consensus on the hypothetical scenario or its implications.
Participants highlight limitations in the assumptions made about spacetime and the nature of the universe's expansion, indicating a need for clarity on definitions and conditions of the hypothetical scenario.
The universe has never been "the size of a baseball" so I'm not clear why you are asking what would have happened if it has "stayed" that size.Pjpic said:If the universe had stayed the size of a baseball, would it have taken light 13.5 billion years to travel across it?
I don't know, maybe something about how the density(?) of spacetime effects light.student07 said:What is your thought about it?
This posits an incorrect assumption that spacetime is an "ether". It is not.Pjpic said:I don't know, maybe something about how the density(?) of spacetime effects light.
Pjpic said:If the universe had stayed the size of a baseball
Pjpic said:something about how the density(?) of spacetime effects light.
PeterDonis said:The universe, as best we can tell, is spatially infinite, so, as phinds said, it has never been "the size of a baseball".
Spacetime doesn't have a density. The matter and energy present in spacetime does, but spacetime itself doesn't.
Pjpic said:If the currently visible universe had stopped expanding at an earlier time
Pjpic said:would the greater energy density cause light to take the same 13.5 b.l.y. to traverse the radius?