Wolte

Thank you again for all the answers. And especially Strange, for trying to answer the original question. I would have counter statements, but shall think it through later ones more. To get back to the topic and the question on how to scientifically ask the original question. With the given information on this thread, let me try to take a shot at it… Would the following way be a more scientific way of asking the same thing (by giving an example)?: “(If it turns out there is an increasing amount of dark stuff in the observable universe) Let us consider the observable universe as a filled water balloon and dark stuff (-matter, -energy or something) as air. And also, that someone has sticked a straw in the balloon, with the other end of the straw in the middle of the balloon and the other end outside the balloon. Now, if there is an increasing air bubble inside the water balloon. Couldn't we, by studying the border of the air bubble and the water, determine if someone is blowing in to the straw to make the increasing air bubble or if someone is stretching the water balloon to get the air sucked in? Maybe by, for example, if there was a bigger or a smaller vacuum cap at the border than in elsewhere in the bubble/balloon” This question/hypothesis might still be bad (and as untrue as the original), but was this any better for a question/hyphothesis for discussion? This should, at least in my theory, have a little bit better base for the mentioned requirements; 1. mathematical model 2. testable predictions 3. experiments/observations to the those predictions.

Hi. Heres the link ones more: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-something-pulling-our-universe.887846/ It wasn't a direct quote, rather a combination what I was trying to ask back then. But I think I already got a good answer for all my questions (which on the same time answered the original question!)

Ok. I think these two combined, explains the reason I was a bit refused at the other forum a few years ago. And I see, I was kind of "inventing a god", by skipping steps to beliefs. But for the original question that is based on this discussion, would you state that: "It's possible, but there is no way of proving it. It's just a belief and not in anyway useful at the moment."

Thanks for your reply. -Well not totally kicked out, but a quick shutdown of the thread, before any good-enough answers. I just figured, I wasn't wanted there anymore. ref: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-something-pulling-our-universe.887846/ -ok, so the "push" word that I've heard is like more like "driving" (force) that covers either possibility. -1. Ok, (though I need to think more closely this question/belief). Anyway, I don't "believe" my suggested idea or other theories without evidence, I just like to keep options open. -2. ok. -3. So far going good! :)

Thanks. I think these observable vs entire universe, were the words I was looking for. I shall use them in the future for clarification.

I'm actually trying to find reasons why I was kicked out in an other forum a few years ago for asking a question. (the actual questions are numbered below) Heres what I was trying to ask in short: "the universe is expanding accelerating (galaxies are travelling away from each other at an accelerating speed). It has been suggested (or proven?) that this is caused by dark energy in the/our universe. In pop science, I've heard many times that: 'there must be something pushing this accelerating expansion and that something is dark energy' ". Ok, I have nothing against this idea, but what bothers me the most, is that I see there are two possibilities for the accelerating expansion; either push or pull. So could there be something pulling the expansion (outside) our universe rather than pushing (from inside the universe, like dark energy)? 1. If there had already been something else before the big bang, with what word, would you describe everything (the known universe+something else)? I believe the universe is a bad word for "everything" , since it has "boundaries" and seems to be bound to just what we can observe. 2. Is it because we have no possibility to prove (or even observe) the asked question, that makes this unsuitable as a question for science? Follow-up: if we can't observe/prove something-> it doesn't exist? 3. If you were to ask this question, how should this be properly be asked in science?