Expansion
- Nameless1995
- Posts: 95
- Joined: October 10th, 2012, 4:32 pm
Expansion
-
- Posts: 2501
- Joined: April 28th, 2013, 10:03 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Omar Khayyam
- Location: Australia
Re: Expansion
Regards Leo
-
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: March 28th, 2014, 3:13 am
Re: Expansion
I think what it means is that space is all that where the laws of this universe we occupy, apply. Beyond it, the laws of the universe do not apply. So from our reference frame "beyond" is unapproachable and no information of the beyond can reach us or be of use to us. So it is nothing because what it is actually is irrelevant to us and therefore the equivalent of nothing. At least that is what I think it means.Nameless1995 wrote:If the universe is finite then beyond the universe there must be nothing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Can you imagine absolute nothing? Yes by not imagining at all. Imagine nothing = not imagining. Now if there is absolute nothing outside universe, then how can the universe expand? Where is it getting the free space to expand?
I am not much of a science guy but this is how I think of it. If we were to hypothetically reach the end of the universe, and be able to travel faster than the expansion with our torch light beaming out in front of us, at the edge of the universe the light would simply turn towards where the laws of science had reached, we would also turn to where laws of science existed and we would still see the beam as going straight. We would end up turning and not even know it, wondering when we would reach the edge.
-
- Posts: 2501
- Joined: April 28th, 2013, 10:03 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Omar Khayyam
- Location: Australia
Re: Expansion
Regards Leo
-
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: March 28th, 2014, 3:13 am
Re: Expansion
Oh, I am reading and re-reading what you have written in "how can an infinite universe have origins?". I think what you say is brilliant, though I do not understand quite a lot of it. I am trying, though, but till I understand what you say and it makes sense to me, I have to go by what makes sense right now ( in an "out of my depth but making sense of it" kind of way) and that is what I have expressed.Obvious Leo wrote:It makes better sense to think of the boundary of the universe as a time rather than a place. Obviously this time is therefore the present moment because beyond the present moment nothing yet exists. The state of nothingness beyond our universe is the future which is yet to be made but we also leave a state of nothingness behind us since the past no longer exists either. Thus the boundary of the universe is impossible to observe because you're on it.
Regards Leo
-
- Posts: 2501
- Joined: April 28th, 2013, 10:03 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Omar Khayyam
- Location: Australia
Re: Expansion
Regards Leo
-
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: March 28th, 2014, 3:13 am
Re: Expansion
hahahaObvious Leo wrote:Making sense is not a highly valued imperative in the world of physics but we Aussies set great store by it. In fact I'm convinced that god invented beer solely to stop the Aussies from ruling the world.
Regards Leo
- Siphersh
- Posts: 101
- Joined: June 8th, 2013, 7:56 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Terence McKenna
- Location: Hungary
Re: Expansion
I'm pretty sure that the expansion of the Universe doesn't mean the expansion of matter. It means the expansion of space.Nameless1995 wrote:If the universe is finite then beyond the universe there must be nothing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Can you imagine absolute nothing? Yes by not imagining at all. Imagine nothing = not imagining. Now if there is absolute nothing outside universe, then how can the universe expand? Where is it getting the free space to expand?
-
- Posts: 2501
- Joined: April 28th, 2013, 10:03 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Omar Khayyam
- Location: Australia
Re: Expansion
How do you reckon this might happen? Does empty space just spread itself out a bit and if so how far can it spread itself out before it gets too empty? Perhaps new bits of empty space just pop into existence to fill in the gaps. How does nothingness expand and contract and twist and curve? The very proposition is metaphysically nonsensical.Siphersh wrote:It means the expansion of space.
Regards Leo
- Siphersh
- Posts: 101
- Joined: June 8th, 2013, 7:56 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Terence McKenna
- Location: Hungary
Re: Expansion
You seem to think about space as if it was matter. Space is not matter. It's distance. There's something wrong with your metaphysics if it expects space to be some kind of a substance.Obvious Leo wrote:How do you reckon this might happen? Does empty space just spread itself out a bit and if so how far can it spread itself out before it gets too empty? Perhaps new bits of empty space just pop into existence to fill in the gaps. How does nothingness expand and contract and twist and curve? The very proposition is metaphysically nonsensical.Siphersh wrote:It means the expansion of space.
Regards Leo
-
- Posts: 2501
- Joined: April 28th, 2013, 10:03 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Omar Khayyam
- Location: Australia
Re: Expansion
Regards Leo
- Siphersh
- Posts: 101
- Joined: June 8th, 2013, 7:56 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Terence McKenna
- Location: Hungary
Re: Expansion
-
- Posts: 2501
- Joined: April 28th, 2013, 10:03 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Omar Khayyam
- Location: Australia
Re: Expansion
Regards Leo
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Expansion
Space is solely relational and therefore can have no role to play in an ontologically kosher physical model of our universe.
They do not describe the real world but the observed world.
Over the course of several posts you've set out your stall on what you see as the inadequacy of physics being merely a set of epistemic models - your complaint that it lacks an ontology. But, I may have missed it, but I haven't yet spotted anywhere where you've defined what it means for an entity to "exist", what it means for a physical model to be "ontologically kosher" and how one goes about making a clear distinction between descriptions of the "real world" and descriptions of the "observed world".Thus space is being deployed to describe a non existent entity.
When you first started posting here I had high hopes. But you didn't answer any of my objections to your initial posts. Your subsequent posts sometimes seem, on the face of it, to be quite close to the simple: "I object to the widely accepted models of science simply because they are widely accepted so therefore they must be dogma" view that we get from many, many posters very regularly on the science section of this forum - the Galileo Syndrome, as I like to think of it. i.e. the view that maverick views are right simply because they are maverick views, and the more they're criticized the more this shows that they're being suppressed by "the man" and so must be true. Often this view is grounded in a straightforward lack of understanding of what these standard models actually say, often combined with a pre-existing distaste for the perceived consequences of a particular aspect of the science.
In your case, this last part doesn't seem to be the case. So it would be interesting to investigate further.
- Nameless1995
- Posts: 95
- Joined: October 10th, 2012, 4:32 pm
Re: Expansion
Distance can only increase if matters move away from each other, no? The distance between A and B can only increase and A and B moves away from each other. But how can A and B move away if there is nowhere to move. How exactly can free space expand? Is there some practical non-hypothetical example?Siphersh wrote:You seem to think about space as if it was matter. Space is not matter. It's distance. There's something wrong with your metaphysics if it expects space to be some kind of a substance.Obvious Leo wrote: (Nested quote removed.)
How do you reckon this might happen? Does empty space just spread itself out a bit and if so how far can it spread itself out before it gets too empty? Perhaps new bits of empty space just pop into existence to fill in the gaps. How does nothingness expand and contract and twist and curve? The very proposition is metaphysically nonsensical.
Regards Leo
If some particles forming a boundary moves apart then it may be said that the space inside the boundary expands but the particles could only move because there were free space to move. Is there any example of really creation of new space which is not just re-positioning of matters and stuffs?
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023