Moltensphereearth Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 IF the planets were molten when they were born spheres and the universe is expanding would the spheres not loot like teardrop shape due to the force of the expanding universe? Also, if the sun if a sphere and the universe is expanding would the sun not look like a teardrop shape too? If the universe is expanding why is this not true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steevey Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 (edited) IF the planets were molten when they were born spheres and the universe is expanding would the spheres not loot like teardrop shape due to the force of the expanding universe? Also, if the sun if a sphere and the universe is expanding would the sun not look like a teardrop shape too? If the universe is expanding why is this not true? Astronomers don't know for a fact that space itself is expanding, only the the speeds at which galaxies are traveling away from each other are accelerating. On top of all that, if space itself was expanding, and all matter is all on the same plane that is space, all matter would be on the expanding plane with the same amount of force moving all matter. If you and another object are free-falling at the same height, since the force of gravity is the same, the atoms in you and the object are all falling at the same speed or are effected by the same amount of force at the same moment, so you are both going the same speed. Edited February 17, 2011 by steevey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 IF the planets were molten when they were born spheres and the universe is expanding would the spheres not loot like teardrop shape due to the force of the expanding universe? Also, if the sun if a sphere and the universe is expanding would the sun not look like a teardrop shape too? If the universe is expanding why is this not true? Why should it be true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spyman Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 IF the planets were molten when they were born spheres and the universe is expanding would the spheres not loot like teardrop shape due to the force of the expanding universe? Also, if the sun if a sphere and the universe is expanding would the sun not look like a teardrop shape too? If the universe is expanding why is this not true? For the Sun or other objects in space to be forced into a teardrop shape by the accelerated expansion, the expansion must be unsymmetrical. The modern view of the Big Bang and the expanding Universe do NOT have any center but instead have a uniform and equally large expansion, in all directions and in all locations. As such the Sun is expanding equally everywhere inside, causing it to grow slightly before it's own gravity counters the accelerated expansion and a equilibrium is reached. ¤ The key to avoiding the misunderstandings is not to take the term "big bang" too literally. The big bang was not a bomb that went off in the center of the universe and hurled matter outward into a preexisting void. Rather it was an explosion of space itself that happened everywhere, similar to the way the expansion of the surface of a balloon happens everywhere on the surface. ¤ This difference between the expansion of space and the expansion in space may seem subtle but has important consequences for the size of the universe, the rate at which galaxies move apart, the type of observations astronomers can make, and the nature of the accelerating expansion that the universe now seems to be undergoing. http://www.mso.anu.edu.au/~charley/papers/LineweaverDavisSciAm.pdf The Big Bang is not an explosion of matter moving outward to fill an empty universe. Instead, space itself expands with time everywhere and increases the physical distance between two comoving points. Because the FLRW metric assumes a uniform distribution of mass and energy, it applies to our Universe only on large scales - local concentrations of matter such as our galaxy are gravitationally bound and as such do not experience the large-scale expansion of space. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang Local perturbations The expansion of space is sometimes described as a force which acts to push objects apart. Though this is an accurate description of the effect of the cosmological constant, it is not an accurate picture of the phenomenon of expansion in general. For much of the universe's history the expansion has been due mainly to inertia. The matter in the very early universe was flying apart for unknown reasons (most likely as a result of cosmic inflation) and has simply continued to do so, though at an ever-decreasing rate due to the attractive effect of gravity. In addition to slowing the overall expansion, gravity causes local clumping of matter into stars and galaxies. These stars and galaxies do not subsequently expand, there being no force compelling them to do so. There is no essential difference between the inertial expansion of the universe and the inertial separation of nearby objects in a vacuum; the former is simply a large-scale extrapolation of the latter. A uniform local "explosion" of matter can be locally described by the FLRW geometry, the same geometry which describes the expansion of the universe as a whole. In particular, general relativity predicts that light will move at the speed c with respect to the local motion of the exploding matter, a phenomenon analogous to frame dragging. This situation changes somewhat with the introduction of a cosmological constant. A cosmological constant has the effect of a repulsive force between objects which is proportional (not inversely proportional) to distance. Unlike inertia it actively "pulls" on objects which have clumped together under the influence of gravity, and even on individual atoms. However this does not cause the objects to grow steadily or to disintegrate; unless they are very weakly bound, they will simply settle into an equilibrium state which is slightly (undetectably) larger than it would otherwise have been. As the universe expands and the matter in it thins, the gravitational attraction decreases (since it is proportional to the density), while the cosmological repulsion increases; thus the ultimate fate of the ΛCDM universe is a near vacuum expanding at an ever increasing rate under the influence of the cosmological constant. However the only locally visible effect of the accelerating expansion is the disappearance (by runaway redshift) of distant galaxies; gravitationally bound objects like the Milky Way do not expand. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_expansion_of_space#Local_perturbations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moltensphereearth Posted February 17, 2011 Author Share Posted February 17, 2011 (edited) Why should it be true? droped water acts like teardrops so the sun should too if it's moving. it is strange it's expanding like that. I'ts not really a bang. A bit hard to prove as the instruments needed to test this would be expanding too. Im a bit confused though with space expanding. Space has no sides so does not exist, so how can space expand? with my idea of space surrounds solid, that proves that empty space has ALWAYS never existed. Edited February 17, 2011 by Moltensphereearth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 droped water acts like teardrops No, it doesn't. http://www.kidsnewsroom.org/elmer/infocentral/frameset/meterology/bad/BadFAQ/BadRainFAQ.html Oh, and die, sockpuppet, die Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts