is there anything in Universe that is not revolving around something?

[Lekgolo555]

Is there anything in the universe that is not revolving around something?

 

Is the universe expanding or shrinking? Where is the center then?

 

Is space itself something, or is it truely nothing? Like when we go to outer space are we traveling in something or is it nothing at all?

[Klaynos]

If you zoom out far enough everything moves in a curve, I'd have thought.

 

Expanding, and the expansion is getting faster. It has no centre.

 

You are not traveling in something like an ether, probably, and not an ether in the traditional something for light to propergate in sense. There is alot of matter in "space" though, like dust. What is space though is a very deep question and I think GR is your best bet for getting an understanding of it...

[spikerz66]

Expanding, and the expansion is getting faster. It has no centre.

 

It would have to have an origin if its an expansion. Now what I believe the poster meant was that if everything revolved around that center point.

 

Which is definatly not true.

 

There had to be an origin and this origin is the center of the universe.

 

My theory is that there is a small metal sphere there, and on it it has a post- it note that said. BOOM! im joking if you didnt get it by the way.

[Klaynos]

It would have to have an origin if its an expansion. Now what I believe the poster meant was that if everything revolved around that center point.

 

Which is definatly not true.

 

There had to be an origin and this origin is the center of the universe.

 

My theory is that there is a small metal sphere there, and on it it has a post- it note that said. BOOM! im joking if you didnt get it by the way.

 

Nope, no centre, no origin. Or more to the point everywhere is the origin.

 

And that's not a theory

[ydoaPs]

Is there anything in the universe that is not revolving around something?

The Earth. I doubt there is anything else, though.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Err, do go on, please.

[Sisyphus]

I, too, am a fan of geocentrism.

[ydoaPs]

Err, do go on, please.

I am standing on the Earth which is stationary relative to me. I'm not moving, so neither is the Earth.

I, too, am a fan of geocentrism.

 

I didn't say anything about geocentricism.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I didn't say anything about geocentricism.

ydoapscentrism?

[ydoaPs]

ydoapscentrism?

 

That has a nice ring to it.

[Phi for All]

ydoapscentrism?

It would take a revolution to make *that* popular.

[Klaynos]

I am standing on the Earth which is stationary relative to me. I'm not moving, so neither is the Earth.

 

 

I didn't say anything about geocentricism.

 

There are situations where the earths spin and orbit need to be taken into account for experiments on earth.

[Sisyphus]

I am standing on the Earth which is stationary relative to me. I'm not moving, so neither is the Earth.

 

That doesn't actually work, though. Well, it does, but you have to violate every law of physics to make it work. What, objects making daily billion-light-year-radius circles around me for no apparent reason? Sounds good to me!

 

(That's why "inertial" reference frame is always specified.)

[spikerz66]

Nope, no centre, no origin. Or more to the point everywhere is the origin.

 

I dont understand, the big bang is the thought that all matter in the universe came from a single point isnt it? Why is it such an illegitimate thought then to say that this is ---the---origin?

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I dont understand, the big bang is the thought that all matter in the universe came from a single point isnt it? Why is it such an illegitimate thought then to say that this is ---the---origin?

 

Because that single point was everything that existed. Everything was in that point, so everywhere was the origin. There was no "outside" of the point. You can't look at it from the outside - it was everything.

[[Tycho?]]

I dont understand, the big bang is the thought that all matter in the universe came from a single point isnt it? Why is it such an illegitimate thought then to say that this is ---the---origin?

 

You are visualizing it as an explosing thats occuring in say a 3D room. This is not a good way to think about it. There is no room that the explosion occured in, the exposion emompases everything, there is nothing outside it.

 

The oft-mentioned analogy is this: Take a balloon, and draw 4 points on it with a marker. Blow up the balloon, and notice how as the balloon expands all the points move away from eachother. Inside and outside the balloon is nothing; you can't draw the points on just the air. So all these points are moving away from eachother, but they are not all moving away from a single point.