|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,908 Year: 4,165/9,624 Month: 1,036/974 Week: 363/286 Day: 6/13 Hour: 1/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: What's the Fabric of space made out of? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fabric Member (Idle past 5701 days) Posts: 41 From: London, England Joined: |
Hi there people , ive spent the last 2 days going though these threads just because it interest's me a great deal, im glad i found this forum because the anwers are very indepth & the people really seem to know there stuff, i have many question's but first off i would like to know what is the actuall " Fabric of space" made out of & how can it keep stretching ,surely it can not keep expanding forever..?? If so how, why does it not tear..? i hope someone can anwser this in detail, i would really appreciate it. Thanks )
ABEAdminNosy: I cleaned up the title a bit. I hope that is ok Fabric. {Tweeked topic title (changed "Whats" to "What's"). It was causing sorting wierdness in my database. - Adminnemooseus} This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 02-27-2005 18:47 AM This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 03-28-2005 12:04 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fabric Member (Idle past 5701 days) Posts: 41 From: London, England Joined: |
not a problem AdminNosy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eta_Carinae Member (Idle past 4404 days) Posts: 547 From: US Joined: |
there is really no such thing as the fabric of space. It really arises out of the well known rubber sheet analogy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fabric Member (Idle past 5701 days) Posts: 41 From: London, England Joined: |
Thanks for your anwser Eta Carinae, i understand what your saying about the sun & planet's curving space time, but what is actual space made out of, & if it is sretching how does it keep doing so without breaking in half or tearing ? cheers
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Loudmouth Inactive Member |
quote: Only matter can tear. Space is not made out of matter. Space is an area with four dimensions if including time. It is only called "fabric" as an analoy, not as a true description of the material aspects of space/time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ohnhai Member (Idle past 5192 days) Posts: 649 From: Melbourne, Australia Joined: |
it's brane juice isnt it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fabric Member (Idle past 5701 days) Posts: 41 From: London, England Joined: |
Ok i understand that , cheers, but if before the Big Bang there was an absolute nothing then space was created spontanously from the Big Bang then space has to be made out of something to exist , do you see what im trying to say here, i know space is a void but surely to exist it has to be made out of something? Or maybe not, i dont know thats why im asking. cheers Fabric.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Loudmouth Inactive Member |
quote: Space is just an area that obeys certain laws. And I think you said it all, space is a void so it is nothing by definition. All that defines space are the natural laws that matter/energy obeys within that space.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 507 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
No, I do not see what you're trying to say. You are trying to relate space to your common sense. It doesn't work like that.
Space is space. It's like a 14th century Russian peasant asking the question "what is the planet Jupiter made out of?" and expect one of us to answer in terms she could understand, especially if she expects us to answer with the word snow or dirt or wheat. Well, can you think of anyway to answer that question? Added by edit. Try to think of it this way. In order to have space, something must exist for us to measure with or in relative to. If nothing exists, then technically there's no space. This message has been edited by Resurrected Hector, 02-28-2005 17:45 AM People, please look at the Style Guide for EvC thread by Sylas. Pay particular attention to step 3. SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING: Refusal to use the search engine may cause brain cancer.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LDSdude Inactive Member |
You're space question is an interesting concept. Man can only interpret through the 5 senses what is (or isn't) out there. There might be something, but if so, to us it is nothing because we would have no way of knowing. So all in all, don't worry about it. Unless there is another piece to the electro-magnetic spectrum that has yet to be discovered, scientists aren't gonna find anything. If there is something, we probably won't know about it until we're ressurected and have all the revealed truths of the universe. But for now, it's okay to write it in the textbooks as-"blank".
This message has been edited by LDSdude, 02-28-2005 18:14 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
was space created or was it just populated? if you can't tell {space} from {NONspace} would you know? if space is expanding wouldn't the rulers used to measure it also be expanding?
one of the interesting things about the whole inflation of the universe thing is that the sum of energy and gravity and mass adds up to zero (gravity is negative somehow), so it is not so much a creation as a division of {stuff} into what we know as the universe and this kind of implies that everything in between is also a zero sum game but there are also other theories, like the brane theory, where 4D membranes ('branes') waving around in a 5D (or more) superuniverse collide causing the "bang" event and these kind of imply that the 'brane itself is {something} as it is kind of difficult for {nothing} to collide with more {nothing} and this kind of implies that {something} exists beyond the sphere of the "bang" expansion as the 'brane is bigger ... I hope that helplesly confuses the issue . {{edit to fix typo}} This message has been edited by RAZD, 02-28-2005 20:37 AM we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Xeriar Inactive Member |
As mentioned, the fabric of space is a term used to create a better analogy for the way we perceive space to work. The rubber sheet analogy gets used a lot, especially when drawn with grid lines.
We talk about various massive objects 'resting' on this sheet and 'weighing it down' creating curvature about them, so that some of these previously parallel lines run closer to eachother. It's possible to have an object so massive that it forces the lines around it to touch, creating a kind of isolated pocket-universe. Lines exist going in, but none out - we call this a Black Hole. The analogy is also useful for describing it as the medium through which light moves. This is a little specious, however, as light's speed does not really depend on space's density, as you might call it. The expansion of space is more than just everything within it moving apart from eachother. While it doesn't make a ruler grow (because the atomic forces binding it together vastly overpower expansion's attempts to make it do so) - it does allow for things to occur which would otherwise be considered to break Relativity - two objects actually receding from eachother at a velocity greater than that of the speed of light, due to the new space created in between them (though, 71 kilometers per second per megaparsec is not terribly fast). I doubt science will offer much of an explanation before we get a Grand Unified Theorem, and that seems an unfortunate distance off.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
thanks, and welcome to the fray.
{{off-topic}} notice that there are two reply buttons: one general reply that does not link it to any other message and one for each message that causes a link between the two, and adds to the clarity of what the response is discussing. this is next to the [peek] button that lets you look at the coding other people have used to format their replies. {{/off-topic}} Xeriar writes: two objects actually receding from eachother at a velocity greater than that of the speed of light, according to our frame of reference and with the assumption (which currently appears correct) that the speed of light is unchanged even by passage of such great distances (where one can envisage light never reaching from one to the other, and thus a limit to the knowable universe regardless of it's true size), but is that the only explanation? {added by edit}
ps -- you can set your preferences to recieve e-mails for replies to your messages and these only work with linked replies. enjoy This message has been edited by RAZD, 02-28-2005 21:57 AM we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LDSdude Inactive Member |
xeriar, you're avatar is making me dizzyyyyyyyy..... ZZZZZZZzzzzz ZZZZZzzzzz ZZZZZZZzzzzzz ZZZZZZZZzzzzzz..... Whoa! Huh? What? Oh yeah! Cool avatar! It's still making me sort of diiiizzyyyyyyyyyyyy.......
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024