# You're taking up too much mass!

#### dav57

##### Extraordinary Thinker Thingy
Registered Senior Member
Just a thought I wanted to share….

The usual description of our universe is supported and derived from the fact that mass has somehow been created and has taken up space over time, by nature of its very existence. But ponder the following…and I’m not sure where this could lead, but what if we consider space taking up mass? This is a difficult one to get your head around but what if mass has always been there and space was created which expands and tries to take up mass, rather than the usual way round? This rather preposterous idea, once you get your head around it, fits nicely with the idea of mass being pushed together into the minimum volume possible as space tries to take its place.

Go on then….slaughter this idea….

It's a bit hard to say without some quantitative model...
Can you show how it leads to Newtons's inverse square law for gravity?

Pete said:
It's a bit hard to say without some quantitative model...
Can you show how it leads to Newtons's inverse square law for gravity?

Aheem, no not really, but if something (whatever it is) is trying to take up the room of something else, then the greatest pressure, or force, is usually at the edge of the boundaries of the two entities.

If you get onto a full bus, the people next to you will feel the most force, with the people at the back feeling the least (something like inverse square).

If space is taking up mass, the most force will be at the edge of the space/mass confliction.

If space is trying to take up mass then it will naturally cause mass to form a shape of minimum volume, hence a sphere.

dav57 said:
If space is trying to take up mass then it will naturally cause mass to form a shape of minimum volume, hence a sphere.

Your actual starting point is false though! U are putting forward a theory which is the opposite of mass taking up space which u claim is the current thinking. It is not. Mass does not take up space. A 10kg weight takes up just as much space as a 1kg weight.
The resistance to changes in motion (mass, inertia) has, surprisingly, very little to do with the concept of space. One is a dimension, the other is a property.

John Connellan said:
Mass does not take up space.

Yes that is what I'm saying.

John Connellan said:
A 10kg weight takes up just as much space as a 1kg weight.

I'm not sure what you mean by a "10kg weight" ????

John Connellan said:
The resistance to changes in motion (mass, inertia) has, surprisingly, very little to do with the concept of space. One is a dimension, the other is a property.

Not sure how this relates to what I'm saying. All I'm trying to say is that evidence shows the space between masses expanding and that mass seems to somehow get squeezed together as if something is trying to reduce its volume locally.

Pete said:
It's a bit hard to say without some quantitative model...
Can you show how it leads to Newtons's inverse square law for gravity?

Yep.

dav57 said:
Aheem, no not really, but if something (whatever it is) is trying to take up the room of something else, then the greatest pressure, or force, is usually at the edge of the boundaries of the two entities.

You first have to realize that the force isn't around the edges as you say. If space is not penetrating the mass it will not sense density. The force is produced throughout the mass volume but it does still naturally generate a sphere..

hmmm so space is at a higher pressure than mass....yes?

MacM said:
You first have to realize that the force isn't around the edges as you say. If space is not penetrating the mass it will not sense density. The force is produced throughout the mass volume but it does still naturally generate a sphere..

MacM, Yes you're right about that and I completely agree. I'm getting my mucking furds wuddled

Quantum Quack said:
hmmm so space is at a higher pressure than mass....yes?

Yes, I suppose if you were to continue along these lines then it must be.

By the way this was only a silly thought I had a couple of days ago - it's probably complete rubbish, but worth sharing anyhow

I don't think it at all silly, I have often contended that the center of mass is considerably lower in pressure than that the outer of mass and that this is exactly what gravity is, a pressure differential or vacuum of space vs the greater vacuum of mass.

But to use similar words "hypothetical abstraction" might be better than considering them as silly.

dav57 said:
Just a thought I wanted to share….

The usual description of our universe is supported and derived from the fact that mass has somehow been created and has taken up space over time, by nature of its very existence. But ponder the following…and I’m not sure where this could lead, but what if we consider space taking up mass? This is a difficult one to get your head around but what if mass has always been there and space was created which expands and tries to take up mass, rather than the usual way round? This rather preposterous idea, once you get your head around it, fits nicely with the idea of mass being pushed together into the minimum volume possible as space tries to take its place.

Go on then….slaughter this idea….
Maxwell elimanated the Idea n the 1800's

gentle, can you point us to a link that shows this?