considers things moving at very close to the speed of light uses Newtonian mechanics
It’s an interesting idea but this is a pretty massive oversight.
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
considers things moving at very close to the speed of light uses Newtonian mechanics
It’s an interesting idea but this is a pretty massive oversight.
If it indeed rotates, this raises another question: What does it rotate around, i.e. where is the center of the universe? How does our position in the universe relate to this center, or which (known) structures have we observed there. Could it be the Great Attractor?
If you drink enough it won't take 500 billion years to rotate. In fact, you'll have to hold onto the grass to keep from falling off the planet.
Scientists propose a lot of stuff. A lot of these proposals are contradictory to each other.
Still cool.
How does this manage to bypass the need for a center to the Universe?
Obviously it's spinning in four dimension space. Like living on the 2D surface of an inflating balloon that is rotating, there is no "center" from the perspective of us lower dimensional scrubs.
Ok. So hear me out. What if said 2D universe is spread out on the inside of said balloon and the spinning is happening on two axis? Wouldn’t that make gravity the result of centrifugal force? And what if the balloon is actually flexible, so that the heavier stuff stretches its surface outwards (thus warping time and space around it)?
I’m no scientist but that’s how I’ve often imagined it. Although it’d have to be in an even higher dimension for more degrees of freedom on rotation? No clue there.
No clue haha but that is a neat idea. Also my explanation probably wouldn't really explain centrifugal force to offset the hubble tension.
There was also a scishow or spacetime video about how gravity can be seen as an emergent property of "time / causality is slower the nearer the gravity well", and that is how gravity works. To truly understand it you have to understand the math and how to solve it, afaik our explanations are all rather imaginary. So you could probably interpret the math to mean that this "spacetime bulging" is the result of a spinning universe.
The bigger question is: Where is the rest of the matter that spins in the other direction? It should have perfectly canceld each other out! (like matter and antimatter also didn't)
A center in two dimensions, in three dimensions an axis, in more dimensions...
Weeeee!
I don't like your username, but I like your message.
Forgive me for strawmanning but you know some idiot is going to say this contradicts "scientists'" claim that the universe is 13.8 billion years old
If that is true maybe that means that it actually is finite and has a center. And the rotation and light speed put an upper bound on its size.
Then again the expansion of space doesn't care about such mundane things as a cosmic speed limit so the universe rotation probably won't either. Or the extents just slow down.
If that is true maybe that means that it actually is finite and has a center. And the rotation and light speed put an upper bound on its size.
Actually no, that would only be true if the universe was two-dimensional. The universe essentially curves back on itself. Kurzgesagt explained the two options of finite and infinity universes and this timestamp explaines the curving back: https://youtu.be/isdLel273rQ?t=120
Kurzgesagt really like to present scientific speculations as fact.
We simply do not know whether the universe is finite or infinite. And so far no curvature has been observed. As far as we are aware it is flat.
I think that if space itself is what is rotating, then speed of light limit does not apply. But if it's everything in the universe orbiting, as it were, a central point, then it would.
But if it is space itself rotating, then that would suggest some objective frame of reference outside the universe. Wouldn't it?
But if it is space itself rotating, then that would suggest some objective frame of reference outside the universe. Wouldn't it?
Not necessarily. Just like space is growing without the need for an objective outside frame of reference, it could be rotating - the rotation is just relative to itself.
I don't think something can rotate relevant to itself. If all of reality was the earth, and nothing else, how can you tell if it's spinning or not?
Please use small words if you try to answer this. I know a decent bit of applied physics, but once it turns to pure math, my head starts to swim.
Stuff could move around differently. Rotations have many effects, e.g. rotation curves (the closer you are to the center of the rotation, the faster you go). We could still figure out that the earth is rotating by measuring the effects a rotation has.
And if everything is rotating, and most is rotating in the same direction, it means we're probably in a black hole.
Science is going to be interesting during the next twenty years.
Why would it mean that? And how can we be inside a black hole when we are not spaghettified?
Black hole cosmology makes the most sense to me. But what do I know, I’m just a burnt out stoner.
So it's about 3 universe months old? Pfffft, baby.
You wouldn't want to put the universe in a tube
I like the one where we live inside of a black hole, and a black hole is a gateway to another universe
Not the most useful of gateways though if you have to be smushed to go through it.
Think of the weight loss bro better than any diet
I believe the correct term is "spaghettification" and it's not your ordinary everyday spaghettification, but one that happens at an atomic level.
As long as you find a black hole that leads to the spaghetti universe, it would be fine
Actually it's just toilet water. Slow motion flushing.
It's toilets all the way down!
The headline sounds like scientists are telling us to go live in a slow rotating universe. Jokes aside, what's in the center? A super super massive blackhole?
We're just circling a big drain