• We hope all of you have a great holiday season and an incredible New Year. Thanks so much for being part of the Space community!

Is It Possible That The Universe Could Not Possibly Have Expanded Faster The Speed Of Light?

Aug 14, 2020
622
117
1,060
I stated in another thread that the darkness of the universe does not come from a lack of light to the universe but from an over-abundance of light to the universe. Light coming from everywhere to anywhere, from every point of the compass; from every point of the dome of universe. I woke up this morning realizing that I should have added in for 4-dimensionality's sake, from every point of older time to every point of newer time in an infinite depth no astronomer or physicist, nor anyone else, could ever fathom.

There never has been a dark universe as such. And light comes from an infinite Universe as the light before light (and/or light after light), to infinity. And gravity waves before gravity waves (and/or gravity waves after gravity waves), to infinities of gravity waves. No point in space ever lacked, or ever lacks, relativity to its neighboring point in space, so, no point in time ever lacked, or lacks, relativity to its neighboring point in time. With distance, though, it is relativity that collapses, breaks down, not space and not time . . . not space-time. So, this dimensionless point we occupy has always had -- always has -- space, time, light, mass-energy and gravity defining it.

So, not being able to reach beyond the distance of relativity, the distance in space and time beyond relativity's collapse and breakdown, the distance that merges into infinity, some will tell you there is none . . . or even if there is such distance is, it isn't relative.

That it will have local relativity in any real physicality that comes through from that background to this foreground, to all foregrounds, they never give a thought to . . . physicality coming through from background's infinity such as horizon constants of one kind or another for one thing, among other quite possible things (such as the micro-verse being the local, relative, model (and/or projection) of the non-local, non-relative, macro-verse . . . the two possibly being one and the same to the point of (Planck) Big Crunch (M) / (Planck) Big Bang (E)).

It, the observed universe, can, of course, at least by the relative looks of it, expand into its own past of mass-energetic 'wild' (its own future of returning to the 'wild' (its own constant of 'turning' (building up and out from the base-wild, and recycling back to the base-wild, are always passing in turning . . . again, the up and out from mass-energetic wild (the Planck horizon(s)) in evermore complex structuring is building to entropy's crest, then fall back in collapse of complexity to the base mass-energy of the 'wild', the base that never left, never ceased to exist . . . the base that is always present in infinite's constant ('1') of horizon))).

The speed of light in a vacuum ('c'), a constant of speed to us ((+/-)186,000mps ((+/-)300,000)), is a constant of place ('1'), base ('1'), to the infinite Universe, The elastic capable of squaring 'base'. Again, the speed of light is constant in a vacuum. Along with 'g', it probably is the vacuum it is constant in and/or constant to, the Big Vacuum (C^2).
-----------------------------------

It's a Multiverse Universe.

"Reality has so many things that most people would associate with sci-fi or even fantasy." -- Bruno Bento, physicist, University of Liverpool, U.K.

"That's one of the exciting things about math, you can go through a door . . . and you wind up in a completely different universe. It's very much like Alice in Wonderland." -- Jack Morava, mathematician at Johns Hopkins University and inventor of Morava K-theory.
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS