North's geometrical argument invalidating expansion

[north]

Martin

 

if the Universe is expanding then could this not be simply an illusion ?

 

for example and this is my biggest argument against BB is that when thinking three dimensionaly why would not all expansion from say 100 different galaxies around our galaxy , come to a conclusion that there is null expansion ?

 

because all perspectives from different galaxies would see expansion toward us

[Martin]

Martin

 

if the Universe is expanding then could this not be simply an illusion ?

 

for example and this is my biggest argument against BB is that when thinking three dimensionaly why would not all expansion from say 100 different galaxies around our galaxy , come to a conclusion that there is null expansion ?

 

because all perspectives from different galaxies would see expansion toward us

 

try it with dots on graph paper. make a pattern of dots and then on the next sheet scale up all the distances by a factor of two.

 

expansion is a percentage increase in all the longrange distances (not the shortrange like within our own galaxy or group of galaxies but between widely separated galaxies)

 

the real percentage rate is very small but significant over time

it is 1/140 of a percent every million years.

 

but to teach yourself, imagine distances doubling every million years.

[north]

Originally Posted by north

Martin

 

if the Universe is expanding then could this not be simply an illusion ?

 

for example and this is my biggest argument against BB is that when thinking three dimensionaly why would not all expansion from say 100 different galaxies around our galaxy , come to a conclusion that there is null expansion ?

 

because all perspectives from different galaxies would see expansion toward us

 

try it with dots on graph paper. make a pattern of dots and then on the next sheet scale up all the distances by a factor of two.

 

the thing is that graph paper is two dimensional

 

my graph paper , so to speak , is three dimensional

 

it has volume , a sphere

[iNow]

Same can be done with a balloon.

[north]

Same can be done with a balloon.

 

not really

 

for a balloon only has galaxies on the outside of the skin of the balloon

 

but in my example , 3D , galaxies would also fill the inside of the balloon

[Martin]

 

the thing is that graph paper is two dimensional

 

my graph paper , so to speak , is three dimensional

 

it has volume , a sphere

 

North, if you can't do the same experiment in 3D, in your head, that I described doing in 2D on graph paper, then you may not have the imagination or minimal degree of receptiveness that we need here in Astro Cosmo forum.

 

Try again. It really doesnt matter whether its 2d or 3d in this case. Forget about sphere. Picture some dots in a 3D space like the room you are sitting in.

 

Now double the distance between each pair of dots.

 

do you see that they all get farther from each other?

 

===========================

 

you have said that you argue against the BB theory (that is, against standard expansion cosmology) on the basis that having expansion occur as seen from surrounding galaxies would make stuff come closer to us!

 

If you can't see right away that that is wrong, then somebody is going to take your Arguer's License away. I mean it. Try to use better reasoning in your arguments against the BB.

[north]

the thing is that graph paper is two dimensional

 

my graph paper , so to speak , is three dimensional

 

it has volume , a sphere

 

 

 

 

 

 

North' date=' if you can't do the same experiment in 3D, in your head, that I described doing in 2D on graph paper, then you may not have the imagination or minimal degree of receptiveness that we need here in Astro Cosmo forum.[/quote']

 

I see

 

 

 

Try again. It really doesnt matter whether its 2d or 3d in this case.

 

it does matter really

 

 

===========================

 

you have said that you argue against the BB theory (that is, against standard expansion cosmology) on the basis that having expansion occur as seen from surrounding galaxies would make stuff come closer to us!

 

no

 

I said the result would be a null expansion

[Edtharan]

not really

 

for a balloon only has galaxies on the outside of the skin of the balloon

 

but in my example , 3D , galaxies would also fill the inside of the balloon

With the balloon example, the surface of the balloon is supposed to a simplification of 3d space into 3d space.

 

As the balloon is 3d (in reality), then the fact that we simplified the 3d space into a 2d space means that the forth dimension of reality will be simplified into the 3rd dimension.

 

(sorry if that last paragraph is a bit confusing)

 

What I am trying to say, is that you can't place galaxies inside the balloon, as they would not be in the same space time as those on the outside.

 

If the 2d surface of the balloon represents 3d space, then the inside (and outside) of the balloon represents time (inside is the past and outside is the future).

 

You seem to understand the analogy with the graph paper as the 3d space being simplified into a 2d surface. The link between them is that you can always wrap the graph paper around the balloon and it doesn't change the fact that the graph paper still simplified the 3d space into the 2d surface.