The universe is expanding, but, where?

[durangodawood]

Space doesnt expand INTO anything. "In" is a spatial term.

 

[Wryetui]

Do you honestly think this is an appropriate analogy?

I'll let you think about by asking you a question:


I'll stick a piece of metal to a magnet.
You round up every believer you know and pray for god to make a tree act as if it were a magnet and have a piece of metal stick to it.
Which piece of metal will stick and why?

To say that we don't know why and how magnets work is something I cannot take seriously in this day an age.

You wouldn't be reading this, if it wasn't for the state of the art magnetic parts in the server hosting this piece of text.

LOL again, these people just can't wait for you to say something they disagree with to start it. Of course we know magentism exists and works, but I said in my post: it's not like we know more about those two than about God! And I think we know more about God than about magnetism (historical references, cultural backgrounds, saints, people, priests, ayatolas, rabbis, hindus, religion in general), that's what I meant.

Why would you God think would convert a tree into a magnet? Just to satisfy your curiosity? Just so we can say: Chess mate atheists! Look what God did! No, sorry, God disproves those stupidities.

 

[Grafted In]

I don't put limitations on God. In my opinion the big bang is less than the popping of a balloon in comparison to infinity and eternal. To me the universe is infinite and we are simply placed within less than a tiny place in within that infinite size/time. Look at our solar system. Does it not look like the atoms we see with special optics? Then look again at our galaxy and those beyond it. Do they not appear to make up the atoms or molecules of an even bigger level of existence? It is my opinion the scale of things go on forever. Without end. What we perceive to be the smallest partial is made up of yet smaller partials and on and on in both directions of both time and space. Scientists think the big bang was the beginning of all that exists. My humble opinion is that they are thinking too small.
There is simply no way we can fathom these things with finite minds. I gotta think God must find some humor in our silly conclusions.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I just don't understand, if it is expanding where is it expanding? It needs a place for that expansion to take place within that space, is it really incomprehensible?

It's not incomprehensible, but it's very non-intuitive.

Where is space expanding? Everywhere, more or less.

But the universe is not expanding into anything, like your ink expands into water.

Imagine a poor analogy. No, I mean, imagine a flat rubber sheet that's infinite in all directions. And there are some coins taped to the surface here and there.

Mathematically, we can imagine the sheet expanding to twice its size. Say, if a chunk of rubber starts at point (x,y) on the sheet, then it moves to (2x,2y).

Since it's infinite, even if the rubber sheet gets twice as big it's still the same size... infinite. The sheet doesn't have to expand into anything.

The coins on the sheet are something like galaxies. They don't expand. It's just the space they're swimming in that expands. And when the sheet stretches, they get farther apart.

 

[Loudmouth]

That, my friend, is the difference between someone who thinks a relationship to the unknown is a relationship to whatever, and someone who thinks a relationship to the unknown is a relationship.

So in actual fact, in order to contradict religion, you have said nothing yourself.

There doesn't have to be deities in order for people to believe in deities, or think that they are in a "relationship" with a deity.

 

[Loudmouth]

Why would you God think would convert a tree into a magnet? Just to satisfy your curiosity? Just so we can say: Chess mate atheists! Look what God did! No, sorry, God disproves those stupidities.

In other words, God is indistinguishable from a deity that doesn't exist.

 

[Michael]

In other words, God is indistinguishable from a deity that doesn't exist.

At least human record some influence of "God" on their lives. Nothing is more impotent on Earth than your "space expansion" deities. They don't have any effect on a single photon in any lab on Earth, or anywhere else for that matter. It's all an act of "pure faith" on the part of the 'believer'.

 

[Loudmouth]

At least human record some influence of "God" on their lives.

They record influences, but have never shown that it is a deity doing it.

Nothing is more impotent on Earth than your "space expansion" deities. They don't have any effect on a single photon in any lab on Earth, or anywhere else for that matter. It's all an act of "pure faith" on the part of the 'believer'.

When you refuse to look at anything outside of a lab, it does nothing by highlight your position as a crackpot.

 

[Michael]

They record influences, but have never shown that it is a deity doing it.

Ditto for your impotent on Earth sky entities. The cause/effect relationships between photons and your impotent invisible friends are all *an act of pure personal faith*!

When you refuse to look at anything outside of a lab, it does nothing by highlight your position as a crackpot.

Irony overload! Your entire basis for ignoring the influence of God on peoples real lives on Earth is directly related to the same issue! Your invisible sky entities are more impotent on Earth than an *average* supernatural concept of God. There isn't even any chance of creating actual "experiments" to demonstrate any of your claims!

 

[Loudmouth]

Ditto for your impotent on Earth sky entities. The cause/effect relationships between photons and your impotent invisible friends are all *an act of pure personal faith*!

Irony overload! Your entire basis for ignoring the influence of God on peoples real lives on Earth is directly related to the same issue! Your invisible sky entities are more impotent on Earth than an *average* supernatural concept of God. There isn't even any chance of creating actual "experiments" to demonstrate any of your claims!

Once again, only crackpots require that something happen in a lab.

 

[Michael]

Once again, only crackpots require that something happen in a lab.

Why do you reject the influence of God on peoples lives again? When did any photon ever *tell you* that the 'cause' of redshift is "space expansion"? FYI, it's utterly pathetic that you're reduced to childish name calling. Your "crackpot' commentary is about as useful and ethical as calling atheists "evil" simply because they refuse to agree with some point related to "religion".

 

[Loudmouth]

Why do you reject the influence of God on peoples lives again?

What evidence am I rejecting?

When did any photon ever *tell you* that the 'cause' of redshift is "space expansion"?

Every time it returns with a wavelength independent redshift, unlike plasma redshift which is wavelength dependent. It is the same evidence you ignore time and again because we can't put an expanding universe in a lab. It is the most desparate attempt at ignoring evidence that one can find.

 

[Michael]

What evidence am I rejecting?

You mean *other than* about 3 thousand years of recorded human history?

Every time it returns with a wavelength independent redshift,

You haven't even *demonstrated* that claim in the first place! When did you show me gamma rays redshifted the same as white light?

unlike plasma redshift which is wavelength dependent. It is the same evidence you ignore time and again because we can't put an expanding universe in a lab.

You've never provided a single published peer reviewed paper that demonstrates that you can rule out *all* forms of plasma redshift in the first place!

It is the most desparate attempt at ignoring evidence that one can find.

Right. You guys also gave me the same song and dance routine over the over-hyped Bicep2 claims. Within *months* all your invisible sky deities were replaced with *ordinary dust*! Talk about *crackpot* claims!

 

[Loudmouth]

You mean *other than* about 3 thousand years of recorded human history?

How is that evidence?

You haven't even *demonstrated* that claim in the first place! When did you show me gamma rays redshifted the same as white light?

I already demonstrated a wavelength independent redshift. Until you face the evidence, there is nothing more to address.

You've never provided a single published peer reviewed paper that demonstrates that you can rule out *all* forms of plasma redshift in the first place!

And now we have magical plasma redshift that produces wavelength independent redshift.

 

[Michael]

How is that evidence?

The exact same way that your cause of 'photon redshift' claims are "evidence" of 'space expansion". Such claims are nothing more than an *act of pure faith* on the part of the 'believer'.

I already demonstrated a wavelength independent redshift. Until you face the evidence, there is nothing more to address.

No you didn't. You showed that *some* wavelengths are reasonably redshifted about the same. You failed when we got to higher energy wavelengths however.

And now we have magical plasma redshift that produces wavelength independent redshift.

There's at *least* a half dozen different types. How many did you actually *test*? Answer: *Exactly one*!

Meanwhile you simply *ignore* every single failed "test" of your claims:

Mysterious 'supervoid' in space is largest object ever discovered, scientists claim - Telegraph

 

[Michael]

Mysterious 'supervoid' in space is largest object ever discovered, scientists claim - Telegraph

Although the Big Bang theory allows for areas that are cooler and hotter, the size of the void does not fit with predicted models. Simply put, it is too big to exist.

 

[PsychoSarah]

LOL again, these people just can't wait for you to say something they disagree with to start it. Of course we know magentism exists and works, but I said in my post: it's not like we know more about those two than about God! And I think we know more about God than about magnetism (historical references, cultural backgrounds, saints, people, priests, ayatolas, rabbis, hindus, religion in general), that's what I meant.

Why would you God think would convert a tree into a magnet? Just to satisfy your curiosity? Just so we can say: Chess mate atheists! Look what God did! No, sorry, God disproves those stupidities.

We don't even know if deities exist. We know magnetism exists. I am pretty sure that we know more about magnetism than any deity.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Ditto for your impotent on Earth sky entities. The cause/effect relationships between photons and your impotent invisible friends are all *an act of pure personal faith*!

Irony overload! Your entire basis for ignoring the influence of God on peoples real lives on Earth is directly related to the same issue! Your invisible sky entities are more impotent on Earth than an *average* supernatural concept of God. There isn't even any chance of creating actual "experiments" to demonstrate any of your claims!

You seem to require all claims demonstrated except for deities.

 

[Loudmouth]

The exact same way that your cause of 'photon redshift' claims are "evidence" of 'space expansion".

Stories in books are not observations.

A wavelength independent redshift is an observation.

The two are not comparable.

Such claims are nothing more than an *act of pure faith* on the part of the 'believer'.

A wavelength independent redshift is directly observed.

No you didn't. You showed that *some* wavelengths are reasonably redshifted about the same.

Those same wavelengths should NOT be redshifted the same if it is plasma redshift. Even more, we shouldn't see anything more than a fog in the distant universe, and yet we see pin pricks of light. All of this is evidence on the side of an expansion.

You failed when we got to higher energy wavelengths however.

Not a failure. The only failure is your inability to deal with the evidence.

There's at *least* a half dozen different types. How many did you actually *test*? Answer: *Exactly one*!

Number of plasma redshift mechanisms you have shown that can produce the observed redshift? Zero.

 

[Michael]

Stories in books are not observations.

Stories you make up about photons being redhsifted by "space expansion" are not controlled observations either!

A wavelength independent redshift is an observation.

It's really too bad that you are unable to demonstrate that's true for the higher energy wavelengths, and it's just another example of your personal "act of pure faith" in the unseen (in the lab or anywhere else).

The two are not comparable.

Yes they are. You have *faith* in the "unseen" in the lab, and you can't demonstrate that your claim even *applies* to higher energy wavelengths.

A wavelength independent redshift is directly observed.

Gamma Ray Delay May Be Sign of 'New Physics' :: UC Davis News & Information

The researchers propose that the delay could be caused by photons interacting with "quantum foam," a type of structure of space itself. Quantum foam is predicted by quantum gravity theory, an attempt to unite quantum physics and relativity at cosmic scales.

Gamma rays don't even necessarily travel at the same speed as lower wavelengths!

Those same wavelengths should NOT be redshifted the same if it is plasma redshift.

You of course have *zero* published evidence to support your "statement of faith'.

Even more, we shouldn't see anything more than a fog in the distant universe, and yet we see pin pricks of light. All of this is evidence on the side of an expansion.

And indeed, we see much more blurry objects at the largest redshifts. In fact we really have no idea how far we can "see" in the first place. We're limited by our technologies. There's no 'evidence' of anything other than "blurring" due to scattering in plasmas! In fact your claims about the SZ effect *demonstrate* that plasmas *do* have a tangible effect on photons!

Not a failure. The only failure is your inability to deal with the evidence.

What evidence did you show me that your claims apply to gamma rays and white light equally? No such evidence was ever presented! It's an "act of faith on your part as that MAGIC survey demonstrates. You can't even demonstrate that all light travels at the same speed through the plasma medium.

Number of plasma redshift mechanisms you have shown that can produce the observed redshift? Zero.

Amount of evidence you've given me to demonstrate your claim even applies to white light and gamma rays equally: ZERO!