Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Philosophy Explorer]

It seems this question has no solution. Scientists say that since the Big Bang, the universe has been expanding. Okay I can buy that one. But then the question turns on inside of what? Another universe possibly? Or nothingness?

What say you to this?

PhilX

[Atreyu]

Yes, Phil, I think that "nothingness" is the only proper term. It can't be expanding into "another Universe" because the Universe by definition is Everything. A "growing" or "expanding" Universe in no way implies any other Universes, it simply means that the Universe is getting "bigger" in some way. If it is merely "expanding", then this only implies a growth of space, but if it is "growing" it would imply the growth of much more. Either way, there is no need to violate the definition of the word "Universe". So the Universe cannot be expanding "inside of" something else greater than Itself, because there is nothing else.

Of course, saying it is expanding into "nothingness" seems a rather dubious way of expressing it. Why do you feel a need to think of it as expanding "into" anything else? I've already explained in other posts that if the Universe is expanding then this implies an expansion of space as well. We like to imagine "empty space" and "vacuums" but in reality they do not exist. Only apparent "empty space" and "vacuums" exist. Otherwise, it would be proper to imagine it expanding into empty space.

But at any rate, if one insists on asking "What is the Universe expanding into", then "nothing" seems the best word, since "empty space" exists only conceptually.

[Present awareness]

Your physical body has been expanding from conception until adulthood, what has it been expanding into? Space is that which is not there, allowing that which is there to expand into it. Your body and the universe, follow exactly the same principles of expansion and the emptiness of space is infinitely allowing.

[Atreyu]

Your physical body has been expanding from conception until adulthood, what has it been expanding into? Space is that which is not there, allowing that which is there to expand into it. Your body and the universe, follow exactly the same principles of expansion and the emptiness of space is infinitely allowing.

The problem with your example is that it takes only a small part of the Universe, not the entire Universe itself. In this case, the Universe is "All", so there is no empty space, or anything else conceivable, for it to expand into. But your point is not without merit, as I've delineated in other posts. Yes, when something expands, it will always appear to be expanding "into" empty space. This is part of our cognition, could you imagine it being otherwise? So as the Universe apparently expands, we must perceive/cognize apparent space expanding along with it. If we could not do this then we wouldn't perceive expansion in the first place. The two must grow hand in hand --- if the space we perceive as being in between matter is growing, then total space must be growing as well.

So, by definition, the Universe cannot be expanding into empty space (i.e. something else). What happens is that as it expands our perception of space must also expand along with it. So "nothing" is the most proper term, although, again, I say it's an error to think of it as expanding "into" anything at all.

[Philosophy Explorer]

The universe is everything we can see and sense with our instruments which allows for something beyond the universe. If we posit that this beyond is infinite space, then there's no need to assume that infinite space expands to accommodate an expanding universe.

Does anybody equate nothingness with space?

PhilX

[Atreyu]

The universe is everything we can see and sense with our instruments which allows for something beyond the universe. If we posit that this beyond is infinite space, then there's no need to assume that infinite space expands to accommodate an expanding universe.

Does anybody equate nothingness with space?

PhilX

I knew this was your line of thinking....

No, actually the Universe by definition is "All". This includes that which we can see and sense with our instruments, as well as all that which we cannot.

I myself do not equate "nothingness" with space. Space is something. And IMO wherever "space" is perceived or cognized there is also "matter", known or unknown, seen or unseen. Our cognition of "space" is intimately related to our cognition of "matter", so "space" is definitely not "nothing". If we perceive "something" we always perceive both matter and space. And if we perceive "nothing" that implies we don't perceive either matter or space.

If there are more than three dimensions of space, then those higher dimensions of space are also a part of the "Universe". I think that in your post you are intuiting the existence of higher dimensions of space, in which our "Universe" (three dimensions) could be expanding. I agree with this view, but it's important to realize that those higher dimensions of space are also part of the "Universe" by definition.

[Felix]

It does seem counterintuitive.... But we are assuming that what we can see locally, in our portion of the universe, applies to the rest of the universe that we can't see, which is of course reasonable. However we can't be certain that our universe is the whole shebang (or bigbang). For all we know, there are an endless number of other universes beyond our own universe. If so, our universe would indeed be expanding into something greater than itself. Would this imply other dimensions of space as Atreyu said? I'm not sure.

[Philosophy Explorer]

This is the definition I go by: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/universe which is different from others definition. Here I'm saying that our universe is finite in length and time (relative to the Big Bang). There may be a space beyond our universe into which our universe is expanding into.

PhilX

[Atreyu]

This is the definition I go by: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/universe which is different from others definition. Here I'm saying that our universe is finite in length and time (relative to the Big Bang). There may be a space beyond our universe into which our universe is expanding into.

PhilX

Absolutely, but higher dimensions of space are only necessary if we consider the Universe expanding in time. If we only consider galaxies moving away from each other "physically", not taking time into account, then no higher dimensions of space are necessary. We can, as you suggested, imagine a sort of infinite three dimensional space into which the galaxies are moving. They can keep moving away from each other forever if we imagine there to be an infinite three dimensional space in which they could go.

But to imagine the entire Universe "moving through time" definitely suggests higher dimensions of space. After all, what else could an entire three dimensional world be moving through, other than a higher dimension of space? If we imagine a Universe as being a point, we need a line (one more dimension) in order for time to be a phenomena we can apply to the whole "world" (in this case, a point). With a line, the point can now move across it, thereby creating the phenomena of "time" for any entity operating within its parameters. If we take the Universe as a line, then again we need another dimension higher, the plane, for the whole line to be able to move outside of itself, once again creating "time" as a phenomena which can be applied to the whole line. The same analogy would apply to a plane, and so on.

So, taking this analogy further, we can imagine our entire three dimensional Universe moving in a space of higher dimensions than exists within itself. And this would give us the phenomenon of time/motion as being a property of the entire Universe, as we assert. Time/motion are a property of the Universe as a whole, because this "whole" is moving through dimensions of space which are not contained within itself. Just as the point can move through three dimensional space, can move within a sphere.

For all we know, there are an endless number of other universes beyond our own universe. If so, our universe would indeed be expanding into something greater than itself. Would this imply other dimensions of space as Atreyu said? I'm not sure.

As I said, this would only have meaning if we take "Universe" as merely being the three dimensional entity we imagine it to be. Otherwise, if we stick with the correct definition of "Universe", there cannot be more than one. Our Universe expanding into something greater than Itself in no way necessitates thinking of "multiple universes".

What implies higher dimensions of space is merely our perception/cognition of time/motion as a general property of the Universe. The Universe moving as a whole, i.e. "time" being a property that pertains to the Universe as a whole, is what implies at least one more dimension of space than the three we can perceive, otherwise there is nowhere for this Whole to go, nowhere for it to move to. Higher dimensions of space were intuited by great minds of the past because it's the only logical way to explain the entire Universe of three dimensions having the property of time/motion.

[Felix]

'If we only consider galaxies moving away from each other "physically", not taking time into account, then no higher dimensions of space are necessary."

You lost me there... time is a measure of physical movement or change, so how can you have physical movement that does not take time into account?

[Bohm2]

These links below might help:

...what cosmology REALLY says is not that space stretches or expands but rather just simply that gravitationally bound systems keep getting farther away from each other. It is DISTANCE that is changing, not space.

The Balloon Analogy
http://www.phinds.com/balloonanalogy/

Misconceptions about the big bang
http://www.mso.anu.edu.au/~charley/pape ... sSciAm.pdf

[Vijaydevani]

It seems this question has no solution. Scientists say that since the Big Bang, the universe has been expanding. Okay I can buy that one. But then the question turns on inside of what? Another universe possibly? Or nothingness?

What say you to this?

PhilX

The universe per se is not expanding. The scale of space within the universe is supposed to be increasing with time. There is a difference. I am not a science guy so it took me a year of reading and re-reading about it before I got what that means. That is the problem with counter intuitive stuff. It takes a lot of wrapping around to get to it. It might help not to think of the universe as a balloon but rather as the collection of all the points to which the laws of science extend. The universe is not expanding "inside" anything because there is no "outside".

[Felix]

Bohm2 said: "These links below might help"

Thank you but they didn't help clarify the issue for me.

So the universe only appears to be expanding from our time bound perspective, is that it?

There was a statement in the article Bohm2 linked to: "The universe not only has no center, it has no edge, but that does not imply that it is necessarily infinite, it could be finite but unbounded."

How can that which is finite be unbound? Doesn't "finite" imply having boundaries?

[Radar]

It seems this question has no solution. Scientists say that since the Big Bang, the universe has been expanding. Okay I can buy that one. But then the question turns on inside of what? Another universe possibly? Or nothingness?

What say you to this?

PhilX

The question presupposes there really is an "out there" out there. I'm not so sure there is. What if every thing, every where, every when and their every possibility coexist as one, unified whole, not as a singularity, but as a state of affairs -- a continuum? Is that any less feasible than multiple universe theories? The difference is that proponents of multiple universe theories do not propose a continuum, but every thing and their every possibility coexisting in time and each in their own place. The former is no more scientifically valid than the latter.

[Philosophy Explorer]

Vijaydevani said:

"The universe is not expanding 'inside' anything because there is no 'outside'."

Don't be so quick to leap to this conclusion. As I said, within our universe, we can only see and sense so much and estimates exist as to its age and size saying it's finite so there must be a beyond. What that beyond is is anybody's guess so my guess is infinite, outside space. Any other guesses? (another infinite universe e.g.)

PhilX