Posted: Oct 06, 2011 3:17 pm
by tuco
Dudely wrote:
tuco wrote:Facetious? Those are questions one gets when one starts to ask what the nature of space-time is. Nothing, but not that kind of dark energy, sounds good to me as it brings us back on topic - 2 < 0

Ok, excuse me then. It's hard to tell online, especially when you have such a density of sarcasm as on this forum (I would have it no other way)!

You asked me about new matter being created when the universe expands and when I explained that isn't what would happen (and that it is, in fact, impossible), your response was to ask what was in the new space and that you didn't like making matter without energy. . . which is what I had just said wouldn't happen. That's why I thought you were being facetious.

Expanding space-time increase mass in the same way bread rising increases the number of raisins in the dough. It doesn't.

No excuse needed as no offense was taken. I tend to agree I did not like the metaphor used by Mr Riess, at the same time, OP question seemed just as facetious and when we say A we must say B. It if was that self-evident how it works, no Nobel then I guess. The question essentially was: What is the nature of the bread? as the raisins are irrelevant at this point where we talk about expansion on microscopic scale. How about this: Can I influence this expansion? By stretching the bread a little, somehow.