cmdpwnd

Ok I guess my phrasing is just really bad, I don't mean the balloon analogy you all are referencing but just a balloon in general sorry for the confusion when I said `I use the analogy of a balloon as popularized in association with the universe's eternal expansion` I was just trying to reference how the balloon and universe are similar and had only heard of the balloon analogy as explained to me by someone else which I can now see was incorrect so I revise that you look at it like a rubber band and that if the rubber band breaks then anything within the bands perimeter will `escape`. So the band has a predetermined amount of matter and therefore can only expand so far yet if the universe does not create or destroy matter yet expands indefinitely then that is flawed in that assuming the edge of the universe consists of atoms that are all compacted together in a close enough space that no object can pass between the two atoms.

I was in a chatroom with some friends coding and we got talking about the universe and infinity and I said the following approx. 1hr before this post. Im just wanting to gather everyone's thoughts on it and if someone else has proposed this before and if so who and when. Thanks in advance, cmdpwnd [i also posted this on stack exchanged and they were pricks which is why I came here] ^that's retarded. take the balloon effect for example, a balloon is completely sealed as it inflates until the pressure is great enough to break the seal from its expansion. This principle would tell us that the matter stayed consistent and that it was continually distributed across an area until the gaps between the individual atoms was great enough that other particles (gas) could escape. With the balloon theory however this cannot be consistent with the way that the universe expands because for the universe to maintain an infineltly expanding edge at some point all the matter within the universe at that point would only exist at the perimieter therefrore creating a vacuum at either side of the atoms which would give us a ring of matter. Instead for us to continue to have the matter as is in the universe without it being re-distributed as the edge expands it would by the laws of nature HAVE to gain matter. So yea sorry if i just inverted all known laws of physics upon you but that's how i see it. (Cleaned up statement as per req by @cyanoats) It is said that the universe is continually expanding to infinity and that as such while the universe technically has an edge that its position continues to expand eternally. Assuming that the previous is true my statement concludes that the only way for this to be possible is if as the universe expanded it attained matter thereby defying the Law of Conservation of Mass. I use the analogy of a balloon as popularized in association with the universe's eternal expansion as follows: As a balloon expands the matter that makes up the balloon is consistent and provides an air tight seal to the gases within the balloon until the point at which the individual atoms that make up the balloon are far enough apart that the gas inside can escape however this cannot apply to the universe because, assuming that the Law of Conservation of mass holds true, as the universe expands it requires that matter exist at the point which is defined as the 'edge' or 'perimeter' which , like the balloon, would require that the matter of the perimeter be redistributed to accommodate for the area that the perimeter covers. If the Law of Conservation of Mass does hold true this would mean that eventually all matter in existence would makeup the 'perimeter' at a width of a single atom at which point by Law then the universe could no longer expand. By this I conclude that since the universe is continually expanding yet the matter which makes up the universe is not being continually redistributed to accommodate for the 'permeter's' area that the universe must create matter as it expands and that in such matter is constantly and infinitely being created. Original chat in picture attached