As far as we know the universe is expanding at a greater rate as time progresses. Some scientists attribute this to dark matter but I'm starting to think of the possibility of gravity. Not gravity from our universe but some other mass outside our universe. I view our universe like a nucleus being split apart (big bang). Gravity from surrounding nucleus (other very dense universes) our attracting the sub particles (galaxies) which could explain the expansion.

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated,
Sebastien

The mass, which would have to surround our Universe (in your pull-it-apart idea), would be equivalent to a shell.

Within a shell, gravity (from that shell) is effectively zero as it is cancelled out by the attraction from all around.

For example, if you dig into the Earth, you can discount the gravitational effect of the Earth above your height, all around the Earth, in calculating what gravity you experience; until at the centre of the Earth you experience no gravity. (More or less, the earth isn't uniform).

So I'm not sure your idea holds.

__________________
Reality moves at the speed of light.
If the text of this post is blue, it's a "Moderator comment".
[ The RULES of the Forum ] [ Forum FAQs ] [ Conspiracy Theory advice ] [ Alternate Theory Advice ]
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team - use the /!\ icon at the top-right of the post.

If our universe was one dense point this could apply (like before the big bang). As galaxies move further apart from each other the force from opposing universes reduce and the gravity becomes polarized. The acceleration makes sense in this scenario.

The “shell” is a good analogy but other universes (or nucleus) around ours are not evenly distributed (like a molecule) making this shell very irregular…

Thanks for the reply

I'd go with the prvious reply. Can you express your idea mathematically?

Sabastien, it is called dark energy not dark matter just for clarification. Also, there is nothing wrong with your idea other than it is not observable. If there is an alternative that is observable or disprovable then your idea will always be just an idea. Maybe one day our technology or math models will allow us to definatively answer your question and "see" beyond our current "event horizon" if you will, but right now that is not the case.

Then wouldn't we see some directionality to the expansion?

__________________
Reality moves at the speed of light.
If the text of this post is blue, it's a "Moderator comment".
[ The RULES of the Forum ] [ Forum FAQs ] [ Conspiracy Theory advice ] [ Alternate Theory Advice ]
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team - use the /!\ icon at the top-right of the post.

We would.

--Dennis

__________________
________________________________________
Your theory is crazy, but it's not crazy enough to be true. -- Niels Bohr --

Ipsa scientia potestas est. ~ Knowledge itself is power.---- Bacon
--------
Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit.


Hint: this is at heart a scientific forum, and underneath the fooling around there are some diamond-hard minds hanging about, ready to tear you to shreads. -- mike alexander --

There would be different rates of accelerations. Being an irregular "sphere" ensures the direction is always outwards.

Have these different rates been observed?

(...and no, the diferent rates of expansion of the (our) visible Universe as a whole does not count, as that has not been shown to have a direction or preferred directions.)

It's time to stop hand-waving. If you think the observed expansion of the Universe can be explained by the pull of other Universes around ours, you'd need to do some real maths to figure out how.

__________________
Reality moves at the speed of light.
If the text of this post is blue, it's a "Moderator comment".
[ The RULES of the Forum ] [ Forum FAQs ] [ Conspiracy Theory advice ] [ Alternate Theory Advice ]
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team - use the /!\ icon at the top-right of the post.

I'm no math wizard... This will only be an idea until scientist think "outside the universe" and prove it true. Hoping it will be in my life time.

Thanks again for the input!
(Anyone have time for some math?)

It's not a matter of thinking outside the universe. It is a matter of observing something on a cosmic scale that is consistent with your irregular whatchamacallit. The burden is on you to demonstrate such observations, or to show us mathematically how you think it would work if future observers are able to look deeper.

I can agree with this. I thought that maybe this could be because we were inside of a black hole ... then I thought that this could be caused from a white hole .... but then i thought if there was a huge amount of gravity pulling then wouldnt it pull the stuff closer to it faster than us and wouldnt it pull the stuff farther away from us slower? Wouldnt that make both the stuff farther away from us AND the stuff close to it than us both move away from US ?

__________________
http://www.whatisorganicliving.com
http://www.cancerfightforums.com/forum/
http://www.nycbrownies.com
"Banned by BAUT" Alumni (2008)

why outwards? Why do we need a sphere here at all?

Lets take three objects at one second intervals and drop them from a hovering spaceship towards a black hole. the first object accelerates away from the second object and the second object accelerates away from the third. From the point of view of the second object both the first object and the third object are accelerating away from it.

__________________
http://www.whatisorganicliving.com
http://www.cancerfightforums.com/forum/
http://www.nycbrownies.com
"Banned by BAUT" Alumni (2008)

If everything in the visible Univers were being attracted to a point-source (a black hole) you'd be able to detect the location of that point source by the direction of movement.

__________________
Reality moves at the speed of light.
If the text of this post is blue, it's a "Moderator comment".
[ The RULES of the Forum ] [ Forum FAQs ] [ Conspiracy Theory advice ] [ Alternate Theory Advice ]
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team - use the /!\ icon at the top-right of the post.

There is some evidence of that.

But also how would we detect movement if everything is moving ... but at different speeds? some galaxies would be moving away from us because they are moving faster than us ... other galaxies would be moving away from us because they are moving slower than us ...

__________________
http://www.whatisorganicliving.com
http://www.cancerfightforums.com/forum/
http://www.nycbrownies.com
"Banned by BAUT" Alumni (2008)

I'm afraid with my limited knowledge I may wind up asking more questions for clarification than helping to answer the original but my interest is peaked here:

Firstly, I'm wondering if I understand the original concept correctly in that Seb was wondering if perhaps other universes encompassed ours in some kind of eliptical spheroid formation... I have a hard time believing in this idea for a number of reasons but let's just say that Copernicus was right but on a FAR grander scale than he realized for the sake of argument.

In that case, doesn't it make sense that rather than our universe being the only one affected, all of these universes within the elipse would also be drawn into unusual shapes to compensate for such an awkward arrangement? Going further on this thought; wouldn't the entirety of this multiverse be ever changing in form as a result? It seems to me that in the end, just like air pressure, all of this would have to "balance out" into a more neutral state until the entire grouping became stable.

However, I must revert to my original answer in that our universe being central to this multiverse seems a bit ego-centric.

To compound this viewpoint, if such a grouping of multiverses existed it only makes sense to conclude that more groupings exist outside of such a grouping in an endless parade of clusters. Therefore we wind up with a concept of multimultimultimultimultiverses and so on and so forth. All of which would have to be affecting each other. Once again this raises the point of "Balancing Out".

Of course I'm not opposed to the concept of multiverses at all. But I'm not sure I agree with this interpretation of their interaction.

...I think..... Mind you, I'm no astrophysicist. (just a 21 year old amateur with no college degrees) haha.

__________________
The glass isn't half full or half empty... it's the wrong size.

If the "60-Second Egghead" video that Scientific American has posted explaining 'Dark Energy' is to be believed, it (DE) is responsible for maintaining the separation of the galaxies. Without it, everything would condense; attracted by mutual gravity and the cosmic waltz would not exist. So DE must have some form of 'substance' relative to gravity - sort of like pelaspan in your UPS shipment, it keeps things from bumping into one another.
If we can show that light is affected by gravity as we have seen in various examples of gravitational lenses formed by quasars, could it be that DE also affects light? If so could the Doppler Shift be a result of DE exerting a 'drag' on light passing through it, thereby shifting its frequency towards the red end of the spectrum?