Pages

01 June 2018

The Great Expansion

Take A pool. If we were to fill it, the water at the start can be seen filling up so fast, spreading everywhere in every direction it can. But, as the water builds up, the filling, while still growing at the same speed, is perceived to be slower. You no longer see the huge and sudden spread of the water from a central location but rather witness the slow and eventual filling of the pool.

The same example can be used with a large balloon. As you begin to fill it, there is a sudden and exponential expanding of the balloon. As the balloon grows however, this growth appears to slow. But, all the while the rate of oxygen entering the balloon is constant.

The reason for this is actually quite simple. Mathematics is the best use of how to explain this but don't worry if you're no good at math, I will try to explain this in a way that anyone can understand.


One explanation (of I'm sure thousands) to the creation and continued expansion of the Universe can be perceived in a simple math equation.

2 = 1 + 1

That might actually confuse you, but it is the fundamental truth to the universe. Of course, as far as explanations go, that's not much help. For this, we must go a little deeper into the meaning. When using the above equation to explain existence which comes in the form of duplication, we have a particle (x) which Duplicates and splits itself (y). In this sense, we are referring to Leibniz's Law.

Leibniz's Law, in its basic sense is the indiscerniblity of something which is identical to another. In other words, everything that makes up particle x is the same in particle y, and everything in particle y is in particle x. There are no differences between the two. If there was, then it would not be part of Leibniz's Law. If we are to use this as a basis for creation, we would begin to see the exponential growth that takes place.

x = x + y
x + y = xy (or 1 + 1 = 2)
xy + xy = xyxy
xyxy + xyxy  =xyxyxyxy
xyxyxyxy + xyxyxyxy = xyxyxyxyxyxyxyxy
xyxyxyxyxyxyxyxy + xyxyxyxyxyxyxyxy = xyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxy
xyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxy + xyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxy = (xy)32

As you can imagine, in this form of an example, we would soon be overwhelmed with far too much information to comprehend very quickly, with the number surpassing a Googleplex of digits after a short process of duplication. We need something much simpler to understand.  And this is where the rate of expansion, time, comes into effect. Lets go back to the pool example for a moment.

Added Water (W) multiplied by amount of Time () = Expansion (E).

If 1ltr of Water (W) takes one unit of time () to be added to the pool, then it would take 1 instance of time () to become Expansion (E).

W x = E

Therefore, in order for (E) to double, it would require 1 more instance of time ().

E2 = 2 x W

Now in order for (E) to once again double, it would need to also double the required instances of time () from 1 to 2. By this i mean, if 1 Unit of (E) took 1 unit of () then do double (E) for the very first time would only require 1 more unit of () for a total of 2 (not an additional 2), any subsequent doubling from that point would therefore require to also double ().

Now I'm not talking about the speed of time, but the amount of time. If our pool requires 10,000Ltr of water and it took you 1 minute to measure out a 250ml glass of water and poor it into this pool, and then you repeated the exercise, it would therefor take 2 minutes to pour 500ml into the pool, 4 minutes to pour 1Ltr in, and a total of 8 minutes to pour 2 Ltrs into the pool. Once you reach 1024Ltrs (a little over 34 Hours), If someone was to come along and add an extra 250ml without you knowing, do you think you would even notice the difference or do you think it would, by this stage be so subtle that it would be near impossible to tell? From your perspective, that small amount of water added to the pool makes such a minuet change that it would go unnoticed.

Can the same be said for the expansion of the universe, or is the expansion far greater than we can comprehend?

No comments: