... and accelerating. Possibly to end with a whimper, rather than a collapse and then another bang!

If my memory serves me well (which does not lately and I don't have my books handy right now), I would say Hubble is actually the one who determined the universe is expanding and Wheeler is the one who supported the constant universe

So, if the universe is expanding, what is beyond the end of the universe?

@IamNobody correction, think it was Fred Hoyle ?

@magicwatch it does ring a bell, but then again this memory of mine. The one thing I am sure about is that the constant universe wasn't Hubble's work

Sounds like a small swingers' session, that

then explain why the galaxies are expanding away from each other, this would not occur in a static universe

@magicwatch galaxies move - probably movement from forces that occurred years ago.
Space does not expand.

@TheAstroChuck OK, then prove it to me....

@TheAstroChuck All 3 wrong - space does not expand

@TheAstroChuck That's not proof, that is a consensus of astrophysicists ideas that may or may not be true. Until quantum physics and gravity can be enmeshed every thing is just not much more than thoughts. Remember in the late 1800's physicists thought there was not much more to learn except for fine tuning the mathematics. Newest theories make possible a series of expansion and contraction. Source: The Atlantic, Feb. 6th, 2018

@gater What space? Define it.

my belief also.

@TheAstroChuck Temper, temper....lol

@TheAstroChuck When you deny the facts of the Universe, you might as well claim that you don't have the mental capacity to comprehend the truths of the Universe

@TheAstroChuck Ive asked you a very simple question and you can't seem to answer it - what lies outside of this finite universe?

@TheAstroChuck If you don't like him just ignore him. Arguing heatedly here is a bit childish don't you think?

They are round, and they bounce. What are? BALLS.

@gater "Deny the facts of the universe"? As espoused in the book of genesis? Or perhaps "The book of Mormon".

@gater Outside of anything finite is always "nothing", otherwise it would be something, and therefore the finite would not yet have ended. or is it "inside" there is nothing?

@gater, @buzz13 Nah! I like arguing using "ad absurdum." Until I get bored that is.

@Petter No The facts of the Universe are that space extends forever - and its always been that way.

@gater What's beyond forever? NO TIME, because forever is time dependent.

@Petter That's my point - space extends forever because the idea of a finite Universe is retarded. There is no such thing as "nothingness" - even your nothingness takes space - duh

@gater No. Space implies somethingness. The only thing that can be "forever" is nothing. Straightforward philosophy, my friend.

@Petter Whats the difference from empty space and nothingness?

Space continues forever - empty or not. Anyone that claims the Universe is finite is blind to basic logic.

@gater empty space IS nothing. Otherwise it would be something. Binary logic.

@Petter So we can agree that space is infinite

That's why it's called a theory, it has no proof.

@dbass27 That and the idea that the Universe had a beginning is retarded

@gater Space can exist and yet be empty - as per intergalactic space, which contains only radiation. Nothing means just that. Not even radiation, Nothing. It is a concept, just as the square root of minus 1 is a concept. It does not exist. It is a moot point of logic. If you can talk abour space, then it still exists and you are not yet beyond space. Within space, time, another dimension of space, exists. Beyond lies nothing at all. Until you can grasp that concept, your horizons are limited to space alone. Tricky philosophical point.

@Petter No - there is no such thing as nothing - There is empty space or occupied space. Your nothing still occupies space.

@gater If you can define it as occupied or empty, it exists. A full stadium or an stadium still exist. No stadium doe not. Hence empty space exists. No space does not. This is the point where maths becomes interesting.

@Petter You don't seem to get it - there is no nothing - only space

And West Virginity...

@Condor5 Who's "West"? Does she need help?

@Petter well, there was Mae West, but she's, you know, dead.

@Condor5 One big bang too many?

@Petter, hah! Maybe so.

@Condor5 Actually virginity is just before the 1st bang. May have been big or not

So, what came before that?

I like this answer.

@dbass27 Time