Where would the observation of a static Universe have lead us?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the hypothetical implications for cosmology if observations indicated that the Universe is static rather than expanding. Participants explore the theoretical consequences of such a scenario, including historical models and the nature of gravitational forces.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that a static Universe would imply that its expansion has recently halted due to sufficient matter to counteract gravitational forces, negating the influence of dark energy.
  • Others note that static Universe models, such as those proposed by Newton and Einstein, were historically significant but ultimately flawed due to their instability under perturbations.
  • A participant questions the implications if there had never been evidence of expansion, prompting further exploration of the foundational assumptions in cosmology.
  • There is mention of unresolved issues in static models, such as the management of stellar detritus, which poses challenges for maintaining a static state.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of a static Universe, with some supporting the idea that it would indicate a balance of gravitational forces, while others highlight the historical context and inherent challenges of static models. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the broader implications for cosmology.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference historical models and the evolution of cosmological thought, indicating a dependence on the definitions of expansion and static states. The discussion highlights limitations in static models without resolving the mathematical or theoretical complexities involved.

Tokage
Messages
22
Reaction score
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?
 
Space news on Phys.org
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.
 
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.

Thanks for the answer chris! What if there had never been any evidence, even in ancient times, that the Universe was expanding?
 
Before there was a Big Bang model, there were static universe models. Newton had one after his discovery of the force of gravity, and even Einstein made one after finding general relativity. So the expansion was a recent surprise. Ironically, both Newton's and Einstein's models were wrong-- they would not have been dynamically stable (any perturbation would have made the universe go dynamical, and expand someplaces and contract in others). Also, static universe models always have the problem of needing to figure out what to do with all the detritus that stars make, and no known process could reverse that.
 
Mr. Ken G himself! Here I was bemoaning leaving, um, the other place, and missing out on your threads. I've been mulling over a future post I'd like to make relating to an early paper by Bernard d'Espagnat (meebe Sunday.) Here's hoping you'll be around for that!

Anything similar to your recent classic-quantum perspective-tweaker on this board? I loved that!

(Don't worry, I'll mostly popcorn through your threads from the sidelines as always, even if I won't be able to resist a dumb comment or question on the odd occasion.)
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
7K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
6K
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
8K