[Guille]

Originally Posted by SinJin

Fair enough. I know that there is data leaning towards a "flat" universe. Do you know if there is any data collected yet about the expansion of the universe and if it is expanding at the same rate in all directions or at different rates in different directions? My guess, if the expansion is related to distribution of mass, is that the rate of expansion at different locations wouldn't be the same, so there wouldn't be a center.

I'm as blind s you, I have no information about the rate of growth. Maybe I can try and send a very polite e-mail to a scinetist who is not particularly very impotant, but who coudl know about these things and woudl answer back. Any sugestions of who?

Anyway, I think that the space doesn't grow equally ina ll directions, allthough I think that the unvierse is a sphere (of cours,ento an exact sphere).

[zeroca]

Originally Posted by SinJin

Just out of curiosity, but how come a growing universe can never be a perfect sphere?

I'd borrow again the excellent expression from Tony Stanton: "The universe has a foam-like structure":
And then precede with my own thought:
each heavenly body is encircled with its own space, which begins from the center of body, which itself is placed inside this space. The space spreads to all directions up to some distance from the center of body and is expending permanently, pushes solid matter placed inside its bounds to the center from all sides, as if were pressing it from all sides to the center, so the universe itself can't have spherical form, but has the probability to have infinite number of heavenly bodies with their own spaces (both of them approximately of a spherical form).

[mkirkpatrick]

Most things move,as a matter of fact all things move,but that which is not a thing does not??The paradox of all reality and all phenomena,is that from absolute motionlessness comes motion.the is no motion whatsoever in the nomunon,that which is at the back of all-is ever still,the question that we all
need to understand-is this,when you are everywhere,and our onmipresent
then where could you possibly go to where you were not already present at??
It is only when we look at the realitivity of what we think of as the REAL-world
that we see movement-in the Real-world of the Absolute there is no motion.
the very idea of movement would be seen as laughable and quite absurd!

Movement like its cousin Time are both illusions that have tricked mankind
for centuries.


kind regards michael.

[SinJin]

hmm.... I'm not sure I understand you. Are you saying that since motion is relative, some things may appear to be motionless even when they're not, but it would be impossible to determine?

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick

Most things move,as a matter of fact all things move,but that which is not a thing does not??The paradox of all reality and all phenomena,is that from absolute motionlessness comes motion.the is no motion whatsoever in the nomunon,that which is at the back of all-is ever still,the question that we all
need to understand-is this,when you are everywhere,and our onmipresent
then where could you possibly go to where you were not already present at??
It is only when we look at the realitivity of what we think of as the REAL-world
that we see movement-in the Real-world of the Absolute there is no motion.
the very idea of movement would be seen as laughable and quite absurd!

Movement like its cousin Time are both illusions that have tricked mankind
for centuries.
kind regards michael.

The one does not move, yet everything within the unmoving one moves, except the unmoving of the one in each. The ever present everywhere may be present in each wave/electron/particle, then the ever present has individual presence everwhere at once, while maintaining whole stillness. At the same time, such religion may not be necessary. Time, may be a dual intuitive premanition? Time requires the unmoving now space, to allow us the experience of motion... What do you think?

regards

[SinJin]

Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie

The one does not move, yet everything within the unmoving one moves, except the unmoving of the one in each. The ever present everywhere may be present in each wave/electron/particle, then the ever present has individual presence everwhere at once, while maintaining whole stillness. At the same time, such religion may not be necessary. Time, may be a dual intuitive premanition? Time requires the unmoving now space, to allow us the experience of motion... What do you think?

regards

Oh I see now... thanks for clearing that up.

[jungjedi]

what if you were to move everything in the universe to one side suddenly.that would make for one hell of a dopplershift

[tmurraynet]

Originally Posted by Graybeard

Can the Universe have a centre ... A centre would imply that there are other places that are not central .. eventually you would arrive at an edge.

Space is accelerating, and as it is accelerating away from every observer .. I don't think there can be a central point.

If there was, however, i don't think Einsteins theory of relativity would ever have become fact. Everything would be measured from the centre, it would be the one 'relative' point ... But Einstein said "Every observers view is as legitimate as any other."

Greg

I agree with number 3 ... I don't think there would be a method of detecting number 2 unless the energy of the particles were changing ... Number 1.... hmmm... I don't really get it ... if the whole universe was expanding, why would there be more energy available to create new particles??

The Universe in a chain reaction. Most of us call this Time. THe Universe is expanding and changing and moving And we are part of it. Everything is controlled by Energy.

[michellemfry]

Ok, I may need a therapist to explain this, but I used to be left handed dominant, and upon the end of all efforts, I was shown the way to the other side. I have been living, if you call it living as a right handed dominant person, and I say that loosely. I still see myself as some Picasso conception, not always with my parts where they are supposed to be. My point, sense of humor, saves the day, and thanks for not leaving me with a thigh protruding out of my forehead, Picasso. I was in serious competition with a unicorn, and not proud of it at all.
Please take this not serious,
Supposed to ease your tension, not your intellect!
Later

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by michellemfry

Ok, I may need a therapist to explain this, but I used to be left handed dominant, and upon the end of all efforts, I was shown the way to the other side. I have been living, if you call it living as a right handed dominant person, and I say that loosely. I still see myself as some Picasso conception, not always with my parts where they are supposed to be. My point, sense of humor, saves the day, and thanks for not leaving me with a thigh protruding out of my forehead, Picasso. I was in serious competition with a unicorn, and not proud of it at all.
Please take this not serious,
Supposed to ease your tension, not your intellect!
Later

I am left handed,and a dud with the right,I could ride a unicorn,and put up a good fight?
What has this got to do with the threads title?


regards michael.