Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ProTechYoNeck t1_j1obx96 wrote

Reply to comment by Drew_pew in Is the Milky Way... Normal? by cciccitrixx

The balloon would still have a center... you can still pin point the center even if you can't feel it. What you just explained is exactly what I proposed, like a room. If you could float in the room you could be in that center while it expands. The issue with trying to explain this in a different way is that it doesn't seem possible with our current understanding. If one just said that the universe is infinite, then I can see the argument that there isn't a "center" but to be infinite and expanding... if it is theoretically infinite because it's ever expanding that's fine but then you're right back at the same issue of it having a "center" to be ever expanding from, whether you see it or not.

0

Drew_pew t1_j1ocmpd wrote

No, you’re misunderstanding my analogy. In the balloon example, the surface of the balloon is the universe. The center of expansion is nowhere in the universe in that analogy. Another way to say it would be: can you point to the location in the universe which is the center of expansion? Can you go there (if you could teleport)? The answer to both questions is no.

Also I’m not sure what you were saying about an infinite universe so perhaps we agree, but there certainly is not a center to an expanding infinite plane.

2

ProTechYoNeck t1_j1odkm2 wrote

Ok so saying this balloon is a perfect circle with no nipple, the surface of the balloon would be the universe and the space on either side of that surface would be nothing right?

1

Drew_pew t1_j1odug6 wrote

Yup, exactly. The idea of the space on either side being “nothing” is extremely hard to fathom for me honestly, but it’s the only way to interpret an expanding finite universe (that I know of).

2

ProTechYoNeck t1_j1og0fg wrote

I mean unless the distance between the opposite sides of the surface is a number between 1 to 0 which can be infinite.

I get what you are saying. I'm still skeptical of the current idea being presented here. There are still anomalies that are seen in the cosmic microwave background that stands either for or against the current model but, it's still up for debate.

I appreciate your willingness to discuss the topic in a civil manner. Only thing I'll leave you with is to continue to question the way the data is being interpreted. It might lead you somewhere you might not have thought about

2