Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Universe expansion logic ?

  1. May 7, 2012 #1
    by measuring redshift physicist conclude
    1.most of the galaxies are moving away from our galaxy
    2.universe is expanding

    1.most of the galaxies are moving away from our galaxy

    if we ride alongside a train on a motorbike with relatively same speed , do we don't hear the doppler effect . it is effective if one is static
    like wise our galaxy must be moving alongside or in line with other galaxies so shouldn't there be blueshift on the direction of our galaxy heading and redshift on opposite side, but we see redshift every where :confused:

    2.universe is expanding

    how physicists concluded universe itself is expanding by judging the outward movement of galaxies :confused: universe is infinite ,isn't it? so how does universe expand .if space itself is expanding from a concentrated state stretching stuff within it, then one has to admit space is finite ,if space is infinite it must not be expanding.

    if galaxies are moving away from each other ,well they are moving relative to each other but how does it prove space/universe is expanding
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2012
  2. jcsd
  3. May 7, 2012 #2

    Drakkith

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    There is, but only with galaxies close enough to us that the expansion of the universe is not the dominant source of redshift. For example, the Andromeda galaxy is highly blueshifted (for a galaxy) and is currently moving towards us. However, the overwhelming majority of galaxies are too far away to be bound to us and as a result the expansion is carrying them away and causing them to be redshifted. This expansion happens in all directions and affects everything. Everything in the universe that is not bound by gravity or another fundamental force is moving away from everything else.

    A couple of things here. First and foremost, when we say that the universe is expanding, what we mean exactly is that objects within the universe are moving away from each other. That's it.

    Second, even an infinite universe can expand. This may seem silly and counter-intuitive, but it is the truth. You are imagining the universe as a giant bubble or something related and that the universe itself is expanding into pre-existing space. This is not what we mean by expansion, nor is it required that something be outside the universe for it to expand into.

    So, everything we see that is not bound to us is moving away from us due to expansion. Whether or not the universe is finite or infinite us currently unknown, yet either can be true and still be compatible with current models of cosmology.
     
  4. May 7, 2012 #3
    Why do you say that if space is infinite it must not be expanding?
     
  5. May 7, 2012 #4

    Chronos

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    1. All of the galaxies in the local group are moving in the same general direction at a speed of about 600 km/s. There are additional peculiar motions of the individual galaxies, but, of lesser magnitude. Only the Andromeda galaxy is actually approaching the Milky Way - at the blistering speed of about 60 km/s. The are a few dwarf galaxies that are also blue shifted, but, are orbiting other larger galaxies so their blue shift is a temporary effect due to their orbital direction relative to the Milky Way.

    The Hubble constant is about 70 km/s/Megaparsec. Assuming the velocity of the local group relative to the CMB [~600 km/s] is typical, it appears unlikely any galaxy more than about 9 Megaparsecs [~30 million light years] distant will ever be blueshifted.

    2. The observable universe is definitely finite and has steadily increased in size for the last 13.7 billion years. Since, by definition, the observable universe is limited by the finite speed of light - it will forever be finite.
     
  6. May 7, 2012 #5

    jim hardy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    Is the pioneer anomaly in proportion to hubble contant dividec by c ?

    methinks there's something yet to be figured out about this apparent expansion, redshift, and all that...
     
  7. May 8, 2012 #6
    I see absolutely no reason why the unobservable universe cannot be finite. Unobservability certainly doesn't preclude finiteness. It merely means that it is beyond our observation. For all we know the unobservable universe could be an exact replica of the observable one including the observable one's finiteness albeit larger. The real difference is that the unobservable universe's finitness might very well be a real one instead of one based on our inability to see beyond a certain point. Actually, saying that the visible universe is finite based on that reason is tantamount reaching conclusions about a land area' size because we can't see beyond a certain mountain range.
     
    Last edited: May 8, 2012
  8. May 8, 2012 #7

    Chronos

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Not even close. The hubble constant is only 70 m/s per Megaparsec. Our best guess for now is the pioneer anomaly is merely a thermal effect.
     
  9. May 8, 2012 #8

    Chronos

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Radrook, keep in mind the unobservable universe is causally disconnected from the observable universe.
     
  10. May 8, 2012 #9

    Interesting! Can you elaborate a little on that.
     
  11. May 8, 2012 #10

    Chronos

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    You can't observe anything older than the observable universe.
     
  12. May 8, 2012 #11
    infinity is not an ongoing process, it is a fundamentality
     
  13. May 8, 2012 #12

    Radrook, keep in mind the unobservable universe is causally disconnected from the observable universe.

    So how would observation be a causation?
     
  14. May 8, 2012 #13
    I agree 100%! If it can be increased then it wasn't infinite to begin with. The infinitely large cannot be made larger because there is nothing larger than the infinitely large. The same holds true for the infinitely small. If indeed it can be smaller larger then it had spacial or numerical limits. Limits and infinity are mutually exclusive.
     
    Last edited: May 8, 2012
  15. May 8, 2012 #14

    Chronos

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Infinity is a logical construct and yields logical contradiction when treated as if it possesses any physicality. Is the set of all integers more 'infinite' than the set of all even numbered integers? There are any number [an infinite number, to be precise] of calculus problems that use infinity as a limit, yet, yield a finite solution.
     
  16. May 8, 2012 #15
    If light cannot reach us from the unobservable universe, then nothing can. Therefore, nothing we ever do can have any effect on the unobservable universe, and vice versa.
     
  17. May 8, 2012 #16

    bapowell

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Are you familiar with Cantor's work on the cardinality of infinite sets? It is possible to construct infinite sets of different size.
     
  18. May 8, 2012 #17
    It doesn’t have to for both universes to be causally connected. As the definition of causation shows, causal connection simply means that one universe would need to affect the other in a cause and effect manner. Does the visible universe do anything that affects the invisible one in a cause-effect manner? well, please note that it feeds matter to the other making it larger in the process. Also note that such matter can be assumed to interact causally with whatever it encounters on the other side of the boundary that separates one from the other from a human perspective.

    BTW

    I agree that humans are causally disconnected from that universe. But that doesn't justify a blanket statement that would imply that both universes are causally disconnected.
     
    Last edited: May 8, 2012
  19. May 8, 2012 #18

    Drakkith

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I don't believe matter is being fed from the observable universe to the unobservable universe.

    The border isn't a brick wall, its a barrier in time. Anything beyond that barrier CANNOT affect us yet. Objects just on the other side can and have been affecting objects on our side, we just haven't been able to observe this effect yet. Therefor we are not causally connected to it yet.
     
  20. May 8, 2012 #19
    Where is it all going from your standpoint then-tra la la land?




    I never said that we are causally connected as human beings to anything that happens beyond that horizon. I never said that the horizon blocks all influences between these regions. Your misunderstanding is that you are focusing on people in relation to that horizon and I am talking about the two distinct regions themselves in relation to one another and people are totally irrelevant from the point of causality between these two areas.
     
    Last edited: May 8, 2012
  21. May 8, 2012 #20

    bapowell

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Your statements are confrontational and rude, Radrook. Drakkith is merely trying to engage in constructive discourse (the brick wall reference I'm sure was meant facetiously, as I know Drakkith to be a thoughtful commenter.) I'll advise you to read the PF rules on this kind of attitude -- this is a place to learn, not pick fights.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Universe expansion logic ?
  1. Universal Expansion? (Replies: 30)

Loading...