Why the universe has to be so big?

The Error of Small Samples sits quietly in the corner.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

why-the-universe-has-to-be-so-big. That is the OP question .

Answer ; because each sub-atomic needs a fundamental amount of space inwhich to exist . Which of course expands into atomics.

Therefore the reason the Universe is so big , is because energy and then matter , has a fundamental amount of space that is needed in order for both to manifest into a physical thing .

Space is important for the manifestation of anything . No matter the size .

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

there is a tendency to equate the large scale in size of the universe as to different possibilities and the ironic part is it doesn't matter if it's large or small as it doesn't change one iota of anything on earth or our existence. even worse, since the laws are fundamentally the same even if it's billions of light years away, it's basically the same neighborhood, with some superficial variants. in other words, the grass isn't greener just because the other grass is light years away. you would need a wormhole or be able to go beyond this universe in order to experience something truly/fundamentally really different (physics and laws of nature).

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Are there any theories that claim that the universe we can observe (or to include those parts we cannot observe) is actually finite?

 

Regarding size, "He Who Shrank" is a story about a guy injected with a serum that makes him shrink. He shrinks down until the atoms because galaxies and continues. He lands on planets and shrinks down on those to start the cycle again. After an endless number of these cycles he eventually lands on Earth.

 

that's still has the connotation of being within the same framework (physics/laws of nature) though, just changes in size scale and a material universe where the medium of consciousness is through organic life. the idea that consciousness could exist outside of organic life or in a different type of medium/existence is a foreign concept to people.

 

Well, that's because there's no good evidence for that.

 

Saint,

You must be giving lot of time in raising such interesting topics.

I take this as how come Universe is so big. The prevalent Big Bang Cosmology (BBC) talks of accelerated expansion of the universe (from zero) with stretching of intervening space. All sort of imaginative factors are involved here including inflation and Dark Energy which give the universe present size and a finite age. But since our understanding as on date is limited so even if there are some teething issues we cannot do much in absence of a plausible alternative. At least BBC is able to explain a great deal of observations.

But still there is an unanswered question, any inflation or expansion guided by any amount of finite energy must stop one day, then what? Then we have to talk about gravitational contraction of the universe, has it already started or why it has not started yet or when will it start.....BBC does not offer any clear answer to these troubling questions.

So let us change BBC with a tremendously simple alternative requiring no fudge factors, only a little bit of imagination and one assumption about presence of something called "Progenitor State of Matter and Radiation" (PSMR) will do the needful. We just have to define PSMR (even mainstream refers to empty space as actually not nothing, but we are not able to concretely define it). I am attempting to define the empty space by stating that empty space is actually PSMR and it manifests as gravity when it is stretched, otherwise it cannot be detected. It certainly is not a state as we understand in Physics (no solid, no gas, no liquid, no plasma).

This simple assumption (introduction of PSMR) explains all the observation which BBC does and even covers some unanswered questions under BBC too.

for starter, BBC answers your question (why universe is so big : due to continued accelerated expansion) but it creates some more related unanswered questions as in blue color, but the PSMR alternative not only answers this question but predicts further that universe would continue to grow, with no stopping, forever.

My only concern as of now is "is the concept of PSMR as such viable"? Introducing something as Progenitor of mass and radiation? Is it scientific? My only support is the concept of Dark Matter in mainstream, if Dark Matter concept is 'in' then PSMR should also be 'in'.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,,-203794,00.html

 

Thanks for the link and interesting reading
But to me it seems we have discovered something which is in existence
But it does not explain why not 10 klm per second faster or 10 klm slower
Yes we have labelled it
And I guess yes we will have to be satisfied with "it is what it is and that's it, no argument"

The supremacy of physics strike again

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

My take on the acceleration of the expansion of the Universe is as follows

The most distant parts of the Universe which we can see are moving into NOTHING and because they are moving into NOTHING they are not meeting ÀNY resistance

Since there is NO resistance those distant parts of the Universe are still moving, and as stated accelerating, under the explosive force of the Big Bang as per the rules of physics

In simple language - stuff will continue to move in a direction under a force unless another force acts upon it

As I contend the distant parts of the Universe are not meeting any other forces so they will just keep going

My bet is as the general density of the Universe decreases due to expansion gravity will prove ineffective in halting the expansion

The final death of the Universe will be when the density is so low that the forces holding atoms together will fail

The components of the atom will fly apart

I do not understand where your Progenitor State of Matter and Radiation fits in or even what it is

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Same could be said for a lot of the basic numbers that govern our universe. The thing is they all work together to make our Universe what it is. So there is a "reason" why they are what they are. It isn't a matter of argument at all. "Just Six Numbers" by Martin Rees goes into this topic.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jun/08/just-six-numbers-martin-rees-review

 

I could easily be wrong but I think the prevailing opinion is that the universe may just be expanding into itself.It is creating its own space as it expands and is not expanding into anything exterior to it.

There is no NOTHING to provide zero resistance

There is no Outside in the same way as there is no centre.

Hope I have picked up right on that.

 

Yes I agree you have that spot on

There is no NOTHING to provide zero resistance

I have read that and Huey Dewey and Louie still argue about it and have not given me a straight answer on that aspect

It is creating its own space as it expands and is not expanding into anything exterior to it.

If that is the case I would contend the space it is self creating would not be offering any resistance

This would result in exactly the same outcome as if it was expanding into the nothing exterior to itself (which has been stated does not exist (there is no nothing beyond the Universe))

Huey Dewey and Louie are calling for more coffee

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

^^^
Expansion is only between galaxy groups or clusters. It supposedly does not affect space between galaxies or between solar systems or between planets. Why would it affect atoms?

<>

 

^^^
I think you have the current theory correct but it makes no frigging sense. Space is simply area. It is nothing to be created. The so called fabric of space which scientists claim to exist, IF it exists, must be something in space just as planets & galaxies & everything is in space. Space itself is not made of anything.
If planets or solar systems were moving away from each other, we would not say space is being created or is expanding & there is no reason to claim it for galaxy groups moving away from each other. The best we can say about it is we do not know & any further default should be that space is infinite, at least until we find out different.
Even aside from simple space, we do not know whether there is anything beyond our known universe & to claim to know is ridiculous.

<>

 

I don't think that is correct

Currently the moon is moving away from Earth about 3.8 cms a year

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/ab...e-earth-when-was-this-discovered-intermediate

Another link gives 50 billion years before it settles into a locked stable orbit

My understanding is the sun will have died and expanded to burn the Earth up before that period has passed

Sure in small pockets of the Universe some constructs are moving closer to each other. But overall those small regions do not counter the decrease in overall density of the Universe

I understand atoms will "explode" when effectively there exists a perfect vacuum

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

It is correct. The Moon moving away from the Earth has nothing to do with the Universe expanding.

https://www.scienceabc.com/nature/universe/why-is-the-moon-moving-away-from-earth.html

 

^^^
Where atoms exist there will not be a vacuum.
I have never heard of the supposed expansion of space affecting the make up of atoms.
The theory claims only that space expands between galaxy groups. Tho it is usually misstated as between galaxies.

<>

 

It does not fit in the BBC model, it is alternative to that. Let me try to express it:

- To understand PSMR, a reference to Asymptotic Freedom of quarks (of nucleons) is in order. As per this if two quarks are brought closer the bond strength reduces and if two quarks are taken apart then bond strength increases and beyond a point it snaps and new particles are created.

1. So consider PSMR as something present all over, if it is stretched (like between quarks) then it can be detected otherwise it cannot be. A stretch in PSMR beyond certain critical point produces particles, a relaxation in strethced PSMR produces radiation.

2. The strength of stretch determines gravity (G). This is highest between quarks and naturally falls to prevalent value just beyond an hydrogen atom.

3. Any formation of matter (or even the concentration of energy) causes stretch in the surrounding PSMR.


With this almost all the observations can be plausibly explained. Let us take the OP: start at t = 0, when there was no stretch, the PSMR was completely at rest, no motion, no detection, no stretch, no temperature, like nothingness as we understand.....no concept of time and matter. Now somehow a stretch started developing between any two arbitrary points, this stretch reached a level and first fundamental particle got created (start of time either from this point or from the point when the stretch started developing), once couple of particles are present the PSMR could no longer be at rest, the self sustaining trigger would have ensured production of more particles and radiation. Even today, say the matter universe has a finite horizon, beyond that the stretched PSMR exists, this stretched PSMR is further breeding ground for matter thus the growth of universe continues and will continue forever.