If the universe is infinite, how is it expanding?

[semaphore]

You are a crackpot like the other users because you throw judgement without inspecting the evidence.

So much irony in this. You haven't supplied any real evidence for your crackpot nonsense.

The dismissal of experiments confirmed by numerous independent scientists is blatant corruption.

If they are so numerous, then why can't you name any? Why are you chanting Santilli and only Santilli's name? Why haven't you been able to cite a single study that's not from Santilli's crackpot website?

I have to apologize to you and other serious visitors of this post.

You should apologise for not understanding what "independent" means. A document from the crackpot Santilli's own website is not acceptable evidence for Santilli's own crackpot ideas.

This is your third post derailing the attention from Santilli's curriculum.

Your fanatical worshipping of Cthulhu Santilli is duly noted.

The correct link is santilli-foundation.org/docs/IRS-confirmation-212.pdf

Come back when you have something published in a respectable journal. Don't worry, no real scientist is holding their breath for Santilli to suddenly become respectable.

[Garnier Fructis]

Copy pasta: i.imgur.com/jFXH1.png

In fact, under the Doppler's interpretation z = v/c of the Hubble law z = H d, the galaxies G_2 and G_1 have the cosmological redshifts z_2 = v_2/c and z_1 = v_1/c with v_2 = 2 v_1 since d_2 = 2 d_1, thus implying that the galaxy G_2 accelerates away from G_1 when seen from Earth E. However, when z_2 and z_1 are measured from the galaxy G, we have z_2 = z_1 since the two galaxies are located at the same distance d_2 from G, thus establishing that the galaxy G_2 has no acceleration away from G_1 when seen from G.

Note that the inconsistency persists under the far fetched conjecture of the expansion of space itself or of any far fetched preferred geometry since the latter must verify Hubble's law, thus having Santilli's diagram in the local tangent plane.

Doesn't that only establish that the acceleration of each galaxy away from G is the same?

[howdydiddlydoo]

It's constantly expanding... to translate: infinite.

No.

If something is expanding, it means it was smaller than it is now and larger in the future.

Inifinity does not get bigger and smaller.


The Universe is either not infinite, or it is not expanding, or as someone else suggested, space is infinite, the Universe isnt.

[Dezerte]

Man, I thought he wouldn't come back.

To auBerg:

I'll get back to you when Santilli's findings have passed peer review. Forgive me for believing in the educated scientists that conduct these peer reviews, over Santilli's conspiracy theories.

Not only was his papers rejected, but Santilli went on and called it a great conspiracy (as I also mentioned in my first post to you); an idea you also seem to have bought into.

[Deleted]

So much irony in this. You haven't supplied any real evidence for your crackpot nonsense.

A crackpot he may be, but if auBerg was Santilli he would still have more knowledge than us amateurs in this thread, and a discussion far more interesting than all these naive posts that come up again ad again ("The Universe is either not infinite, or it is not expanding, or as someone else suggested, space is infinite, the Universe isnt."). Likely none of us published something in a respectable journal either.

That said...

[Osmeric]

If auBerg is someone with a world-shattering theory, why is he posting on MMO-C? The most parsimonious theory is that he has nothing except delusions.

I'll add that comparisons to Gallileo merit a +40 score on the Baez Crackpot Index, as does claiming a conspiracy of the scientific establishment.

[Garnier Fructis]

If auBerg is someone with a world-shattering theory, why is he posting on MMO-C? The most parsimonious theory is that he has nothing except delusions.

I'll add that comparisons to Gallileo merit a +40 score on the Baez Crackpot Index, as does claiming a conspiracy of the scientific establishment.

He also gets another +40 on that scale for claiming conspiracy.

[Lodreh]

To all the science and physics fanatics out there i have a question for you.
If the universe is infinite, how is it expanding?

How do you measure infinity? You don't it keeps going... hence expanding.

/End

[semaphore]

A crackpot he may be, but if auBerg was Santilli he would still have more knowledge than us amateurs in this thread

How do you know everyone here's amateurs?

and a discussion far more interesting than all these naive posts that come up again ad again

I'd rather have Dhrizzle back. At least he tried to argue his crackpot theory with what he thinks are real evidence. auBerg just whines and complains

[Deleted]

Also, please inspect Santilli's diagram establishing the inconsistency of the conjecture of the expansion of the universe because the relative acceleration between galaxies solely occurs for Earth and does not occur for other observers throughout the universe.

Copy pasta: i.imgur.com/jFXH1.png

In fact, under the Doppler's interpretation z = v/c of the Hubble law z = H d, the galaxies G_2 and G_1 have the cosmological redshifts z_2 = v_2/c and z_1 = v_1/c with v_2 = 2 v_1 since d_2 = 2 d_1, thus implying that the galaxy G_2 accelerates away from G_1 when seen from Earth E. However, when z_2 and z_1 are measured from the galaxy G, we have z_2 = z_1 since the two galaxies are located at the same distance d_2 from G, thus establishing that the galaxy G_2 has no acceleration away from G_1 when seen from G.

Note that the inconsistency persists under the far fetched conjecture of the expansion of space itself or of any far fetched preferred geometry since the latter must verify Hubble's law, thus having Santilli's diagram in the local tangent plane.

I saw that figure while quickly skimming over that pdf. It seems unnessecary cruel, beating a very dead horse, Earth as center of the universe, that no one ever took seriously. The current scientific mainstream, an expanding universe, is dismissed as a "far fetched conjecture" at the end of the paragraph.

The "local tangent plane", I suppose that would be observers on earth, the detector and a local flat metric described by Special Relativity. In that metric, the photon which is already redshifted, gets absorbed by the detector camera etc... but the redshift itself is caused by the expansion. A "local tangent plane" including far-away galaxies seems like a flat earth, a good local approximation but bad if I want to travel from Europe to Australia, since I could never reach the latter on a local tangent plane.

[Deleted]

The universe is infinite ~ The universe is expanding
You're talking about two different usages of the word here.
One is the totality of all existence - including everything we do not know and cannot observe.
The other is the observable universe. - What we CAN see (or theoretically could make observations ON (but not of - not from Earth)).
The diameter of the observable universe is estimated at 93 billion lightyears (yes, it can expand faster than the speed of light).

To us, it doesn't really make sense to talk about the universe we cannot observe, so while that MAY be infinite (there's no reason to say it is, and no reason to say it isn't), and that is certainly a popular statement, it is utterly pointless and meaningless.

The observable universe is NOT infinite, and IS expanding according to our currently accepted model.

Space is infinite - the universe is not (or the other way around)
I don't think this helps the understaning. Space isn't really "that empty void which all the planets and stars and stuff is located in". That makes it too ... firm... or unalterable. Which it is not. It is space itself that is expanding, NOT the universe that expands into space.
- Galaxies aren't simply drifting further apart... The space between them is actually expanding (not simply increasing either - expanding - swelling, if you will).

tldr;
The known universe is finite and expanding.
Space itself is what is expanding.
Nothing outside of the known universe is relevant.

[Uncle Julian]

I think you're looking at it backwards, try this way: The universe is ever-expanding, therefore it must be infinite (because it will continue to keep going, and going, and going).

[howdydiddlydoo]

I think you're looking at it backwards, try this way: The universe is ever-expanding, therefore it must be infinite (because it will continue to keep going, and going, and going).

I cant understand how people like you have this illogical thought.

If something is expanding, then it was smaller than it previously is now and it will be larger in the future.

It is impossible for something to be infinite if it is expanding.


How on earth can that concept possible elude someone? Its so simple?????

[Garnier Fructis]

I cant understand how people like you have this illogical thought.

If something is expanding, then it was smaller than it previously is now and it will be larger in the future.

It is impossible for something to be infinite if it is expanding.


How on earth can that concept possible elude someone? Its so simple?????

Why? There's nothing mathematically unsound about an expanding infinite universe.

[howdydiddlydoo]

Why? There's nothing mathematically unsound about an expanding infinite universe.

Please explain further.

Unless i am mistaken, infinite can only contain regional expansion (which makes sense if you was to say space is infinite, the universe is not). Infinite itself can neither expand nor shrink.

If something is infinite, it does not have size. It is limitless. A limitless environment does not have measurable dimsension to either contract or expand.

If you can show otherwise, i would like to be educated.

[Sayl]

Keep dreaming.

I have attended lectures that Santilli recently gave in Kos, Greece and there were scientists from fourteen different countries there. Santilli is not alone and neither am I.

It was announced at the meeting, that the Santilli Foundation has one million dollars available to currently use to support research beyond Einstein all over the world. I'm so happy you are out. Stay out and leave scientific priorities to others.

Oh, I wasn't dreaming -- it was just a guess. If you're not part of the Santilli cadre, that just means you're accustomed to parroting his statements frequently enough that you end up sounding just like him. That's equally unfortunate.

This person you exalt is an ambulance chaser who resorts to filing lawsuits and alleging conspiracies instead of resting on his own merits. If his ideas had any traction, he wouldn't have resorted to founding his own crank entities and journal in order to publish. (Or is it journals now? I forget.) In any event, feel free to pose and posture here all you like -- "the serious visitors to this thread", as you put it, are already aware of Santilli's crackpot status.

[Garnier Fructis]

Please explain further.

Unless i am mistaken, infinite can only contain regional expansion. Infinite itself can neither expand nor shrink.

If something is infinite, it does not have size. It is limitless. Neither expansion nor contraction can exist in a limitless environment.

If you can show otherwise, i would like to be educated.

You can think of it with Hilbert's Hotel. Imagine a hotel with an infinite number of rooms, and a guest occupying each room. A new guest walks in, and in order serve this new guest, they move the guest in room 1 into room 2, the one in room 2 into room 3, etc.

In this manner Hilbert's Hotel can continuously add new guests without ever encountering a problem. Now imagine that the "hotel" is the universe, and the "guests" are units of distance between galaxies. Now you can accommodate an expansion between galaxies in an infinite universe.

[Judson]

To all the science and physics fanatics out there i have a question for you.
If the universe is infinite, how is it expanding?

I have always assumed they meant the background of space, the nothingness, was infinite while the particles in it like planets, gas, dust, are expanding outward from the point of origin (for matter)

[howdydiddlydoo]

You can think of it with Hilbert's Hotel. Imagine a hotel with an infinite number of rooms, and a guest occupying each room. A new guest walks in, and in order serve this new guest, they move the guest in room 1 into room 2, the one in room 2 into room 3, etc.

In this manner Hilbert's Hotel can continuously add new guests without ever encountering a problem. Now imagine that the "hotel" is the universe, and the "guests" are units of distance between galaxies. Now you can accommodate an expansion between galaxies in an infinite universe.

That called regional expansion, which infinity can accomodate.

In your example, the number of rooms has not expanded. But the number of guests has expanded because you have added one, concluding that there was never an infinite number of guests to begin with.

Infinity + 1 = Infinity. Or more specifically, infinity + 1 does not exist.

[Garnier Fructis]

That called regional expansion, which infinity can accomodate.

In your example, the number of rooms has not expanded. But the number of guests has expanded because you have added one, concluding that there was never an infinite number of guests to begin with.

Infinity + 1 = Infinity. Or more specifically, infinity + 1 does not exist.

I don't think you totally grasp this idea. Hilbert's Hotel was created precisely to show that counter intuitive ideas such as this were logically and mathematically valid. Here's a video that explains it better: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faQBrAQ87l4

Also, you said infinity can accommodate "regional expansion." So what's the problem? When we talk about the universe expanding, we mean that galaxies are expanding away from one another.