Understanding this is the easy part imo
Comment on wat
crapwittyname@feddit.uk 4 days agoBest analogy I heard for it is if you put a load of dots on a balloon, then inflate it. Are the dots getting further away? Yes. Is there just the same amount of rubber between each dot as when you put the dots on? Yes. Can you measure the relative speed of the dots? Yes! But have they actually gone anywhere? No…ish?
plutopos@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 4 days ago
Great analogy, and yeah the “ish” is the fun part!
crapwittyname@feddit.uk 3 days ago
The fun of justifying a reference frame outside the universe. Sorry I’m getting a headache.
kamen@lemmy.world 4 days ago
Yeah, but in this case is the universe just the dots on the surface of the balloon or is it the whole balloon with its entire volume? Intuitively I think it’s the latter (although there’s probably no “hard” edge that’s bounding the ends of the universe like the rubber of the balloon), and if that’s true, you could measure the speed of one wall getting away from the centre or the speed of two opposite walls getting away from each other.
I could be wrong of course, I’d be happy if someone points out what I might be missing.
DancingBear@midwest.social 3 days ago
No, you completely understand quantum physics, you are one of the elite.
But in the analogy I don’t think we know what the air in the balloon is, we call it expansion. But I don’t know enough to say anymore
kamen@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Yeah, when you put the dimensions implication in it it starts making a bit more sense.
DancingBear@midwest.social 1 day ago
I don’t know how accurate the analogy is though I’m not a physicist
crapwittyname@feddit.uk 3 days ago
Yep I think you have to imagine dots suspended in space inside the balloon to better get what’s going on, and you’re right, the “edge” of the universe is definitely nothing like the surface if the balloon. Probably?