Ethan Siegel sums up the stretching/creation of space like this:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...universe-expands-does-space-actually-stretch/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...universe-expands-does-space-actually-stretch/
You seem very certain, how is it possible to know that? We can agree that your statement is a very strong assumption instead.
Some scientists still seem to cling to the theories of continuously increasing multiple universes based on each and every individuals most mundane everyday choices. I see that as extremely unlikely, but I do not have any evidence to back up my assumption.
Concepts such as the multiverse are not theories, but are physically untestable hypotheses.
General relativity, which tells us how space behaves, is a theory that can be, and has been, tested.
By contrast, the suggestion that space can be "created" has no physical or mathematical foundation.
General relativity, which tells us how space behaves, is a theory that can be, and has been, tested.
By contrast, the suggestion that space can be "created" has no physical or mathematical foundation.
Looks like a problem with the James Webb Telescope Mid Infrared Instrument (MIRI) - Mid-Infrared Instrument Operations Update
Hopefully they can fix the problem or devise a workaround.
Hopefully they can fix the problem or devise a workaround.
So, Medium Resolution Spectroscopy (MRS) is on hold.
I read that MRS involves splitting an astronomical scene into multiple spatial components and dispersing the light from each component with a spectrograph.
I read that MRS involves splitting an astronomical scene into multiple spatial components and dispersing the light from each component with a spectrograph.
Unless it's still being created and we're just not seeing it because of our perspective. The Universe is still expanding and that expansion even seems to be accelerating so who's to say that the "big bang" is not something that's still happening somewhere?
Like some humongous zit that just keeps oozing, defying any and all reason.
All the "physical laws" that we perceive are devised upon the basis of what we see and experience, it is very unlikely that we are able to perceive all the factors of the necessary equations at this time and and date. There will come a time when we (yet again) discover something that seemingly defies any and all previously known physical laws, and after looking at it long and hard for a while we finally have yet another piece of the puzzle but are still likely to be lacking all the pieces needed to fully unlock the marvels of existence.
Theory of Relativity is nice and quite handy, but seems to me a bit of a "guesstimation" (albeit a very good one) that seems to work well enough for people not to poke at it too much. Any sufficiently hard prodding is sometimes met with:
- "Are you absolutely certain that you want to poke a hole in this? Because the universe itself may decide to unravel itself completely if it somehow suspects us of not believing in at least some semblence of physical laws, so: Do you want to exist tomorrow?"
- "..."
- "Yeah I thought so... What's for supper?"
I'm not doubting relativity and all that jazz (possibly for fear of imploding everything in known existence 🙃 ), just do not think we know enough to make very solid statements about what's really going on. We haven't even left our speck of dust yet for cryin' out loud, how can we pretend to know for sure what the universe is or isn't.
Edit:
I hereby claim intellectual rights on the origin of any theories developed from my previously mentioned "Humongous Oozing Zit" hypothesis, should it hold any merit.
Last edited:
Like TNT, you seem to think that space was created, or is still being created, by a "Big Bang" process.
If that were the case, we would have to ask ourselves what existed before space!
Intellectually, we can only assume that space has always existed and that its energy was released at the time of the Big Bang.
The rules of General Relativity are capable of telling us how a universe filled with energy will evolve.
It's the best theory we currently have, but I accept that we are only scraping at the true understanding of the Universe.
Well, it was mearly a hint for a possibility as no one here has really a clue 😉 not even you Galu.
We shall for sure ask ourselves what existed before I/BB. Because the inflation expanded into someting - even if the someting was nothing. Even nothing is something - if only a logical concept ... 🙂
Btw Galu, is there a common name for the Inflation+BB? If not, you have the chance to name it here and now! :-D
//
We shall for sure ask ourselves what existed before I/BB. Because the inflation expanded into someting - even if the someting was nothing. Even nothing is something - if only a logical concept ... 🙂
Btw Galu, is there a common name for the Inflation+BB? If not, you have the chance to name it here and now! :-D
//
It's the HOZ I tell ya! The HOZ!
I don't hold any particular opinion at all about the subject. We don't know anything about it. Was there even a "big bang" at all? It's the HOZ I tell ya! 🚱
Last edited:
You seem still to be thinking in terms of an explosion - expanding into a 3D volume - as you said in post #10,508.
The "common name" I've just invented for the hypothesised model of 'cosmic inflation - cosmic reheating - hot big bang' is 'coin-core-hobb'! 😎
Apparently, only the final 10^-32 seconds (or so) of inflation have left observable signatures on our Universe.
And I am not the only one who doesn't have a clue where the inflationary state came from! 🤓
- Status
- Not open for further replies.