Cyclone Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 True. Then again, it's no more lacking in evidence or testable predictions than the alternative theory (that the universe arose spontaneously and uncaused from absolute nothingness). (I hope you've not going to mention Ockham's razor in response to this- it's becoming such a cliche ) You obviously know that's entirely appropriate though. Given a lack of evidence either way, we should go with the simplest solution. Otherwise why not envisage an infinite layer of higher dimensional spaces. So our universe is one of many bubbles in a multi verse. The multi verse is one of many more dimensional bubbles in a multi-multi verse and so on. You don't need to invent any of these multi anythings to explain what we can see, so why do so? Do we? I think that's a question for each individual- maybe some people can envisage something that's always existed, more than they can envisage something springing into being from nothing? (or vice versa). Maybe, personally I can recognise that my brain doesn't really deal very well with either concept. Maybe not accepting that and believing that infinity is just a very large number and nothing is just an empty space are what's causing a lot of the confusion on this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted August 14, 2010 Author Share Posted August 14, 2010 Could anyone tell me whether this could be the case, or if not the case... why not! would red shift still be detectable if galaxies were devouring themselves from the centre outwards?.. By this I mean, 'from our perspective',would the velocity created from being pulled into the centre of the galaxy still produce red shift?. Because that would provide one explanation as to why space between galaxies is increasing/expanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s.hawkins Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 does a thought exist before it is thought? and once forgotten does it cease to exist. maybe the universe works the same way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 Could anyone tell me whether this could be the case, or if not the case... why not! would red shift still be detectable if galaxies were devouring themselves from the centre outwards?.. By this I mean, 'from our perspective',would the velocity from pulled into the centre of the galaxy still produce red shift?. Because that would provide one explanation as to why space between galaxies is increasing/expanding. If I understand you correctly then wouldn't there be some systems/planets moving towards us if this were the case...do we see any "reverse" red shift...? Or is everything moving away from everything else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted August 14, 2010 Author Share Posted August 14, 2010 does a thought exist before it is thought? and once forgotten does it cease to exist. maybe the universe works the same way?But who's thoughts would be responsible for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted August 14, 2010 Author Share Posted August 14, 2010 If I understand you correctly then wouldn't there be some systems/planets moving towards us if this were the case...do we see any "reverse" red shift...? Or is everything moving away from everything else?No!, nothing would be moving towards us, everything would become more distant, because the mass of all galaxies would be decreasing in size. EDIT: What if new star systems are continually being created towards the outer edges of galaxies, that way galaxies wouldn't lose any mass, and from our positioning within the galaxy, as we travel through space towards the centre of it, space would be being stretched by the by the black hole at the centre, making everything in all direction more distant from us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s.hawkins Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 But who's thoughts would be responsible for it? hmm, im saying, maybe like a thought the universe came from nothing and goes back to nothing. from a void to a void. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 No!, nothing would be moving towards us, everything would become more distant, because the mass of all galaxies would be decreasing in size. Explain that 'cos it makes no sense to me...you said stuff woukld be pulled into the centre of a galaxy surely if something is on the other side of a galaxy to us then if it moves to the centre it's moving towards us.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 No!, nothing would be moving towards us, everything would become more distant, because the mass of all galaxies would be decreasing in size. Wouldn't the stars on the outer part of our galaxy be moving towards us, as we're nearer the centre of our galaxy? Wouldn't we be moving towards the centre of our galaxy as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 hmm, im saying, maybe like a thought the universe came from nothing and goes back to nothing. from a void to a void. So the galaxy only exists in the present? Not the future or past? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.