Some questions I have about the universe...?

[Radrook]

What effect does gravity and gravitational pull have on the expansion or motion of stars/galaxies, what effect does gravity and gravitational pull of everything have on the expansion and motion of the universe...?

Where gravity predominates then expansion is cancelled out. Such areas where it predominates are called super galactic clusters and these are organized into filaments or walls which are the largest structures known. It is in the areas separating such filaments, called voids because of the scarcity of matter, that universal expansion is occurring. Imagine the universe as a honeycomb with the galarct6ic super cluster filaments being the edges of each cell and the inside of the cells being the voids that are expanding driving the edges apart.

Matter in space ranges in size from subatomic particles to galaxy superclusters. In fact, there are larger objects than those—complexes of superclusters called walls or sheets. These structures, as much as one billion light-years across, resemble fine gauze. They are the filaments of space.
http://www.brighthub.com/science/space/articles/122209.aspx

Supercluster - Wikipedia

In physical cosmology, galaxy filaments (subtypes: supercluster complexes, galaxy walls, and galaxy sheets) are the largest known structures in the universe. They are massive, thread-like formations, with a typical length of 50 to 80 megaparsecs h−1 (163 to 261 million light-years) that form the boundaries between large voids in the universe.[3] Filaments consist of gravitationally bound galaxies. Parts wherein many galaxies are very close to one another (in cosmic terms) are called superclusters.
Galaxy filament - Wikipedia

Below is an example of filaments and voids.

 

[Neogaia777]

Where gravity predominates then expansion is cancelled out. Such areas where it predominates are called super galactic clusters and these are organized into filaments or walls which are the largest structures known. It is in the areas separating such filaments, called voids because of the scarcity of matter, that universal expansion is occurring. Imagine the universe as a honeycomb with the galarct6ic super cluster filaments being the edges of each cell and the inside of the cells being the voids that are expanding driving the edges apart.




Supercluster - Wikipedia




Below is an example of filaments and voids.

Thanks again very much Radrook, your helping to expand my horizons, Thanks!

God Bless!

 

[Strathos]

Below is an example of filaments and voids.

Looks more like a Borg Cube to me...

 

[Radrook]

Looks more like a Borg Cube to me...

It's a representation of a cubic section of the universe. Here is another view.

https://phys.org/news/2014-04-cosmologists-cosmic-filaments-voids.html

BTW
They are including Dark Matter in those representations.

 

[Neogaia777]

It's a representation of a cubic section of the universe. Here is another view.

https://phys.org/news/2014-04-cosmologists-cosmic-filaments-voids.html

Awesome, thanks, I understand some more now, gives me a bigger picture, thanks...

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

It's a representation of a cubic section of the universe. Here is another view.

https://phys.org/news/2014-04-cosmologists-cosmic-filaments-voids.html

BTW
They are including Dark Matter in those representations.

Just to make sure I'm understanding correctly...

The "filaments" or strings, contain globular clusters, full of stars, galaxies, ect (more matter and material of the material of the universe than the darker areas) and gravity is very much operating within the filaments, but in the darker areas, not so much, and it (the universe) is expanding or unfolding outward from those darker areas correct, with no real universal, definable "center" (yet) and we don't (yet) know "exactly" "why" (yet)...?

Is that kinda right...?

Oh, and we do not, as of yet know how big the entire universe is, correct...?

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

It's a representation of a cubic section of the universe. Here is another view.

https://phys.org/news/2014-04-cosmologists-cosmic-filaments-voids.html

BTW
They are including Dark Matter in those representations.

Just to make sure I'm understanding correctly...

The "filaments" or strings, contain globular clusters, full of stars, galaxies, ect (more matter and material of the material of the universe than the darker areas) and gravity is very much operating within the filaments, but in the darker areas, not so much, and it (the universe) is expanding or unfolding outward from those darker areas correct, with no real universal, definable "center" (yet) and we don't (yet) know "exactly" "why" (yet)...?

Is that kinda right...?

Oh, and we do not, as of yet know how big the entire universe is, correct...?

God Bless!

Do you think, in time, it will stop expanding, and those filaments, or strings full of material, that gravity will begin take over, but form many, numerous centers in the universe where the material will begin to collect after the expansion is complete, if it does not keep expanding, to where those center's that are left might begin to collapse back in one themselves again, and we could have very, very many, numerous centers where big bangs could potentially happen all over in the universe...?

Thanks again,

Oh, also, I find it very interesting to note, how much a picture of the universe, looks very much like a picture of the connections in a brain... Just thought that was worth noting... Only, I do not think brains are "expanding" like the universe is...?

God Bless!

 

[Radrook]

Just to make sure I'm understanding correctly...

The "filaments" contain globular clusters, full of stars, galaxies, ect (more matter and material of the material of the universe than the darker areas) and gravity is very much operating within the filaments, but in the darker areas, not so much, and it (the universe) is expanding or unfolding outward from those darker areas correct, with no real universal, definable "center" (yet) and we don't (yet) know "exactly" "why" (yet)...?

Is that kinda right...?

Oh, and we do not, as of yet know how big the entire universe is, correct...?

God Bless!

That seems to be about right. There is no expansion within galactic groups, or clusters and within super clusters and filaments composed of super clusters. The expansion is within the voids that the filaments surround. The gravity that keeps clusters, super clusters and filaments together prevents space from expanding in those regions.

That doesn't mean that galaxies aren't sometimes moving apart or towards each other within those clusters, super clusters and filaments. For example the Andromeda galaxy is moving in our direction at approx 110 kilometres per second (68 mi/s) and will merge with our galaxy within 4.5 billion years, eventually forming perhaps a giant elliptical galaxy or a large disc galaxy. It only means that universal expansion is making the voids larger and distances between super cluster filaments greater.

Also, since we can't detect what lies beyond a certain distance, we don't know how much lagethe univers is than what we are detecting.


Visualization of the whole observable universe. The scale is such that the fine grains represent collections of large numbers of superclusters. The Virgo Supercluster – home of Milky Way – is marked at the center, but is too small to be seen.
Observable universe - Wikipedia

The yellow arrow points to the limits of what we can detect which is a diameter of(93 billion light-years. So we can observe 46.5 billion light-years in every direction. Everything beyond that horizon is unknown. The Earth is placed at the center of the diagram because that is our vantage point of observation. In other words, if we were in a location closer to the edge then the universe that we would be able to observe would be different one since the areas now undetectable would then be detectable and the areas now detectable would then be undectable.

That's because detectability depends on whether the light or radiation from those regions has had time to reach us or not. The light from regions beyond observation hasn't had time to reach us yet, and most will never reach us because at those distances space is expanding at or faster than the speed of light. In other words, the more the light travels the more space is added. Like being on a floor that keeps elongating as you run. So it makes little or no real headway.

 

[Neogaia777]

That seems to be about right. There is no expansion within galactic groups, or clusters and within super clusters and filaments composed of super clusters. The expansion is within the voids that the filaments surround. The gravity that keeps clusters, super clusters and film antes together as unites prevent space from expanding in those regions.

That doesn't mean that galaxies aren't sometimes moving apart or towards each other within those clusters, super clusters and filaments. For example the Andromeda galaxy is moving in our direction at approx 110 kilometres per second (68 mi/s) and will merge with our galaxy within 4.5 billion years, eventually forming perhaps a giant elliptical galaxy or a large disc galaxy. It only means that universal expansion is making the voids larger and distances between super cluster filaments greater.

Also, since we can't detect what lies beyond a certain distance, we don't know how much lagethe univers is than what we are detecting.


Visualization of the whole observable universe. The scale is such that the fine grains represent collections of large numbers of superclusters. The Virgo Supercluster – home of Milky Way – is marked at the center, but is too small to be seen.
Observable universe - Wikipedia

The yellow arrow points to the limits of what we can detect which is a diameter of(93 billion light-years, or observe 46.5 billion light-years in each direction. Everything beyond that is unknown. The Earth is placed at the center of the diagram because that is our vantage point of observation. In other words, if we were in a location closer to the edge then the universe that we would be able to observe would be different one since the areas now undetectable would then be detectable and the areas now detectable would then be undectable. That's because detectability depends on whether the light or radiation from those regions has had time to reach us or not. The light from regions beyond observation hasn't had time to reach us yet, and most will never reach us because at those distances space is expanding at or faster than the speed of light. In other words, the more the light travels the more space is added. Like being on a floor that keeps elongating as you run. So it makes little or no real headway.

OK, thanks very much Radrook, you have a great way of explaining things by the way, thanks a lot...

Peace,

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

That seems to be about right. There is no expansion within galactic groups, or clusters and within super clusters and filaments composed of super clusters. The expansion is within the voids that the filaments surround. The gravity that keeps clusters, super clusters and filaments together prevents space from expanding in those regions.

That doesn't mean that galaxies aren't sometimes moving apart or towards each other within those clusters, super clusters and filaments. For example the Andromeda galaxy is moving in our direction at approx 110 kilometres per second (68 mi/s) and will merge with our galaxy within 4.5 billion years, eventually forming perhaps a giant elliptical galaxy or a large disc galaxy. It only means that universal expansion is making the voids larger and distances between super cluster filaments greater.

Also, since we can't detect what lies beyond a certain distance, we don't know how much lagethe univers is than what we are detecting.


Visualization of the whole observable universe. The scale is such that the fine grains represent collections of large numbers of superclusters. The Virgo Supercluster – home of Milky Way – is marked at the center, but is too small to be seen.
Observable universe - Wikipedia

The yellow arrow points to the limits of what we can detect which is a diameter of(93 billion light-years. So we can observe 46.5 billion light-years in every direction. Everything beyond that horizon is unknown. The Earth is placed at the center of the diagram because that is our vantage point of observation. In other words, if we were in a location closer to the edge then the universe that we would be able to observe would be different one since the areas now undetectable would then be detectable and the areas now detectable would then be undectable.

That's because detectability depends on whether the light or radiation from those regions has had time to reach us or not. The light from regions beyond observation hasn't had time to reach us yet, and most will never reach us because at those distances space is expanding at or faster than the speed of light. In other words, the more the light travels the more space is added. Like being on a floor that keeps elongating as you run. So it makes little or no real headway.

But earth and our galaxy is probably not at the center of it really, correct...?

So, how can we be sure that everything beyond the center of our being able to detect, that all of it is moving much faster (at the speed of light) from the center of us, if we are probably not the center, in actuality...? And there is no definable center yet, correct...?

Just had that question, much thanks if you answer,

God Bless!

 

[Radrook]

Do you think, in time, it will stop expanding, and those filaments, or strings full of material, that gravity will begin take over, but form many, numerous centers in the universe where the material will begin to collect after the expansion is complete, if it does not keep expanding, to where those center's that are left might begin to collapse back in one themselves again, and we could have very, very many, numerous centers where big bangs could potentially happen all over in the universe...?

Thanks again,

Oh, also, I find it very interesting to note, how much a picture of the universe, looks very much like a picture of the connections in a brain... Just thought that was worth noting... Only, I do not think brains are "expanding" like the universe is...?

God Bless!

Up to recently they weren't sure on whether the universe would slow down, come to a stop, and reverse directions resulting in what they called a Big Crunch. That scenario depended on whether there was enough matter producing gravity. But then they found out that instead of slowing down the universe is speeding up. Since they couldn't explain why they came up with the idea of Dark Energy which is making the universe accelerate.

About the matter coming to gather to form many big bangs, well, what happens is that instead of big bangs such matters collapses in on itself to form what is called a black hole from which nothing can escape. There is one right now in the center of our galaxy and in the center of most other galaxies as well. Some are believed to cause Quasars which are believed to be the result of the Black hole gobbling in so much material that the influx of it produces gama rays, x-rays and other such radiation.

A quasar (/ˈkweɪzɑːr/) is a compact region surrounding a supermassive black hole.[2] The region emits enormous amounts of electromagnetic energy as a result of mass from the core of a surrounding galaxy, under the influence of the black hole's gravity, falling onto the black hole's accretion disk. Although ranging in size from only 10 to 10,000 times the Schwarzschild radius of the enclosed black hole, quasars are the most energetic form of active galactic nucleus, emitting radio waves and visible light up to 100 times the luminosity of the entire Milky Way Galaxy.[3]

Artist's rendering of ULAS J1120+0641, a very distant quasar powered by a black hole with a mass two billion times that of the Sun.[1] Credit: ESO/M. Kornmesser
Quasar - Wikipedia

So as you can see, there are no Big Bangs caused when matter is compressed in that way.

True about the brain similarity. In fact, some have conjectured that the universe itself can think and one episode of a sci fi program depicted the universe as a living thing. About expanding brains? No, that would cause intracranial pressure leading to a coma and death. The brain would be squeezed against the skull and blood circulation would be impeded leading to tissue death. That's why surgeons provide openings in the skull to relieve pressure where there is brain swelling. In contrast the universe has no such problems.

 

[Neogaia777]

Up to recently they weren't sure on whether the universe would slow down, come to a stop, and reverse directions resulting in what they called a Big Crunch. That scenario depended on whether there was enough matter producing gravity. But then they found out that instead of slowing down the universe is speeding up. Since they couldn't explain why they came up with the idea of Dark Energy which is making the universe accelerate.

About the matter coming to gather to form many big bangs, well, what happens is that instead of big bangs such matters collapses in on itself to form what is called a black hole from which nothing can escape. There is one right now in the center of our galaxy and in the center of most other galaxies as well. Some are believed to cause Quasars which are believed to be the result of the Black hole gobbling in so much material that the influx of it produces gama rays






Artist's rendering of ULAS J1120+0641, a very distant quasar powered by a black hole with a mass two billion times that of the Sun.[1] Credit: ESO/M. Kornmesser
Quasar - Wikipedia

So as you can see, there are no Big Bangs caused when matter is compressed in that way.

True about the brain similarity. In fact, some have conjectured that the universe itself can think and one episode of a sci fi program depicted the universe as a living thing. About expanding brains? No, that would cause intracranial pressure leading to a coma and death. The brain would be squeezed against the skull and blood circulation would be impeded leading to tissue death. That's why surgeons provide openings in the skull to relieve pressure where there is brain swelling. In contrast the universe has no such problems.

Thanks again Radrook...

So if the universe ever get's to that point of not expanding anymore and collapsing on centers throughout the universe, there would just be a bunch of really big black holes, correct...?

Then, what about the big bang theory in general...?

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

Please, excuse me for this, but, How do we know the universe is accelerating "outward"...? Outward from where...? What center or reference point...? Aren't there many centers that stuff is accelerating outward from...? Some toward us, some away from us, or what...?

God Bless!

 

[lesliedellow]

Please, excuse me for this, but, How do we know the universe is accelerating "outward"...? Outward from where...? What center or reference point...? Aren't there many centers that stuff is accelerating outward from...? Some toward us, some away from us, or what...?

God Bless!

A common analogy is the surface of a baloon. If you imagine dots on the surface of the baloon as representing galaxies, then, as the baloon expands, its surface area increases, and everything moves away from everything else, but there is no centre of expansion.

 

[Radrook]

Thanks again Radrook...

So if the universe ever get's to that point of not expanding anymore and collapsing on centers throughout the universe, there would just be a bunch of really big black holes, correct...?

Then, what about the big bang theory in general...?

God Bless!

One thing to remember about the Big Bang Theory is that what expanded wasn't matter. Matter came into existence AFTER the Big Bang and was not the cause of the Big Bang.

If indeed the universe begins to reverse direction, then the predicted outcome is that all matter would gravitationally converge and finally form one black hole and not many black holes. So far we have no evidence of any black hole producing any Big Bang. Instead, their gravity holds everything in and nothing gets out.

If the universe's expansion speed does not exceed the escape velocity, then the mutual gravitational attraction of all its matter will eventually cause it to contract. ... Eventually all matter would collapse into black holes, which would then coalesce producing a unified black hole or Big Crunch singularity.
Big Crunch - Wikipedia

 

[Radrook]

Please, excuse me for this, but, How do we know the universe is accelerating "outward"...? Outward from where...? What center or reference point...? Aren't there many centers that stuff is accelerating outward from...? Some toward us, some away from us, or what...?

God Bless!

True, the very distant areas of the universe as a whole would appear to be accelerating outwards or away from any location or reference point that we might occupy within it. Within that general framework we have the proper motion of galaxies like Andromeda which seems to be approaching us. Yet someone on its opposite side would see it moving away from his position.

 

[Michael]

Please, excuse me for this, but, How do we know the universe is accelerating "outward"...? Outward from where...? What center or reference point...? Aren't there many centers that stuff is accelerating outward from...? Some toward us, some away from us, or what...?

God Bless!

The expansion claim is based upon Hubble's discovery of a photon redshift/distance relationship with galaxies in space. The further away they are, the more 'redshifted' the are. LCDM proponents "interpret" that phenomenon to be related to 'space expansion' although nothing like "space expansion" happens on Earth. Hubble also discussed "tired light" as the possible cause of that phenomenon and many forms of inelastic scattering have been observed in the lab which do transfer photon momentum from the photon to the plasma medium.

If the real explanation for photon redshift is 'tired light', it's more likely that we live in a static, stationary universe rather than an expanding one.

 

[hedrick]

If wikipedia is right, Tired light - Wikipedia, tired light looked possible at one point, but as observations became more precise, it no longer works.

 

[Michael]

If wikipedia is right, Tired light - Wikipedia, tired light looked possible at one point, but as observations became more precise, it no longer works.

That's not entirely correct. I was *assumed* that tired light didn't work, but they've never actually demonstrated such a thing in any published paper. I think you'd have to go all the way back to Fritz Zwicky to find anyone that even tried to eliminate *one* type of inelastic scattering as a potential cause of photon redshift. The irony is that Zwicky was trying to sell his *own* tired light theory in that paper.

Thunderbolts Forum • View topic - The empirical physics error that resulted in a creation myth

 

[lesliedellow]

If the real explanation for photon redshift is 'tired light', it's more likely that we live in a static, stationary universe rather than an expanding one.

I bet there is not a physicist on the face of the Earth who thought of that. It's a good job Michael was on hand to remind them. Eh, what?