I think the data collected supports a Universe that is slowing down...?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dwayne
  • Start date Start date
D

Dwayne

Guest
It is almost amazing to hear that mainstream science tells us that our Universe is expanding. That on average, the more distant the Galaxy, the more red shifted it's radiation is. And the data from these observations is being interpreted as the deeper we look into our visible universe, the faster space-time fabric must be expanding and the less distance we view concludes the expansion is not as fast. So, given this, our conclusion is that the areas further away from us must be speeding up and therefore our Universe must be speeding up in its expansion??

This conclusion does not make any sense to me. It seems to me that if the data indicates that distant galaxies are moving away from us faster than galaxies that are closer to us, then the data should conclude that space is not expanding but rather slowing down given that the most distant visible Universe is data collected from what was going on 13.7 billion years ago.

So, one could say 13.7 billion years ago space was expanding faster than the space we observe that is only 1 billion light years away. Am I missing something?

A Universe that is slowing down should resolve the need for us to have to create the mysterious dark energy scenario. Would it not?
 
You have a very logical observation, if you ignore localized gravity in your equation. You do have an equation, right?

The calculations for the inflation is pretty solid. In fact, the value of "w" (dark energy) appers to be strong enough to support the Big Rip theory rather than the Big Crunch, although the jury is still out on that one, as "dark energy" is still a very mysterious entity.
 
I don't think that is correct, if the amount of space between gravity wells is expanding than everything is moving away from everything else, imagine a balloon with dots on it being blown up looking at one dot the dots closest to it aren't moving away as fast as the dots farther away from the dot your looking at. the expansion itself is increasing but from are vantage point the things farther away are appear to be receding faster than the things closer, just like the balloon example.

the problem with your suggestion, is that it can't really be tested.
 
Back
Top