- #1
ddelbourgo
- 11
- 0
All the theories of the universe’s origins that I have read discuss expanding matter and energy. As far as I know, it is assumed that this expansion created space. I have also read that the universe is continuing to expand, however, at a much less energetic pace. I am wondering if anyone has come up with a formula for the creation of space.
I would think that if such a formula existed, space would have to be defined in terms of matter and energy. In the simplest form it would look something like this: matter X energy = space. Or velocity X matter = space. Clearly it would probably be a more complicated formula, perhaps velocity X matter would have to be squared or cubed.
I am aware of the fact that this formula would cause many problems in the world of physics. We normally think of the universe as expanding “outward.” However, many theories of the universe dispel with the concept of “outward” and “inward.” It is comfortable to think of bodies that are the most distant from the “center” of the universe as traveling away from that center, pushing “out” the envelope space at the edge of the universe. Yet if the universe has no center or periphery, then the concept of energetic matter creating space could contradict many other assumptions of physics, such as our normal conception of gravity.
If, for example, all points in the universe can be thought of as both the center and periphery, then all matter in motion would be traveling “outward” (as well as “inward”) and creating space. Planets revolving around the sun would be creating space that would contradict the understood laws of gravity, because one would have to factor into gravity’s equation the addition of space.
Yet if space is not considered an expression of matter and energy, what is it considered? How do physicists account for its creation both at the beginning of things and now? Shouldn’t there be some formula that accounts not only for its existence but its continual creation?
I would think that if such a formula existed, space would have to be defined in terms of matter and energy. In the simplest form it would look something like this: matter X energy = space. Or velocity X matter = space. Clearly it would probably be a more complicated formula, perhaps velocity X matter would have to be squared or cubed.
I am aware of the fact that this formula would cause many problems in the world of physics. We normally think of the universe as expanding “outward.” However, many theories of the universe dispel with the concept of “outward” and “inward.” It is comfortable to think of bodies that are the most distant from the “center” of the universe as traveling away from that center, pushing “out” the envelope space at the edge of the universe. Yet if the universe has no center or periphery, then the concept of energetic matter creating space could contradict many other assumptions of physics, such as our normal conception of gravity.
If, for example, all points in the universe can be thought of as both the center and periphery, then all matter in motion would be traveling “outward” (as well as “inward”) and creating space. Planets revolving around the sun would be creating space that would contradict the understood laws of gravity, because one would have to factor into gravity’s equation the addition of space.
Yet if space is not considered an expression of matter and energy, what is it considered? How do physicists account for its creation both at the beginning of things and now? Shouldn’t there be some formula that accounts not only for its existence but its continual creation?