What Is The Mechanism of Space Expansion?

[michel123456]

Yes correct but..... is that what we are observing?

[Mordred]

We observe the image you posted. You calculate the proper position

[michel123456]

We don't observe a wall of galaxy clusters in the deep universe.

[Mordred]

Of course not the image you showed is no where near precise. It's simply a tool to aid understanding not an exact map. Its simply showing that galaxies are closer together the further you look back in time.

[michel123456]

Of course not the image you showed is no where near precise. It's simply a tool to aid understanding not an exact map. Its simply showing that galaxies are closer together the further you look back in time.

Can you provide evidence of this? Some data?

[Mordred]

http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0402278v1.pdf[/url

 

Here is a dissertation specifically on expansion.

 

This calculator will allow you to see the expansion history yourself.

 

It can calculate redshift distance now distance then evolution of the Hubbles sphere and observable universe etc Etc open column selections to choose. Number of steps for row control.

 

http://www.einsteins-theory-of-relativity-4engineers.com/LightCone7/LightCone.html

 

http://cosmocalc.wikidot.com/lightcone-tutorial

 

http://cosmocalc.wikidot.com/lightcone-userguide

As far as my proving the most proven model to observational evidence model to date LCDM. There is no need for me to prove the concordance model. There is tons of supporting evidence.

 

The Planck datasets are in strong agreement with LCDM

http://www.cosmos.esa.int/web/planck/publications

 

tons of datasets there for ya

Edited January 19, 2015 by Mordred

[michel123456]

I don't see anywhere data about distance being smaller between far away galaxy clusters.

Maybe it is hidden somewhere inside the impressive planck dataset?

Edited January 19, 2015 by michel123456

[StringJunky]

I don't see anywhere data about distance being smaller between far away galaxy clusters.

Maybe it is hidden somewhere inside the impressive planck dataset?

If the universe is expanding now, it's pretty clear that if we reverse what has happened, the galaxies will have been closer together in the past.

[michel123456]

If the universe is expanding now, it's pretty clear that if we reverse what has happened, the galaxies will have been closer together in the past.

This argument you can find thousand times over the Internet.

What I ask for is a corroborating evidence. An astronomical measurement of smaller distances between far away galaxies. Data.

[imatfaal]

This argument you can find thousand times over the Internet.

What I ask for is a corroborating evidence. An astronomical measurement of smaller distances between far away galaxies. Data.

I get what you are asking for now - and it seems totally reasonable.

 

I have started a trawl - because I had no memory of such information that I have previously encountered.

 

First off I wanted to check how possible it was to answer the question. At high redshift - ie way way back in the galactic past there were now galaxies; say at z=11 there is/was just the hot plasma that gives/gave off the cosmic background radiation. So we need to go back far enough for expansion to be noticeable - but not so far that the makeup of the universe was significantly different (otherwise the density of galaxies would be incommensurable)

 

http://arxiv.org/abs/1404.2844 this paper would make me think that even at relatively low red shifts the propensity of galaxies to form differently and at different rates would make the comparison meaningless. But I am intrigued and will continue to look

[Mordred]

Have you looked at the calculator?

 

You can graph the expansion history distance now and distance then

 

Here this might be clearer

http://www.ifa.hawaii.edu/info/press-releases/flows/

 

http://arxiv.org/abs/1306.0091.

 

This is local data group

 

The others I located require software example

 

 

http://supernova.lbl.gov/union/

 

I'll keep looking

[michel123456]

Wonderful Mordred. Your link to the video is formidable!

http://irfu.cea.fr/cosmography

 

However, I don't see evident signs of concentration of clusters as a function of distance.

[JohnSSM]

Wonderful Mordred. Your link to the video is formidable!

http://irfu.cea.fr/cosmography

 

However, I don't see evident signs of concentration of clusters as a function of distance.

That video is just awe inspiring...Finally someone used 3d modelling that shows vectors and space time g flow...why we cant do the same thing on smaller scales to show the geometry of GR in action for a solar system is puzzling...

 

 

The flow into the zones of much mass in red, slows down and becomes more compact...the flow out of the blue zones of little mass, is faster and more spread out in comparison...Does that mean you could travel faster out of a void, than you could into a black hole, using the same energy?

[michel123456]

I don't even recognize space expansion in this video. I see much more complicated moves.

[Mordred]

The problem is finding datasets that are easily related to. I could post numerous articles with datasets such as this one

http://berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2007/07/perlmutter-team.pdf

 

but would it help you? It is a dataset supporting and constraining systematic errors. However the paper is not easily understood.

Papers like this are easily found. However visualization of expansion from this is not an easy task

(Ps that's one of the reasons Jorrie built the lightcone calculator in my signature)

I've been scouring the internet for several days looking for the easy to relate to articles etc with the data sets included. Not as easy as one might think most require software installations to use.

Speaking of videos you guys will love this one.

 

http://www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/galform/virgo/millennium/

 

this took incredible supercomputer time over 3 months to generate.

Note these two videos is a 100% simulated universe to test out model LCDM

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NjSFR40SY58

Edited January 21, 2015 by Mordred

[imatfaal]

I don't even recognize space expansion in this video. I see much more complicated moves.

 

Modred can check my sums - but those distances in the video would mean a redshift of around about 0.01 to 0.02. That is strictly very local in universal terms

Edited January 21, 2015 by imatfaal
Correcting figures

[GeneralDadmission]

Why would expansion not be considered an aspect of gravitation? Could the BB not have been considered to simply regulate observation of expansion to the point we can only observe expansion along our universes trajectory?

[Mordred]

The metrics of expansion and cosmology is an ideal gas gravity contributes to the positive pressure, while the cosmological attributes to the negative pressure. Gravity is an attraction only, there is no anti gravity.

 

 

http://cosmology101.wikidot.com/redshift-and-expansion

http://cosmology101.wikidot.com/universe-geometry

 

every contributor particles,radiation matter etc has an equation of state that correlates its energy density to pressure contribution.

 

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_of_state_(cosmology)

 

This includes particles/antiparticles

 

The only difference between the two is the charge. Their EoS is identical.

Edited January 30, 2015 by Mordred