Tokage
- 22
- 0
Had our observations shown shown that the Universe was not expanding, and was instead static, where would that have lead us as far as Cosmology is concerned?
The discussion centers on the implications of a static Universe versus an expanding one in the context of Cosmology. If observations indicated a static Universe, it would suggest that the expansion has ceased due to sufficient matter halting it through gravitational attraction, negating the influence of dark energy. Historical models by Newton and Einstein, which proposed static Universes, were ultimately deemed unstable, highlighting the challenges of reconciling such models with observable phenomena. The conversation also touches on the historical context of these models and their limitations.
PREREQUISITESAstronomers, cosmologists, physics students, and anyone interested in the foundational concepts of the Universe's structure and evolution.
chrisbaird said:As there is ample evidence of the universe's expansion and evolution in ancient times, an observation that the universe is currently not expanding, but is static would mean that it's expansion has slowed down to a stop recently. This would imply that there is enough matter in the universe to halt expansion under its own gravitational attraction, and there was no other significant factor (like dark energy) causing the expansion beyond the initial big band and inertia.