[N0B0DY]

Logically, I'm thinking that if I pointed in a northerly direction, my fingertip wouldn't be closer to the north pole of the universe than my elbow.

Though if you can prove that the universe has a shape, or that the center of the self has a substance with an absolute central point, I'll concede.

[Bogie]

I see our expanding universe as a tiny part of an infinite greater universe. Our tiny part or arena is expanding, and there were preconditions to the expansion, i.e. a "before" the big bang. We expand in to the greater universe until the energy density of our expanding "ball" is equalized with the energy density of the greater universe.

By that time, within our expanding arena some interesting things have occurred. The preconditions that lead to the "big bang" are part of a process of "energy to matter to energy" that defeats entropy and so those interesting things I think happen during the expansion are a part of the endless change that goes on in the greater universe.

In this scenario, our expanding arena has a center while the greater universe has no center.

We can't detect the center of our expansion because everything is moving away from everything else due to the energy density equalization that occurs across the entire expansion of our arena, not just at the expanding surface.

And there is the timing of matter formation in the arena. Expansion went on for some time before matter formed from the energy ball that emerged from the "preconditions" (a big crunch).

I guess everybody has a scenario .

[Graybeard]

Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie Any space or matter shape you can think of, absolutely requires a center___Think about it... You can't logically think any other way... Lloyd

Lloyd .. I may be mis-reading you but it seems that you are referring to a 'spatial' centre having 3 dimensions.

Forward - Back, Up - down, Left - right. Of course this would have a centre if you think of space as an entity.

Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie This was no simple explosion of space and or matter, there would have been no vacuum, at the moment of explosion, as the explosion would have been required to create the finite space vacuum, the temperature outside this dis-equilibriated explosion was most likely absolute zero. The explosion temperture would have most likely been trillions of degrees hotter than what has been theorized. As a practical size of such big bang matter would consist of all the matter, and more, presently in the finite universe, as a considerable sum has radiated away, thus just imagine folding all the universe's galaxies, or at least all their matter, back into one black ball. This would be massive beyond belief, in size, even if we consider an increasing light speed as we go back in time toward the initial event, even though velocity increases mass, and reduces size, it would still have been much more massive than has been so far theorized. Now, consider a many trillions of degrees hot real explosion of real matter, into absolute zero thermal space storms, and the massive initial space storms that such gigantic collisions of matter and energy, in all directions imaginable, would create___this much heat would react so violently against such cold, that it is unimaginable, in our thermal semi-equilibriated universe, to truly comprehend___can you? There would have been massive thunder heads, tornados, hurricanes, twistors, spinors, on and on___unimaginable forces at the initial conditions of such a violent explosion, that it could easily explain all the anomalous multidirections, conditions and spirals of the galactic orders___don't you think?

Apart from the fact that we are talking about the presently unknowable, I don't see why such random cataclysmic events as you describe should be the logical order. IMO tremendous force unleashed from a point like 'centre' would be more likely to accelerate in a fractal formation. For the 'anomalous multidirection' to occur an outside influence would be necessary. I don't believe you are proposing one ?

cool bananas ... greg

[RascalPuff]

Dear Lloyd:
Isn't that an awefully daunting and complicated big bang?
- RP

[Graybeard]

Originally Posted by Bogie I see our expanding universe as a tiny part of an infinite greater universe.

But within the 'greater' universe?

Originally Posted by Bogie Our tiny part or arena is expanding, and there were preconditions to the expansion, i.e. a "before" the big bang.

The preconditions of the 'greater' universe set the stage for the Big Bang which is only related to our Universe?

Originally Posted by Bogie We expand in to the greater universe until the energy density of our expanding "ball" is equalized with the energy density of the greater universe.

But Ed, presumably conditions equalise. At this point we would be part of the One Greater Universe? This doesn't satisfactorily explain the acceleration of space, or are you saying we haven't equalised yet ?

greg

[Bogie]

Originally Posted by Graybeard But within the 'greater' universe?

Yes, within the greater universe. The greater universe has always existed and contains a potentially infinite number of arenas similar to ours at any given time. All arenas are temporary, maybe ten trillion years, and they form from the remnants of matter that has been left behind by previous arenas that have played out. The arenas are described in my blog post about Defeating Entropy.

The preconditions of the 'greater' universe set the stage for the Big Bang which is only related to our Universe?

I would put it like this; the greater universe plays a role in the initiation of our arena because the matter that goes into the big crunch from which our expanding universe emerges comes from the greater universe. The precondition to our expanding arena is the big crunch that forms from the matter that has been “deposited” out in the greater universe by previous arenas.

But Ed, presumably conditions equalise. At this point we would be part of the One Greater Universe? This doesn't satisfactorily explain the acceleration of space, or are you saying we haven't equalised yet ? Greg

Yes, our arena is in the expansion phase. It still has higher energy density than the equalized energy density of the greater universe. Our high energy density space is being equalized with the lower energy density of the greater universe as we expand.

That is my idea. The greater universe can be thought of as a dynamic multi-arena universe.

[Bogie]

I re-read my last post and want to add this to expand on the comment about the acceleration of space.

But Ed, … This doesn't satisfactorily explain the acceleration of space, or are you saying we haven't equalised yet ?

Here is how I view the acceleration of space. Space itself doesn’t do anything. It is there and it has always been there.

Space is occupied by EEPs and the density of the EEPs in a given volume of space is referred to as the energy density of that space.

So in my view space does not expand; the EEPs that occupy the space of our arena are spreading out as energy density is being equalized with the lower energy density of the greater universe.

As matter forms from the energy density of space during that process of equalization it is naturally separating because if forms from EEPs that are separating. The “expansion” of the energy density is transferred to the particles that form from the energy density.

Appropriately enough, that momentum that is transferred to the initial atoms that form is also transferred to the initial stars that form and from there to the galaxies that form. The expansion of the matter in the universe, i.e. the apparent separation of galaxies from one another is established even before the first matter materializes from the expanding background of EEPs in space.

Understanding my view of the cause of the acceleration of the expansion is dependant on understanding the cause of the initial separation of matter within space, and then understanding how gravity is affected by the equalization and separation.

Ed

[Graybeard]

Originally Posted by Bogie Yes, our arena is in the expansion phase. It still has higher energy density than the equalized energy density of the greater universe. Our high energy density space is being equalized with the lower energy density of the greater universe as we expand.

Ed .... If we are in the expansion phase .... then we equalise .. What mechanism exists that causes the contraction?

Why should we return?

Originally Posted by Bogie So in my view space does not expand; the EEPs that occupy the space of our arena are spreading out as energy density is being equalized with the lower energy density of the greater universe.

In fact what force would power this in either direction ?

Will re-read your blog entries.

cool bananas greg

[RascalPuff]

Dear Michael:
Is it you, I, or each of us that seems to be obsessed with having the last word?
Incidentally, I do honestly agree with you, that, wherever you may be, you're at the exact center of the universe - this goes for everyone else also of course. Namaste.

[Bogie]

Originally Posted by Graybeard Ed .... If we are in the expansion phase .... then we equalise .. What mechanism exists that causes the contraction?

Gravity. During the expansion you have two effects. One is the equalization of two energy density environments, our expanding universe and the greater universe that separates masses from each other. The other is gravity that attracts masses to each other.

When expansion is complete, i.e. when the energy density is equalized, the galaxies and black holes and “dust” of our arena are set free out into the greater universe. All of that mass that is now moving under its own established momentum still exerts and is affected by gravity.

Now picture a potentially infinite heritage of arenas “depositing” their remnants (galaxies, black holes, etc.) out in the equalized greater universe. The matter from numerous previous arenas will rendezvous and mix and mingle and come under the influence of gravity without the influence of expansion. Big crunches form from these conditions and lead to new arenas. Big crunches burst into expansion after the matter that goes into the crunch is “negated” back to EEPs.

Why should we return?

Gravity dictates it.

In fact what force would power this in either direction ?

It is as yet undiscovered physics that is enabled by the unifying particle that I predict will eventually be discovered. I call it the elementary energy particle (EEP) that I describe in my blog.

The EEP engineers an “energy to matter to energy” process that plays out in the innumerable arenas that are always forming and “dissolving” across the greater universe.

Will re-read your blog entries. cool bananas greg

I hoping more people will read it. There are several more entries almost ready but if I keep posting entries it gets harder and harder for members of the community to wade through them.

I want to enlist the help of the community as I work on the details of matter formation. I have a blog entry ready about the intimate details of how hydrogen atoms form from the energy density of space but right now they don’t have spin and angular momentum. If a few here get interested enough to offer suggestions as to how the proton and electron that form from the EEPs that make up the energy density of space acquire spin and angular momentum, then I can post my entry about the cause of gravity, and then the community might want to help in the description of how hydrogen stars are formed from the isotropic and homogeneous hydrogen environment.