Ghideon

Ok! Distance in the void, around the universe, gets longer and longer as the universe expands. So the void expands, correct?

Fail! The letters are mixed up. Too late to edit ... Image is correct; A/B/C was wrong in descriptions, correct versions of Case I,II,III:

I believe I have found one more reason for confusion in the discussion. The explanations you post are simplified versions containing one physical dimension. In the general case I think this is absolutely fine, removing unnecessary complexity while addressing some specific aspect is a good thing. But in the case with a 1D line in the model, the simplification removes important issues of the model. When you use 1D line you have universe that has a void at both ends. There is no void along the part of the 1D line that is represents the universe. The void is not continuous, it is actually two different voids separated by a 1D universe. In this case you can, as you stated, probably have an expanding universe that increases the distance between two pieces of non-changing voids, just as we can observe increasing distance between galaxies in the universe. But the above simplification seems to hide the geometrical issues I try to address. The universe(s) are surrounded by the void on all sides. Below is a new picture. Case I: A and D are points in the void, B and C are located at the edge on one universe. Case II: The universe has expanded so that the distance BC inside the universe is twice as long as in case I. As a consequence, according to the model, lines AB and CD are moved further apart. Distances AB and CD are unchanged. A traveler inside the universe travels from A to B and measures the distance, distance AB is X. Case III: Same as case II but we take into account that the void is continuous. The universe is still 1D but it has to be surrounded by void. The void must allow for travel between A and B without passing through the universe. The traveler is now in the void and travels from A to B in the void, represented by the dashed line along the universe. What distance will the traveler measure in the void in Case III? Is it X? The points A and B in the void exactly the same in all three cases. Either the void has expanded or objects at A and B would experience acceleration? There may be other explanations, I can't figure out how the geometry of the void works. Side note: once you manage to explain the geometry of the void there are a huge number of issues inside the universe that will be addressed. This will require some thought to untangle. I'll do that in a later post if the tread remains open.

Ok! If one or more additional new "dimensions" are needed, it is not surprising that my attempts at explaining or drawing pictures of the situation fails. I need an exact definition, in whatever mathematical detail that is required, describing all about this new concept and how it is related to the space time. It changes how the geometry behaves and I'm simply not clever enough to figure out how. I use "dimension" because at this point I'm not sure if the model uses mainstream definitions. One thing that just hit me, I haven't verified: Question 1: how many spatial and temporal dimensions does the universe(s) have in your model? Question 2: how many spatial and temporal dimensions does the void have in your model? Please also explain in detail how the following is possible: Ok! Then this thread can be closed. You need to define a coordinate system, dimensions, distance, lines and length. If "distance" in a "dimension" the universe is different to the "distance" in a "dimension" the void you will have some really strange geometrical effects along the edge of the universe. I deliberately use "distance" because at this point it is not clear what it is. No, we are talking about new stuff you keep adding. It is quite possible that your model of spacetime is intuitive to many forum members. But to me it would be easier if you present the complete definitions of all new concepts you need.

Yes but the 1D simple model seems to fail to explain the geometry you seems to suggest. You say there is no expansion of the void and no acceleration of stuff that needs to be moved out of the way. Yet there seems to be room in the void for expaning universes, without moving stuff from the universe and into the void. I added a second dimension to try to show one, out of many possible, situations where I could not understand how the distances and angles are supposed to behave in the model. But then the dip is in another dimension compared to the 1D line you are drawing? This is confusing.

I think your reply confirms that the geometry you suggest may not be possible to explain using pictures. Now when I look at the peaks and dips I get the impression that a 1 Ly distance in the universe is not always a 1 Ly distance in the void. What is space density?

I realise that my picture and description failed to describe the issue, sorry for the confusion! I’ll try a more detailed version, the initial situation is the same but I have out labels on more points. Hope this one is better Case I: A is a point in the void, B is one edge of the universe, C is the other edge, D is a point in the void. Points E and F are in the void, located so that line EF is 5 Ly (Light year). Lines EF and AD are parallel and separated by a distance of 2 Ly. Lines AE and DF are 2 Ly, parallel and separated by distance of 5 Ly. A 1 Ly universe is located between B and C. Angles at A, D, E and F are 90 degrees. Case II: The universe has expanded to 2 Ly, according to your model the result is that the solid AB and CD are pushed away. Line AD is now 6 Ly. How long is line EF according to your model? Case II is where I fail to understand the geometry of the void. If distance EF is increasing then there is metric expansion of space between E and F? How are other universes in the void affected? I have also tried to re-read the thread, at this point it is very confusing to make out what your model tries to explain. I suggest you try to define, in detail, each of the concept you use and how they behave. Also please provide the math, it may not be possible to continue the discussion with pictures only. A few issues: I cant figure out what this means. Please explain area and how distance can increase without metric expansion or moving of objects. What is a local scale? Here are some examples where I believe you state that the void, the space between universes, does not expand:

Then how can a 5 Ly distance become 6 Ly? So far you have, as far as I can tell, denied metric expansion of the void and acceleration of stuff that needs to be moved. What mechanism is responsible for the geometry of the void?

Thanks, but I can't see how the geometry works. I'll try a picture, ugly but hopefully correct. I reuse the notations from the quote below, and add a point D. Case I: A 1 Ly (light year) universe. We have the same points A,B and C as in your case and an additional point D. The line AD is 5 Ly. Case II: The universe has expanded to 2 Ly pushing the solid AB and CD away. How long is line AD according to your model? .

Ok! Then the following apply? Lets have the same setup as above but let A be a point on the edge of another universe "X". When AB is pushed away when BC grows. AB is solid so universe X is pushed away. What kind of acceleration will be measured inside universe X?

Ok! Lets say a universe has a circumference of 1 Ly (Light year) when measured along the edge from inside the universe. Along the outside, seen from the void, the same universe has a circumference of 1 Ly. Space in the universe expands so circumference measured inside is now 2 Ly. Space outside the universe, in the void, does not expand. The circumference in the void is still 1 Ly. Please explain how this works.

Sorry, my bad! I assumed that because I couldn't figure out how the geometry is working, maybe you can explain? Assumptions: 1: Space inside the many universes* is expanding, just like in the mainstream model of big bang. 2: Galaxies at the edge of the universes may be pulled out into an empty void, while also getting further and further form the centre due to the expanding space* If above assumptions about the model are correct, what mechanism allows for the following two things: A: The void between universes allows for a smaller and smaller distance between universes, so the universes can eventually collide. B: The void must, at the same time, expand to make room for expanding universes. I can't figure out how the void between universes behaves, I think you need to provide a mathematic model. *) Standard disclaimer: This is not my understanding of the generally accepted model, its my understanding of the proposed model in this topic

Follow up to make sure I understand; space is not expanding in your model? Expansion is instead always the result from various speculative forces that acts on matter? Matter is dragged and/or pushed into empty space surrounding "a universe"? With all these forces like negative* gravity etc acting on matter, wouldn't a large number of galaxies be deformed? *) non-existing in mainstream models but part of previous posts.

Thanks for the clarification! That was the thing I was looking for. Lets move on, I have some trouble with some references to "expansion" and "force"; examples: and Is some movement in your model is caused by expansion of space and other movement caused by pushing forces?

Ok! But I still do not understand why an observer close to the edge does not observe the empty void on one side and "lots of starts and galaxies" on the other side. What prevents the observer from being at a location that is closer to the edge than half the size of the observable universe? Probably just my english, but what is "it" in this context. None of the things mentioned by @Strange is supposed to cause expansion as far as I can tell. (bold by me)

There are several issues raised, for now I focus on one I posted. The two explainations above seems to contradict each other. How can an observer near the edge of the expanding sphere believe that he is in the centre from his point of view?

Ok. Please clarify, does your hypothesis state that the universe exists in an empty void? Something like the attached image? This void, yellow in the image, may contain other universes (green area). In the future one or many green universes will have expanded enough to overlap?

Yes I know, I tried to create a thought experiment with one thing out of many that the speculative idea fails to explain. Now that we have a list of issues maybe the OP can address them all in one go? Do not expect that me to do that, I prefer to try to explain why GR seems correct . Hopefully you refer to anyone proposing or believing in ideas similar to the OP? (Bold by me).

Correct, I failed to express myself clearly. Thanks for pointing it out! Maybe this is better: The earth is not in a central position in some expanding sphere caused by an explosion.

Other members have already pointed at problems with your statements. But I find it interesting to try to understand how your idea is supposed to work* in comparison to the generally accepted big bang model. Are we, according to your idea, located at a unique position near a centre of an explosion? As far as I know the cooling of cosmic microwave shows that, on a cosmological scale, the Earth is not in a central position. Thought experiment: imagine an astronomer, located at some large distance from us, observing the expansion of the universe. Would that astronomer, according to you, draw the conclusion that he is not in the centre but between the centre and the edge of an expanding sphere? @beecee posted descriptive images, do you have images of your model as a comparison? *) I obviously do not believe the model you describe is working or supported by observations. My questions are intended to allow you to see why.

I'm no math expert but above seems like a sound statement about Actual Infinity. Maybe that is why Actual Infinity is somewhat outdated and replaced by newer definitions?

Hello, I might be able to hint you in the right direction; -What have you tried so far? -Are you familiar with some other basic triangle theorems that you may start from?

Good point, and thereby also easier to add more functions (see below) Yes. It's been a while but my memory says that i've had three universal remotes; not sure if price tag and production cost or complexity correlate but: -Cheapest one had a hardcoded set of commands for a set of manufacturers. -Next had hardcoded set of commands plus the ability to learn new commands by pointing it nose to nose with another remote. (Nice if you bought the replacement remote before the old one was broken) -Most expensive had a connection for adding new models / IR codes. I believe the high price in this case was not necessarily motivated by production cost. Guesswork: A Programmable controller as stated by @Strange was required anyway, and by allowing en user to connect to it looked more fancy, and retailed at a significantly higher price.

I have some trouble understanding, as far as i know the hot dense state that expand during big bang is "everywhere". If I understand the statement above you have, kind of: Some spatially large void. Locally in this void, there are many, or an infinite number, of volumes in a hot, dense state. Each one of these many local hot dense volumes can individually expand and cool. Questions: If you have one large initial void then isn't that, by definition "the universe"? If there is empty space between volumes that can expand as "separate big bangs"* doesn't that imply that each such "big bang" your hypothesis has a centre, as @Strange pointed out? I haven't analysed this completely but: If space is continuously expanding and each new "big bang" is triggered by a finite mass in a black hole that has reached "critical mass", then on a global scale, doesn't the density decrease? So the process can't go on forever? No I do not, but I am on this forum to ask questions and learn more *) I intentionally use "big bang" to try to be clear and separate your model from the mainstream Big Bang, in case they are different in the context of this discussion.

Hi! I'm trying to understand the idea to add some thoughts. Unfortunately the first quote seems empty. Was that intended? I'll comment on point 1-3 once I know I have all info. Ok, but it is tricky to comment or discuss the idea if you keep it for your self