Universe Expansion: Why Objects Move Away Faster The Farther We Look

[happyman79]

How do we add vectors in space, and why does space seem to have a static equilibrium if everything in space is in motion one way or another. Eg. Earth rotates at 22,000km/h while revolves around the sun at 70,000km/h. We and our sun revolve around the galaxy at 500,000km/h while on a collision course with Andromeda at 550,000km/h while expanding in XYZ direction at 76.1km/h over mpc. And i know direction is relevant in space, but displacement has to have some role right? I know if we revolve around the sun in 365.25 days our displacement in correlation ti the sun would be zero, but to the Milky Way galaxy or to another galaxy; or to the expansion of the universe our displacement may never be returnable. Is this a cosmology question or a different type of physics?

 

[Chalnoth]

What do you mean by static equilibrium? Are you talking about the stable orbits of objects in our solar system?

Stable orbits happen for a few reasons:
1. Newtonian gravity conserves energy.
2. The Sun provides nearly all of the gravitational force in the system, for objects far away from other planets. A system with a lot of bodies of nearly-equal masses would be much more chaotic (orbits of stars through the galaxy are rather chaotic, for instance).
3. There's not much of anything for the planets to run into. Collisions would cause the orbits of the planets to decay over time.

 

[happyman79]

Well early solar system was chaotic and had lots of collisions, and we ran out of enough material to keep making plants in our solar system too right? What i mean by static equilibrium is our plant as right now is traveling through space at all those speeds through gravitation, but we do not feel any of those velocities except our Earth's rotation speed, mass, and circumference. But when you stand still on Earth you feel as if in static equilibrium ( no opposing forces, velocites, or accellerations) but are clearly being toss around space at ridiculous speeds. When an asteroid collides with Earth exerts a force on the asteroid as well, upon impact. Now whether it is the mass or speed of the Earth or asteroid making an inelastic collision is not for me to say. Theory says, that if the asteroid goes fast enough it possibly could go through the planet which isn't really an elastic or inelastic collion.

 

[happyman79]

And the Milky Way and Andromeda are a path to collide, plus a red giant named Nemesis has a binary pair with our sun, and it is questionable if they are meant to collide. Or have full orbits. But every 26 million years that other start gets perry close to our sun. ( in comparison to the universe.) one scientist said it possible could have been the reason why we got pelted by an asteroid 65 million years ago, but I'm not going to quote that directly.

 

[Chalnoth]

Well early solar system was chaotic and had lots of collisions, and we ran out of enough material to keep making plants in our solar system too right? What i mean by static equilibrium is our plant as right now is traveling through space at all those speeds through gravitation, but we do not feel any of those velocities except our Earth's rotation speed, mass, and circumference. But when you stand still on Earth you feel as if in static equilibrium ( no opposing forces, velocites, or accellerations) but are clearly being toss around space at ridiculous speeds. When an asteroid collides with Earth exerts a force on the asteroid as well, upon impact. Now whether it is the mass or speed of the Earth or asteroid making an inelastic collision is not for me to say. Theory says, that if the asteroid goes fast enough it possibly could go through the planet which isn't really an elastic or inelastic collion.

We don't feel the Earth's motion because the Earth is in free-fall. This has nothing to do with equilibrium, static or otherwise. It's just due to the fact that if you're in a container that is falling freely, you will be falling at the same rate and so will feel weightless. With the Earth, our "container" has enough gravity that we feel the Earth's gravity, but we can't feel the Earth's motion at all (well, except for its rotation, if we use very precise instruments).

 

[happyman79]

Ok so we free fall around the planet that free falls around the sun that is free falling in galaxy that is on a collision course while expanding through space. Up to the collision part we are just free falling in a continuous rotation, always ended back at start. But compared to other things in the universe we should have displacement every sec. And everything else in space is always moving to, so no point will anything reach a 0 displacement. 24 hrs of standing in the same spot you could say the displacement was 0, but the distance was a total of the circumference of the earth, but really in retrospect to the universe we have didplacement. I get throwing a ball in a car experiences the same forces as you do inside the car regardless speed of car. What i don't get and still make sense is Earth is in a car that us in car that is in a car that is on an escalator that is in an elevator. But all at the same time experiencing it all like we are in one car the while time. The two biggest things I'm not too fond off are, 1 not knowing where in the galaxy we are. 2. What direction are we going in space and what is the shape. If we observe space from every point on a sphere, and every way we could see 13.7 billion light years ( i haven't declared past yet because it cannot be defined, outside of relativity. Is it possible light has a limit or barrier or is it possible to assume the universe is sphere shape itself? And could anything we observe actually be in the future ( expanding further from the beginning of time; what ever direction that might be.)

 

[Drakkith]

The two biggest things I'm not too fond off are, 1 not knowing where in the galaxy we are.

We do know our location within our galaxy.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Milky_Way_Arms_ssc2008-10.svg

2. What direction are we going in space and what is the shape.

We know which direction we are going relative to most of the other galaxies in the visible universe. I'd say that counts for our 'direction' since there is no such thing as absolute motion, only relative motion. As for the shape of the universe, that's still a work in progress.

Is it possible light has a limit or barrier or is it possible to assume the universe is sphere shape itself?

The light itself doesn't have a barrier, but there is a limit to how far we can look since the age of the universe is finite. Light beyond a certain radius simply hasn't had enough time to travel to us yet.

And could anything we observe actually be in the future ( expanding further from the beginning of time; what ever direction that might be.)

Not a chance. We can only ever observe things that are in the past.

 

[phinds]

Happyman, if you are going to continue posting on this forum, I request that you please learn the concept of paragraphs and USE that concept in your posts. Thank you.

 

[Chronos]

And the Milky Way and Andromeda are a path to collide, plus a red giant named Nemesis has a binary pair with our sun, and it is questionable if they are meant to collide. Or have full orbits. But every 26 million years that other start gets perry close to our sun. ( in comparison to the universe.) one scientist said it possible could have been the reason why we got pelted by an asteroid 65 million years ago, but I'm not going to quote that directly.

Nemesis?? Surely you jest. That dog of a hypothesis does not even qualify as an urban legend.