Super-Giant Black Hole Baffles Scientists

[masomenos]

Most scientists agree that the universe is ever expanding, so that would, in fact, mean that the universe is expanding into something. In short, a lot think the universe is finite at any point in time but will never stay finite, if that makes sense.

I know it seems to make logical sense that the universe is expanding into something but it's not.

 

[Tabascocat]

I know it seems to make logical sense that the universe is expanding into something but it's not.

Ok, can you prove that? This is all speculation, we can not prove these hypotheses. Our universe could be expanding into another universe, or it could be expanding into water or it could be expanding into a huge dirty T-shirt that says 'Cowboys Rule'. The point is..we have no idea what lies beyond our solar system, all our best researchers can do is give their best educated guess-a hypothesis.

 

[Hoofbite]

I know it seems to make logical sense that the universe is expanding into something but it's not.

Interesting and confusing thought. If only space weren't so damn confusing in the first place.

If there were something it was expanding into, that something would itself have mass unless it was an absolute spotless vacuum.........wouldn't it?

Any mass at all and it kind of makes the idea of accelerating expansion kind of confusing itself.

This is just kind of random thoughts.......I wouldn't even call myself a star-gazer. Really haven't ever really got into space much more than seeing this kind of stuff posted.

Anyway, if there is "something", it likely has mass. At least in my noob-universe it would only make sense to have mass.

If there's mass, no matter how small, wouldn't it sort of accumulate on the outer edge of the universe as it expands? Kind of like bugs on the windshield of a car? Sure, drive for a couple days on the highway and you have a lot of bugs but not much added weight. Drive for a few billion years and all those little buggy bits and pieces will add up and start adding weight.

If that's the case, how is the speed of expansion increasing? Billions of years of accumulated "something" should slow things down, right?

This definitely seems like a better conversation to have in Amsterdam.

 

[Hoofbite]

As for the black hole itself.

Now debunked.

They just zoomed in really far on this picture.

 

[joseephuss]

Those are two totally different measurements. The universe is almost 15 billion years old, but that has no relation in going a certain distance in light years/speed.

One is a measurement of how fast something is traveling, the other is just a measure of time.

Assuming the universe is expanding slower than the speed of light (186,000 miles per second), I was saying if a spaceship traveled at that speed for 220 million years in time, that it would eventually catch the 'edge' of the universe (if there is or isn't one).

Never-mind, too hard to express my thoughts, no way to explain what I am trying to say in words here

The two things are intertwined.

http://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/5-8/features/F_How_Big_is_Our_Universe.html

From this article, "The image below is both the oldest and youngest picture ever taken. It is the oldest because it has taken the light nearly 14 billion years to reach us. And it is the youngest because it is a snapshot of our newborn universe, long before the first stars and galaxies formed. The bright patterns show clumps of simple matter that will eventually form stars and galaxies. This is as far as we can see into the universe. It is time, not space, which limits our view. Beyond a certain distance, light hasn't had time to reach us yet."

The age of the universe(time) is based on how long it has taken light to reach us(speed/distance). That not only tells us the age, but the size of the universe. They are related.

There are theories out there that claim the universe expansion exceeded the speed of light during the initial moments of the big bang.

 

[Future]

pssshh...Muse found it in like 2008

[youtube]6okwg6PiSis[/youtube]

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

The two things are intertwined.

http://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/5-8/features/F_How_Big_is_Our_Universe.html

From this article, "The image below is both the oldest and youngest picture ever taken. It is the oldest because it has taken the light nearly 14 billion years to reach us. And it is the youngest because it is a snapshot of our newborn universe, long before the first stars and galaxies formed. The bright patterns show clumps of simple matter that will eventually form stars and galaxies. This is as far as we can see into the universe. It is time, not space, which limits our view. Beyond a certain distance, light hasn't had time to reach us yet."

The age of the universe(time) is based on how long it has taken light to reach us(speed/distance). That not only tells us the age, but the size of the universe. They are related.

There are theories out there that claim the universe expansion exceeded the speed of light during the initial moments of the big bang.

This blows my mind.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Something many people don't realize is that empty space is actually not empty at all. There is energy there. All mass is energy and all empty space in our universe has energy. It is that energy that creates the three perceived dimensions. (and possibly many more!)

Now you ask, what is the universe expanding into? It is expanding into literally nothing. Energy is spreading out into a dimensionless void. It's not a universe, it's not space, it is nothing. It's hard to visualize it since you perceive space as being empty when it actually isn't. You are perceiving it's three dimensions! Something the void does not have.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Something many people don't realize is that empty space is actually not empty at all. There is energy there. All mass is energy and all empty space in our universe has energy. It is that energy that creates the three perceived dimensions. (and possibly many more!)

Now you ask, what is the universe expanding into? It is expanding into literally nothing. Energy is spreading out into a dimensionless void. It's not a universe, it's not space, it is nothing. It's hard to visualize it since you perceive space as being empty when it actually isn't. You are perceiving it's three dimensions! Something the void does not have.

One way to visualize space in three dimensions is with tennis balls connected by springs. Imagine a tennis ball suspended in mid air. Now, take six springs and connect them to the tennis ball, spreading them equidistant across its surface. Connect a new tennis ball to the end of each spring, and connect new springs to all those tennis balls. Depending on how many springs and tennis balls you have, you might have a fairly large cube.

Now, shake your cube, and watching the tennis balls oscillate across the springs. Your cube of tennis balls and springs represents space, and their oscillating represents the vacuum energy that's always present within space.

 

[Tabascocat]

The two things are intertwined.

http://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/5-8/features/F_How_Big_is_Our_Universe.html

From this article, "The image below is both the oldest and youngest picture ever taken. It is the oldest because it has taken the light nearly 14 billion years to reach us. And it is the youngest because it is a snapshot of our newborn universe, long before the first stars and galaxies formed. The bright patterns show clumps of simple matter that will eventually form stars and galaxies. This is as far as we can see into the universe. It is time, not space, which limits our view. Beyond a certain distance, light hasn't had time to reach us yet."

The age of the universe(time) is based on how long it has taken light to reach us(speed/distance). That not only tells us the age, but the size of the universe. They are related.

There are theories out there that claim the universe expansion exceeded the speed of light during the initial moments of the big bang.

A cool article in that link. I understand what you are saying but I am having a hard time putting into words on how 220 million lt years is or isn't related to a 15 billion old universe.

Maybe, for example, I am 41 yrs old and I am driving from Houston to Dallas at 75mph. How are both of these related?

I do understand light and how long it takes to travel, or short rather.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Something many people don't realize is that empty space is actually not empty at all. There is energy there. All mass is energy and all empty space in our universe has energy. It is that energy that creates the three perceived dimensions. (and possibly many more!)

Now you ask, what is the universe expanding into? It is expanding into literally nothing. Energy is spreading out into a dimensionless void. It's not a universe, it's not space, it is nothing. It's hard to visualize it since you perceive space as being empty when it actually isn't. You are perceiving it's three dimensions! Something the void does not have.

The void is merely speculation. Like trick said, we know so little about the universe. With that being said, you're right about space not being empty. This is why we still hang on to hope of a hydrogen powered space craft. For each cubic foot of space, we can typically find one hydrogen atom. That's pretty amazing. So space is definitely not a vacuum. That's a common misconception.

 

[Tabascocat]

The two things are intertwined.

http://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/5-8/features/F_How_Big_is_Our_Universe.html

Well, you can stop wasting your time on me. I had a brainfart and wasn't looking at it from another perspective. I was failing to realize that is how astronomers measure distance, by seeing how long it takes light to travel.

I blame the two bottles of win last night :laugh2:

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Well, you can stop wasting your time on me. I had a brainfart and wasn't looking at it from another perspective. I was failing to realize that is how astronomers measure distance, by seeing how long it takes light to travel.

I blame the two bottles of win last night :laugh2:

:doh:

I was going to say it didn't seem you had a grasp of what a light year was.

 

[YosemiteSam]

The void is merely speculation.

Not speculation. I've been there and actually visit often. It's where I go when I'm not here! :laugh2:

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Not speculation. I've been there and actually visit often. It's where I go when I'm not here! :laugh2:

:laugh2:

I agree it's a good theory. But it hasn't been proven. I had a great astronomy professor, Donald Winget. That guy is one bright dude and probably one of my favorite professors ever. He always said this is what we believe now, but it can always change. And there is plenty of disagreeing amongst the most renown experts in the field about many things.

 

[justbob]

Not speculation. I've been there and actually visit often. It's where I go when I'm not here! :laugh2:

Not to sure it doesn't exist here. Some of the threads have a pretty big void in them.

 

[Cajuncowboy]

Wrong thread. LOL

 

[BlindFaith]

Most scientists agree that the universe is ever expanding, so that would, in fact, mean that the universe is expanding into something. In short, a lot think the universe is finite at any point in time but will never stay finite, if that makes sense.

So the universe to you is simply the "things" in it. Dark matter makes up 97 percent of the universe yet it isn't really a thing at all.

Even if you believe in a single big bang, then the emptiness that was there before the big bang is still infinite and is still something I would consider the universe.

 

[jobberone]

Dark matter makes up about 84% of the matter in the universe and about 23% of its mass-energy. Normal baryonic matter makes up less than 5% of the matter in the universe. Dark energy accounts for the remaining mass-energy which is about 72%. Whatever the heck dark energy is.

Particles are being created continuously in space-time and quickly annihilate one another. So the 'void' of space is seething with short lived particles.

And yes we have much to learn.

 

[joseephuss]

So the universe to you is simply the "things" in it. Dark matter makes up 97 percent of the universe yet it isn't really a thing at all.

Even if you believe in a single big bang, then the emptiness that was there before the big bang is still infinite and is still something I would consider the universe.

I don't. I consider our universe as all the stuff(and non-stuff such as dark matter) that started with our big bang. All of that(our universe) exists within that vast emptiness you described. There may also be other universes out there also within that vast emptiness that don't interact or cross our universe.
That probably needs a new term. Maybe that term exists and I just don't know what it is, but that is the way I see it.