How old is the universe...? And, How big is the universe...? Discussion...?

[mark kennedy]

It's both moving away, and coming back in at the same time, in a proportional balance, that it could make it, or perhaps has always been, "perpetual" or nigh perpetual in nature...

Which would make it much, much older than 13.8 billion years old, and it is definitely, or has to be, "very much more and way bigger" than we thought it was...

It is definitely much, much older than 13.8 billion years old, and has been around much, much longer than that...

God Bless!

I'm not so sure, I think the universe is very old and the earth is as well. 6000 years ago God picked this out of the many planets and decided to create life, we still don't know why but one of these days I suppose we could ask him, if we think we could understand the answer. What's more I think God has done this before and will do it again, as a matter of fact, God may have done it countless times across the universe.

 

[klutedavid]

Simple question(s):

How old is the universe...? And, How big is the universe...?

Discussion...?

God Bless!

In the end does it matter if we know, the age or the size of the universe?

We only appear once in the universe, we only live for a handful of decades. Thus, I cannot see any benefit from knowing the age of the universe. If it was one million years old or two million years old, does anyone really care?

 

[Neogaia777]

In the end does it matter if we know, the age or the size of the universe?

We only appear once in the universe, we only live for a handful of decades. Thus, I cannot see any benefit from knowing the age of the universe. If it was one million years old or two million years old, does anyone really care?

Some people do "care" about it, but we also know that it also really doesn't matter...

But it is very "fun", and very, very "awesome" I think, mind blowing at times, all of that, and some people really like to have their mind blown sometimes, like me...

It makes me stand in awe of God, and all his wonderous wonders and full awe and glory...

You don't like that...?

To not want to at least "try to understand God in all His full awe and glory" in and by all the great wonderous awe's of the full glory of Him reflected in His creation...?

You don't want or want to seek to try and understand it/that...? Try and wrap you mind around it...? Really...?

Why not...? Cause I Love it...

To not even at least be curious about it, even just a little bit (and want to explore and grow in that) (that curiousity and understanding) is, as I heard someone else describe it, is "3/4 of the way to being dead if you ask me"...

You not even the slightest bit curious at all about it...?

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

In the end does it matter if we know, the age or the size of the universe?

We only appear once in the universe, we only live for a handful of decades. Thus, I cannot see any benefit from knowing the age of the universe. If it was one million years old or two million years old, does anyone really care?

Remember it was the "knowledge of good and evil" or more specifically "thinking you can judge (between) good and evil, by your own (limited) knowledge of good and evil", that was "bad", or even "deadly" even, NOT knowledge in general...

God Bless!

 

[Simplistik]

After studying the idea from a few different angle's I am currently in the "evolutionary creationist" camp. I believe that, based on our current understanding of how the universe was created, that it is in fact 13.77-13.82 billion years old with the earth itself being something like 4.5 billion years old with human ancestry beginning some time around 400 million years ago. The fun thing about the age of the universe is we believe that we can literally look back thru time and determine the point of "ignition", if you will.

I believe that God set it all in motion. Science tells us that the way in which the "big bang" happened is exactly like what would have happened had God said "let there be light"--there was darkness over the void and then, suddenly, BANG, there is light!

Also, "caring" about it is relative to the context in which you're analyzing the question. From a salvation perspective, it doesn't matter how old it is, so, no, from that angle, I don't care how old it is. But looking at it through the lens of how amazing our God is, I care greatly, if only because of this one fact: if you alter ANY one, single aspect of our universe's creation--if the timing of the expansion of material out from the big bang, for example, were off by 1 millionth of a nanosecond-- then the universe as we know it doesn't exist...nothing would have come into being as it currently is. The earth itself wouldn't have come into being...life as we know it wouldn't have happened.

At the end of the day, whether you care or not, the fact is that we have an AMAZING GOD! Look around you and you can see Him in EVERYTHING

 

[Neogaia777]

After studying the idea from a few different angle's I am currently in the "evolutionary creationist" camp. I believe that, based on our current understanding of how the universe was created, that it is in fact 13.77-13.82 billion years old with the earth itself being something like 4.5 billion years old with human ancestry beginning some time around 400 million years ago. The fun thing about the age of the universe is we believe that we can literally look back thru time and determine the point of "ignition", if you will.

I believe that God set it all in motion. Science tells us that the way in which the "big bang" happened is exactly like what would have happened had God said "let there be light"--there was darkness over the void and then, suddenly, BANG, there is light!

Also, "caring" about it is relative to the context in which you're analyzing the question. From a salvation perspective, it doesn't matter how old it is, so, no, from that angle, I don't care how old it is. But looking at it through the lens of how amazing our God is, I care greatly, if only because of this one fact: if you alter ANY one, single aspect of our universe's creation--if the timing of the expansion of material out from the big bang, for example, were off by 1 millionth of a nanosecond-- then the universe as we know it doesn't exist...nothing would have come into being as it currently is. The earth itself wouldn't have come into being...life as we know it wouldn't have happened.

At the end of the day, whether you care or not, the fact is that we have an AMAZING GOD! Look around you and you can see Him in EVERYTHING

I think that is great, that you have come to that, but/and/however I'd like to take you "even further or farther" but, where your at right now, might be good for right now...

Anyway, I think that's great and very great indeed... And Yes, we do indeed have a "very great and enormously awesome God", indeed, don't we...?

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

Remember it was the "knowledge of good and evil" or more specifically "thinking you can judge (between) good and evil, by your own (limited) knowledge of good and evil", that was "bad", or even "deadly" even, NOT knowledge in general...

God Bless!

About Adam and Eve, they had no knowledge at all whatsoever of evil, completely foreign concept to them... And what the serpent said to them (out of jealousy, hatred, anger, wrath, and envy) (over and about man and with God even also) Anyway, made them (Adam and Eve) to where they basically might have said back to him, "So, your saying we have to have a knowledge of this of this whole evil "thing" (actually good and evil, for without knowing some evil, neither can you really know what good is even either) (they didn't know what it was, not even remotely or even vaguely) Anyway, (to the serpent) "your saying we have to have a knowledge of this of this whole evil "thing" in order to be like our God...? And, he might have said, "Yes, that is what I am saying."

And they took the bait, knowing nothing, and the serpent probably "laughed all the way" (to the bank) after that, knowing they just gave to the world to him... And after they ate, they got "flooded" and probably very overwhelmed with a knowledge of "all evil" or "all good and evil", and they became very, not only ashamed by some of it, but extremely, extremely, very, very "afraid" never having ever felt fear or guilt or regret or shame before, ever... "It" was all very much and completely "foreign" (concepts) to them, but they got tricked or duped or took the bait, and the rest is history, so to speak, up to now or "today"...

What would be the harm in it, they might have thought (at first) (probably not even knowing what "harm" even was)...?

Well, they found out, didn't they...

I think, (about my post I replied to in this (above)) that the knowledge of knowing the difference (like God does), between all good, and all evil, in a world of both good and evil, anyway, I believe all of that kind of knowledge is much more vast, deep, and is much more complicated and complex, than all the deepest knowledge, of all the deepest mysteries, of this entire universe, but, that my be just me...

Cause it seems that way to me...

Which might make any kind of accurate or any kind of "just judgments" by us, quite impossible, really... And we'd do very well to both know and remember that... Take it from Adam and Eve...

God Bless!

 

[Simplistik]

I think that is great, that you have come to that, but/and/however I'd like to take you "even further or farther" but, where your at right now, might be good for right now...

Anyway, I think that's great and very great indeed... And Yes, we do indeed have a "very great and enormously awesome God", indeed, don't we...?

God Bless!

Take me as far as you'd like. I'm always open to learn new things or see something from a new perspective.

 

[Neogaia777]

Take me as far as you'd like. I'm always open to learn new things or see something from a new perspective.

All you really have to do is review this thread, and perhaps do some research of your own...

God Bless!

 

[SpiritualBeing]

Some people do "care" about it, but we also know that it also really doesn't matter...

But it is very "fun", and very, very "awesome" I think, mind blowing at times, all of that, and some people really like to have their mind blown sometimes, like me...

It makes me stand in awe of God, and all his wonderous wonders and full awe and glory...

You don't like that...?

To not want to at least "try to understand God in all His full awe and glory" in and by all the great wonderous awe's of the full glory of Him reflected in His creation...?

You don't want or want to seek to try and understand it/that...? Try and wrap you mind around it...? Really...?

Why not...? Cause I Love it...

To not even at least be curious about it, even just a little bit (and want to explore and grow in that) (that curiousity and understanding) is, as I heard someone else describe it, is "3/4 of the way to being dead if you ask me"...

You not even the slightest bit curious at all about it...?

God Bless!

If you want your mind blown imagine the possibility of infinite parallel universes.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Ok, let's take this from the beginning and/or top, K...?

Is this picture of the known or observable universe (below) and "accurate" one...?

Does it account for all every factor and/or factors that might make this picture "false" or in error at all or not...?

Yes or No...? Does it or doesn't it...? Is it accurate and not in error in any way...?

Yes or No...?

And, if that answer is "Yes", is it all expanding equally everywhere, would be my next question...?

Yes or No...?

Then, if yes to that, now account for gravity that would try to "pull it all back in together", (in it) all along with the, (what I think is) equal and opposite to the other force (gravity) equally everywhere expansion...

Now, what would a picture of that "in motion" or "alive" look like...? If it were a short video with these two forces and all "this" all "in motion" or moving, "look like"...?

Then, what would happen if there were, or are, or is, or was, and outer "edge to it" anywhere at all...? Especially if the two forces were in equal and opposite "balance" with one another...? What would happen and/or be happening and what would it/that "look like"...?

Then imagine if you could travel or move through it, would the picture ever really change at all...? Or would it always appear as if you are the center of it, no matter what...? (As long as you were not near to the "edge of it" or could see an edge to or with it, if it has an edge, that is) (because that would or might be the only exception to this "picture" I am trying to "paint" of it all)

And/but and/or because due the equal expansion everywhere, and nothing is really "moving any faster (or slower) than anything else" (Because it's all "relative" to position (where you at in it) and motion (or speed) in it), Anyway, because of the equal expansion everywhere, is anything, really even "moving", technically "at all" or even "in motion at all" at any point or not, or are those just only "relative terms" only...?

And, then, is there really even a "center" or single point of origin at all (or any future collapsing point at all, in or at "any future point" at all) (due to these things also, that I am trying to pain of it (all)) or is that all "relative", basically, also...?

And then, if it were a "big bang that started it all", or if it ever had one single center point of origin, ever, why do we not see any evidence of any kind of "dispersal pattern" that would indicate such or that to be so...?

Is it because were "just not seeing enough of it", or what...?

Yes or No...?

Then, consider, (hopefully with this picture I am trying to paint of it (all) in mind), (and also the possible or probable "size" of it (all)) Then, consider the probable or possible "age" of it (all) and does that age have to be much, possibly, much, much, "longer" or "very much more older", than just 13.8 billion years old... When you consider the possible diameter of the "entire thing" (the entire universe) could be multiples upon multiples of possibly trillions or hundreds of trillions (or more) light years across, and/or in diameter...

How old is it or would it have to be, or might it be, considering all of "this"...?

Older than we (most of us) currently think...? Or not...? Yes or No...?

God Bless!

Except the flaw lies in the belief that the furthest galaxies are the youngest, and therefore “at the edge”.

Under this belief if one were on one of those furthest galaxies, then one would be at the edge of the expanding universe 13 billion years ago, or still on the edge in the present, they are just 13 billion years older.

So one would not see the same thing regardless of ones position in the universe. You can’t have them the youngest, and currently the oldest in our present, on the expanding edge, and still claim they are not on the edge.

This would imply that from one of them you could observe the BB itself, being they had just started to form.

We won’t get into mature galaxies where they claim only younger ones should exist falsifying their entire model.

Also the biggest flaw is that in a spherical space, expanding away also means something in a 3D sphere MUST be moving towards something else..... it also implies a center, just as the data shows.

Then we have the CMB, which is claimed to have both a red and blue shift. A blue shift in any direction falsifies an expansion in all directions, IF it is what they say it is, which it isn’t.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

That wouldn't happen on a flat Earth - you mean like on the surface of a sphere?

You missed the point, there is no edge, just as there is no centre. But if the universe is spatially finite, its overall curvature is determined by the mass it contains; current measures show it is very flat indeed, suggesting it's extremely large, or even infinite.

You must have missed where I said, "assuming, for simplicity, it's all static".

That doesn't follow. If it's infinite, it's all there is. If it's finite but unbounded there are no edges with anything else. Even spawned from a metaverse it could be 'pinched' off, occupying no space in the metaverse.

Not really. We're 'embedded' in space, so as it expands, we move with it (rather than through it). Like the analogous balloon surface when it is blown up, every point becomes further away from every other point. The gravity of matter concentrations, e.g. galaxies, tends to hold them together against local expansion.

It's not nothing, it's Einsteinian space-time undergoing scalar expansion.

There is no centre point - you may be confusing the idea that the observable universe was once very small with that somehow being a centre, but the observable universe is only a very small part of the whole universe, and however small the whole universe was at the big bang (and it may have been infinite), it was still the whole universe - there was no centre. The balloon analogy only relates to the way every point can become increasingly separated from every other point.

That's just nonsense. What part of an expanding balloon is collapsing inwards? Remember that the balloon analogy only relates to the way every point can become increasingly separated from every other point. A raisin bread analogy is sometimes used for 3D expansion - as the dough expands when the bread rises, every raisin in the bulk becomes further separated from every other raisin; again, this analogy is limited just to separations in the expanding bulk (both analogies have been criticised because of the distractions of irrelevant surfaces & edges, inside & outsides).

You may be getting confused about these dynamic topological ideas because they run counter to everyday intuition. It's necessary to become familiar with the principles of the physics involved to understand it (particularly relativity in this context), it's no good just picking up isolated physics factoids and expecting to apply them coherently.

No, every raisin doesn’t become separated from every other raisin.

The raisins in the center get pushed towards other raisins that are being pushed towards them. As the outside bread expands inwards as well as outwards.

There is not a single analogy you can make that would explain your expanding nothing....

But magic need not conform to the laws of physics, right.......

And the CMB disproves your expansion in every direction because it has a blue as well as red shift. Not that it is what they think it is anyways.

Actually contemplate on that for awhile, maybe, just maybe, you’ll come to see the false belief of expanding space causing light to shift to the red end of the spectrum in all directions.....

And maybe, just maybe, open your mind to the real cause of cosmological redshift...... and what the CMB actually is.........

I am really not sure how you justify to yourself that expanding space causes all light from distance to be shifted to the red end of the spectrum, then not see the contradiction of blue shift in the CMB????? When the CMB is from “before” the galaxies formation (according to them), and therefore from a greater distance and must necessarily cross even more of this expanding nothing......?????? Without a center or starting point, there should be no blue shift at all, but entirely and systematically shifted to the red end of the spectrum. Or the Sloan digital survey should be taken for what it shows, as well as the “Axis of Evil” that becomes more pronounced with better measurement, not less if it was a statistical anomaly as they try to hand wave it away....

But blue shift in the CMB shows space is not the same everywhere.... so you have to discard the belief that it is the same, which is contradicted by several lines of data, or discard the idea that red shift and the CMB is what they say it is. The beliefs are not compatible.....

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

No, every raisin doesn’t become separated from every other raisin.

The raisins in the center get pushed towards other raisins that are being pushed towards them. As the outside bread expands inwards as well as outwards.

There is not a single analogy you can make that would explain your expanding nothing....

I apologise - I thought you'd be able to see that it's just a 3D version of the expanding balloon - when every part of the bulk (dough) expands, elements embedded in it (raisins) will all be carried further away from each other (for any two raisins, the dough between them expands, moving them apart).

It's not a particularly difficult concept, but I suppose it requires a degree of physical visualisation. It does also go some way to explaining why you have problems understanding special relativity, which is also helped by physical visualisation.

As Samuel Johnson said, "Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding."

 

[durangodawood]

People are hilarious.

They think that beyond the "edge of space", there's more space into which our space is intruding but for some mysterious reason scientists dont call it "space".

 

[klutedavid]

Simple question(s):

How old is the universe...? And, How big is the universe...?

Discussion...?

God Bless!

Well the universe is actually decreasing in observable size as time increases.

Is the observable universe fading from view?

Future Horizon
In an accelerating universe (expanding), there are events which will be unobservable as signals from future events become redshifted to arbitrarily long wavelengths in the exponentially expanding de Sitter space. This sets a limit on the farthest distance that we can possibly see as measured in units of proper distance today. Or, more precisely, there are events that are spatially separated for a certain frame of reference happening simultaneously with the event occurring right now for which no signal will ever reach us, even though we can observe events that occurred at the same location in space that happened in the distant past.While we will continue to receive signals from this location in space, even if we wait an infinite amount of time, a signal that left from that location today will never reach us. Additionally, the signals coming from that location will have less and less energy and be less and less frequent until the location, for all practical purposes, becomes unobservable. In a universe that is dominated by dark energy which is undergoing an exponential expansion of the scale factor, all objects that are gravitationally unbound with respect to the Milky Way will become unobservable, in a futuristic version of Kapteyn's universe. (wikipedia, cosmological horizon)

Eventually, we will only see the milky way and nothing else, so the universe is getting smaller!

 

[Neogaia777]

I apologise - I thought you'd be able to see that it's just a 3D version of the expanding balloon - when every part of the bulk (dough) expands, elements embedded in it (raisins) will all be carried further away from each other (for any two raisins, the dough between them expands, moving them apart).

It's not a particularly difficult concept, but I suppose it requires a degree of physical visualisation. It does also go some way to explaining why you have problems understanding special relativity, which is also helped by physical visualisation.

As Samuel Johnson said, "Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding."

Yes it is just like a 3-D balloon, or in your raisin bread example, but it would be the raisins growing and increasing in size (slowly) that would be either expanding the bread or normal matter or material (or us) or the bread dough. And the bread dough would not be growing or expanding at all, and by them (the raisins) (by their growth), (perhaps stationary growth), (only not stationary due to their growth only) pushing out on everything else or the bread dough (normal matter (us)) and is causing the expansion and/or growth of the bread (dough) only by the growth of all the raisins alone, would cause movement of both the dough and raisins, only the dough is not growing at all, but the raisins are, only as the raisins would grow causing the expansion and movement of the bread dough. The raisins would act like bubbles in water also and the water would be the dough, and as the bubbles (raisins) grew in size, and then, as they would "approach" or move or be moving and or gravitating toward the "surface of the water"; the water or dough, or normal matter or material would "move around" the air bubbles as they (the raisins or air bubbles) grew and/or moved (or "grew" is the more appropriate term, and not moved and or moving themselves specifically) Anyway, grew or moved (due to growing) slowly due to all of them (the raisins) (or what may be like stationary bubbles), grew of moved (only not really moving because they are all each pushing out on each other and everything else equally), (space-time) (causing it all to "come alive" and/or move or all of it to be "in motion") (normal matter/material, or bread dough, and raisins and or air bubbles or pockets alike) (the raisins or air bubbles, pushing toward and eventually in time reaching the surface of the water or outer edge of the universe, if it has one, by their all pushing out on each other and everything else)...

Anyway, but the normal matter or material (us) (water) (bread dough) would move around the raisins or air bubbles or air pockets as they moved, only they are not really moving anywhere by themselves, but are only "growing only" and pushing out equally one one another and everything else, in all directions and that is causing them (all of everything(else)) (including those air bubbles and/or pockets and/or raisins) to "move" or be in motion, or for or to all of it to all be growing and or expanding and moving and all be in motion and all of it together then "coming alive" or being in motion...

Except/and/or/because in your bread example, there would also be a lot more raisins in the bread, and a lot less dough, and they (the raisins) would slowly be getting bigger or larger, and that would be what would be causing the bread or dough or normal matter/material to rise or expand or grow or rise or get larger, (and actually all of it to) (move, rise, grow and/or expand) and the water or dough would move "around them" (raisins, air bubbles, pockets) as they (raisins or air bubbles or pockets) moved or grew and/or got larger (the raisins in the bread) (or the air bubbles in the glass of water as they would be moving toward and approaching the surface of the water, or edge of the universe, if it has one), (getting larger as they did), and causing "everything" to grow or expand or be (or "appear to be") in motion...

But the normal matter or material, or bread dough or water, like in the water and air bubble example would "move around these pockets" by the force of gravity that would want to pull the water toward the bottom and/or "around the air bubbles and or pockets" toward to bottom. Or in the case of the universe, a force of gravity that would try to pull back on it (all the normal matter and material) that pulls on it to try and collect it (all the normal matter or material) back toward collecting at a single center or the bottom of the glass...

Does this make any sense...?

I'm trying to paint a visual picture here with words, and I can only hope that someone is getting it, but don't know if anyone or any of you are or is or not...?

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

If you want your mind blown imagine the possibility of infinite parallel universes.

I have... but there is very little evidence, or very many, if any solid "facts" to back up any kind of real understanding of it/that right now (infinite parallel universes or parallel universe in general)... But "not" for what I am trying to describe and/or explain here though...

God Bless!

 

[SpiritualBeing]

I have... but there is very little evidence, or very many, if any solid "facts" to back up any kind of real understanding of it/that right now (infinite parallel universes or parallel universe in general)... But "not" for what I am trying to describe and/or explain here though...

God Bless!

True no evidence or facts, only theories but I believe we are getting closer. Stephen Hawking said “We are not down to a single, unique universe, but our findings imply a significant reduction of the multiverse to a much smaller range of possible universes,”

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Yes it is just like a 3-D balloon, or in your raisin bread example, but it would be the raisins growing and increasing in size (slowly) that would be either expanding the bread or normal matter or material (or us) or the bread dough. And the bread dough would not be growing or expanding at all, and by them (the raisins) (by their growth), (perhaps stationary growth), (only not stationary due to their growth only) pushing out on everything else or the bread dough (normal matter (us)) and is causing the expansion and/or growth of the bread (dough) only by the growth of all the raisins alone, would cause movement of both the dough and raisins, only the dough is not growing at all, but the raisins are, only as the raisins would grow causing the expansion and movement of the bread dough. The raisins would act like bubbles in water also and the water would be the dough, and as the bubbles (raisins) grew in size, and then, as they would "approach" or move or be moving and or gravitating toward the "surface of the water"; the water or dough, or normal matter or material would "move around" the air bubbles as they (the raisins or air bubbles) grew and/or moved (or "grew" is the more appropriate term, and not moved and or moving themselves specifically) Anyway, grew or moved (due to growing) slowly due to all of them (the raisins) (or what may be like stationary bubbles), grew of moved (only not really moving because they are all each pushing out on each other and everything else equally), (space-time) (causing it all to "come alive" and/or move or all of it to be "in motion") (normal matter/material, or bread dough, and raisins and or air bubbles or pockets alike) (the raisins or air bubbles, pushing toward and eventually in time reaching the surface of the water or outer edge of the universe, if it has one, by their all pushing out on each other and everything else)...

Anyway, but the normal matter or material (us) (water) (bread dough) would move around the raisins or air bubbles or air pockets as they moved, only they are not really moving anywhere by themselves, but are only "growing only" and pushing out equally one one another and everything else, in all directions and that is causing them (all of everything(else)) (including those air bubbles and/or pockets and/or raisins) to "move" or be in motion, or for or to all of it to all be growing and or expanding and moving and all be in motion and all of it together then "coming alive" or being in motion...

Except/and/or/because in your bread example, there would also be a lot more raisins in the bread, and a lot less dough, and they (the raisins) would slowly be getting bigger or larger, and that would be what would be causing the bread or dough or normal matter/material to rise or expand or grow or rise or get larger, (and actually all of it to) (move, rise, grow and/or expand) and the water or dough would move "around them" (raisins, air bubbles, pockets) as they (raisins or air bubbles or pockets) moved or grew and/or got larger (the raisins in the bread) (or the air bubbles in the glass of water as they would be moving toward and approaching the surface of the water, or edge of the universe, if it has one), (getting larger as they did), and causing "everything" to grow or expand or be (or "appear to be") in motion...

But the normal matter or material, or bread dough or water, like in the water and air bubble example would "move around these pockets" by the force of gravity that would want to pull the water toward the bottom and/or "around the air bubbles and or pockets" toward to bottom. Or in the case of the universe, a force of gravity that would try to pull back on it (all the normal matter and material) that pulls on it to try and collect it (all the normal matter or material) back toward collecting at a single center or the bottom of the glass...

Does this make any sense...?

I'm trying to paint a visual picture here with words, and I can only hope that someone is getting it, but don't know if anyone or any of you are or is or not...?

God Bless!

Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about. If you could convert that stream of consciousness into a briefer and more coherent post with less repetition, I might be able to comment.

In the raisin bread analogy, the dough is spacetime and the raisins are galaxies & clusters of galaxies, i.e. clumps of matter held together by gravity. By current observations, spacetime is undergoing scalar expansion, carrying each clump away from all the others. The voids are growing because gravity causes matter to clump together locally and the expansion of spacetime increases the distances between the clumps of matter. On such a cosmological scale there is no force pulling everything in one direction, and there is no preferred direction.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

True no evidence or facts, only theories but I believe we are getting closer. Stephen Hawking said “We are not down to a single, unique universe, but our findings imply a significant reduction of the multiverse to a much smaller range of possible universes,”

He was only talking about the inflationary multiverse of 'eternal inflation', where ours is one of an infinite number of 'pocket' or 'bubble' universes spawned by the inflationary process. They used string theory holography to reformulate EI with a temporal boundary, and this predicted a finite range of possible universes. String theory remains a purely hypothetical mathematical model of the universe, so considerable doubt remains.

The other multiverses, including the cosmological multiverse, the Everettian 'Many Worlds' quantum multiverse, and the 'Ultimate Ensemble' - Tegmark's mathematical multiverse, are not affected, so anyone who wants a potentially infinite number of universes and a potentially infinite number of versions of themselves, can continue to puzzle over what this means for the notion of 'self' and 'identity'...