Could the universe be expanding inward so nothing happened?

[HZY]

While watching "Inflationary Cosmology- Is Our Universe Part of a Multiverse - Part I," an MIT open lecture by Alan Guth (on youtube), a thought occured to me: May be the universe is expanding inward instead of outward from the original point (of singularity).

It seem to me that if such a "negative expansion" scenario could indeed be possible, then all events -everything - associated with the evolution of the universe that have occurred, are occurring, and will ever occur, would be occurring inside the singularity; but outside, nothing, not even a whisper - a point of singularity of Nothing, not even a fleeting thought.

Physicists like to say that what we see - rock, sky, people - are just quantum fluctuations. So even on the Inside, it is just slight perturbation in the larger scheme of things.

So it all could really be this:

"(Within) Nothing is Everything <-> (Without) Everything is Nothing" - I call it the philosophy of Nothing-Everything Interchange Logicality (NEIL).

Don't you agree with what I see?

[Philosophy Explorer]

An expansion means to grow larger. How could the reversal of that (growing smaller) still be considered to be an expansion?

PhilX

[Present awareness]

An expansion means to grow larger. How could the reversal of that (growing smaller) still be considered to be an expansion?

PhilX

The word for growing smaller is shrinkage. If you would like to call shrinkage a sort of inward expansion, that's entirely up to you, but it goes against the agreed upon definition of the the word expansion.

-- Updated October 25th, 2014, 10:01 pm to add the following --

An expansion means to grow larger. How could the reversal of that (growing smaller) still be considered to be an expansion?

PhilX

The word for growing smaller is shrinkage. If you would like to call shrinkage a sort of inward expansion, that's entirely up to you, but it goes against the agreed upon definition of the the word expansion.

[DarwinX]

I think you mean that the universe is collapsing into itself which is a possibility. Gravity is the result of a constant collapsing action, one dimension collapses into another smaller dimension. Its all a matter of musical octaves and dimensionality really. Don't you think?

[Bohm2]

It's possible that the "accelerating expansion of universe" is an illusion but that is not the same thing:

Now, a new theory suggests that the accelerating expansion of the universe is merely an illusion, akin to a mirage in the desert. The false impression results from the way our particular region of the cosmos is drifting through the rest of space, said Christos Tsagas, a cosmologist at Aristotle University of Thessaloniki in Greece. Our relative motion makes it look like the universe as a whole is expanding faster and faster, while in actuality, its expansion is slowing down — just as would be expected from what we know about gravity.

If Tsagas' theory is correct, it would rid cosmology of its biggest headache, dark energy, and it might also save the universe from its harrowing fate: the Big Rip. Instead of ripping it to bits, the universe as Tsagas space-time envisions it would just roll to a standstill, then slowly start shrinking.

http://www.astro.auth.gr/~tsagas/Public ... /PRD14.pdf

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44690771/ns ... e-science/

[HZY]

An expansion means to grow larger. How could the reversal of that (growing smaller) still be considered to be an expansion?

PhilX

No! The "egg" shell (point of singularity) doesn't shrink nor expand. Only space, which is been created due to inflationary pressure, is expanding but only within the shell. The shell itself remains static and non-changing (i.e. nonexistent from the point of view of the Outside). Afterall, what is space anyway but manifestation of quantum fluctuations. It does't necessary mean the creation of consequential pressure on the shell by default. Neither do physical properties such as mass, energy, particles, gravity, waves, and other physics-explanables, cause they are also just manifestations that impart no "shell breaking" forces at the fundamental level relative to NEIL (i.e. Nothing-Everything Interchange Logicality).

-- Updated October 26th, 2014, 2:10 pm to add the following --

I think you mean that the universe is collapsing into itself which is a possibility. Gravity is the result of a constant collapsing action, one dimension collapses into another smaller dimension. Its all a matter of musical octaves and dimensionality really. Don't you think?

No! The "egg" shell (point of singularity) doesn't shrink nor expand. Only space, which is been created due to inflationary pressure, is expanding but only within the shell. The shell itself remains static and non-changing (i.e. nonexistent from the point of view of the Outside). Afterall, what is space anyway but manifestation of quantum fluctuations. It does't necessary mean the creation of consequential pressure on the shell by default. Neither do physical properties such as mass, energy, particles, gravity, waves, and other physics-explanables, cause they are also just manifestations that impart no "shell breaking" forces at the fundamental level relative to NEIL (i.e. Nothing-Everything Interchange Logicality).

-- Updated October 26th, 2014, 2:19 pm to add the following --

An expansion means to grow larger. How could the reversal of that (growing smaller) still be considered to be an expansion?

PhilX

The word for growing smaller is shrinkage. If you would like to call shrinkage a sort of inward expansion, that's entirely up to you, but it goes against the agreed upon definition of the the word expansion.

-- Updated October 25th, 2014, 10:01 pm to add the following --

An expansion means to grow larger. How could the reversal of that (growing smaller) still be considered to be an expansion?

PhilX

The word for growing smaller is shrinkage. If you would like to call shrinkage a sort of inward expansion, that's entirely up to you, but it goes against the agreed upon definition of the the word expansion.

No! The "egg" shell (point of singularity) doesn't shrink nor expand. Only space, which is been created due to inflationary pressure, is expanding but only within the shell. The shell itself remains static and non-changing (i.e. nonexistent from the point of view of the Outside). Afterall, what is space anyway but manifestation of quantum fluctuations. It does't necessary mean the creation of consequential pressure on the shell by default. Neither do physical properties such as mass, energy, particles, gravity, waves, and other physics-explanables, cause they are also just manifestations that impart no "shell breaking" forces at the fundamental level relative to NEIL (i.e. Nothing-Everything Interchange Logicality).

This is a new concept the meaning of which is not covered be words such as shrinkage, collapsing, or reducing. How do you define expansion of space within a "shell" without the shell breaking?

[DarwinX]

No! The "egg" shell (point of singularity) doesn't shrink nor expand. Only space, which is been created due to inflationary pressure, is expanding but only within the shell. The shell itself remains static and non-changing (i.e. nonexistent from the point of view of the Outside). Afterall, what is space anyway but manifestation of quantum fluctuations. It does't necessary mean the creation of consequential pressure on the shell by default. Neither do physical properties such as mass, energy, particles, gravity, waves, and other physics-explanables, cause they are also just manifestations that impart no "shell breaking" forces at the fundamental level relative to NEIL (i.e. Nothing-Everything Interchange Logicality).

What is this "shell" that you speak of? I don't think I have heard of this concept before. What does this "shell" consist of - is it free range or caged for example?

[HZY]

No! The "egg" shell (point of singularity) doesn't shrink nor expand. Only space, which is been created due to inflationary pressure, is expanding but only within the shell. The shell itself remains static and non-changing (i.e. nonexistent from the point of view of the Outside). Afterall, what is space anyway but manifestation of quantum fluctuations. It does't necessary mean the creation of consequential pressure on the shell by default. Neither do physical properties such as mass, energy, particles, gravity, waves, and other physics-explanables, cause they are also just manifestations that impart no "shell breaking" forces at the fundamental level relative to NEIL (i.e. Nothing-Everything Interchange Logicality).

What is this "shell" that you speak of? I don't think I have heard of this concept before. What does this "shell" consist of - is it free range or caged for example?

Free within Caged without

[DarwinX]

What came first - the chicken or the egg?

[Present awareness]

What came first - the chicken or the egg?

The chicken is just an eggs way of making another egg.

[Obvious Leo]

The "expanding universe" is simply an observer effect. What's actually happening is that the universe is aging. However, in accordance with Einstein's General Relativity, the universe ages more quickly between the galaxies than it does within them because the gravitational field is weaker there. In weaker gravity time passes more quickly and the observer perceives this differential aging as a spatial expansion. Exactly the same thing occurs within our solar system, although this effect is far less apparent. The moon is actually moving away from the earth, albeit very slowly, a fact well known to physics. This happens for the same reason, namely that time passes more quickly between the earth and the moon than it does on either the earth or the moon. However what the physicists don't seem to understand is that the moon is therefore moving away from us in TIME alone and that the "expanding space" between us and our satellite is simply a construct of our consciousness. We are spatialising time.

Regards Leo

[DarwinX]

What came first - the chicken or the egg?

The chicken is just an eggs way of making another egg.

Or, the egg is just a chicken's way of making another chicken?

-- Updated October 28th, 2014, 10:32 am to add the following --

The "expanding universe" is simply an observer effect. What's actually happening is that the universe is aging. However, in accordance with Einstein's General Relativity, the universe ages more quickly between the galaxies than it does within them because the gravitational field is weaker there. In weaker gravity time passes more quickly and the observer perceives this differential aging as a spatial expansion. Exactly the same thing occurs within our solar system, although this effect is far less apparent. The moon is actually moving away from the earth, albeit very slowly, a fact well known to physics. This happens for the same reason, namely that time passes more quickly between the earth and the moon than it does on either the earth or the moon. However what the physicists don't seem to understand is that the moon is therefore moving away from us in TIME alone and that the "expanding space" between us and our satellite is simply a construct of our consciousness. We are spatialising time.

Regards Leo

Einstein was wrong, time is not a spatial dimension. There are only 3 dimensions not 4. Gravity equals speed of aetheric flow. Rivers of aether flow throughout the universe. Pressure differences in aetheric flow create spin which creates galaxies. Matter is the result of suspended spin energy and inner and outer dimensional conversions. Time has nothing to do with it.

[HZY]

(Nested quote removed.)


The chicken is just an eggs way of making another egg.

Or, the egg is just a chicken's way of making another chicken?

-- Updated October 28th, 2014, 10:32 am to add the following --

The "expanding universe" is simply an observer effect. What's actually happening is that the universe is aging. However, in accordance with Einstein's General Relativity, the universe ages more quickly between the galaxies than it does within them because the gravitational field is weaker there. In weaker gravity time passes more quickly and the observer perceives this differential aging as a spatial expansion. Exactly the same thing occurs within our solar system, although this effect is far less apparent. The moon is actually moving away from the earth, albeit very slowly, a fact well known to physics. This happens for the same reason, namely that time passes more quickly between the earth and the moon than it does on either the earth or the moon. However what the physicists don't seem to understand is that the moon is therefore moving away from us in TIME alone and that the "expanding space" between us and our satellite is simply a construct of our consciousness. We are spatialising time.

Regards Leo

Einstein was wrong, time is not a spatial dimension. There are only 3 dimensions not 4. Gravity equals speed of aetheric flow. Rivers of aether flow throughout the universe. Pressure differences in aetheric flow create spin which creates galaxies. Matter is the result of suspended spin energy and inner and outer dimensional conversions. Time has nothing to do with it.

Whaaa........aaat?

-- Updated October 27th, 2014, 8:12 pm to add the following --

What came first - the chicken or the egg?

In quantum physics, a chicken comes first before the egg that became that chicken in the first place.

[Wayne92587]

I think the term Implode is used for what you call expanding inward.

My understanding is that although the so called expanding Universe is called the Big Bang that there never was a Bang, However the definition of an Explosion is, “a rapid expansion of heat and gasses.”

The Universe, the Heavens and the Stars, Everything, exists as a Metamorphisms, there only seeming to be No Beginning; the Reality of First Cause being the Single Direct Material Cause of the System of Chaos, the beginning of the Evolutionary Process, the Evolution of Space-Time, that has made Manifest the Heavens and the Earth, the Universe, the Reality of Everything.

The Universe, Space-Time, exists as the result of a Transfiguration; the Universe being born of an Evolutionary Process; the Evolutionary Process beginning with the Creation of the Reality of First Cause of the First Singularity to have relative, a numerical value of One-1 being an Affect; a Singularity of One-1 being the first in a series, the beginning of the Evolutionary Process, the beginning of a continuum such as Space-Time; The Reality of First Cause not being born of ordinary, natural, normal means, cause and effect, being without cause, being a Creation.

There is no Expansion of the Universe; there was no Big Bang, although it be True that the Universe was born of a Singularity.

The Reality of First Cause being an Affect, 'not having a Single Direct Material Cause was born of a State or Condition, the Transcendental (Metaphysical) Steadily Random Quantum State of Singularity; a State consisting of an Untold Number of Singularities having no relative, numerical value, having a Numerical value of Zero-0; a Random Quantum Singularity Zero-0 as a result of a Transfiguration becoming the First Singularity to have a relative, numerical value of One-1; a Singularity of One-1 coming into existence as the result of the Transfiguration, the Metamorphisms of a Random Singularity of Zero-0 as it existed in the Darkness, the Nothingness that was on the Deep prior to the separation of Night and Day, prior to the Creation of the Reality of First Cause, the First Singularity to have relative, a numerical value of One-1 that first became readily apparent, measurable as to location and momentum in Space-Time, as the Day was separated from the Night; a Singularity having relative, a numerical value of One-1 being the first in a series, the beginning of a process such as the Evolutionary Process, the beginning of a Continuum such as Space-Time.

The Transfiguration, the Metamorphosis of Reality as it existed prior to the Creation of the Reality of First Cause existing as nothing more than the Darkness, the Nothingness that was upon the Deep, as nothing more than a Big Black Singular Whole.

[ScottieX]

Does not this theory result in the same conclusion as the Big bang theory?

Once all the space between the particles becomes so young that it is trivially small (or the particles are so young that they take up the entire universe) you would seem to get a "big bang" effect (assuming that the extrapolations led to that scenario - which apparently they do).

It is just a matter of perspective - like debating whether an object is moving away from you or you are moving away from it.