Anonymous at Thu, 16 May 2024 17:46:33 UTC No. 16178634

>>16178625
The soimeter is going off-scale

Anonymous at Thu, 16 May 2024 17:59:44 UTC No. 16178649

>>16178625
Universe is NOT infinite.
It is easy to see that if it were infinite, then energy would not be conserved; an infinite unverse contains an infinite amount of energy and therefore the law of the conservation of energy contradicts an infinite universe hypothesis.
It can at most be a totally bounded space which expands faster than the possible rate of travel.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 May 2024 20:26:02 UTC No. 16178838

>>16178649
>Whereas in this finite universe that popped into existence from nothingness, the energy popped into existence as well.
Which means it's still not conserved.
So we've agreed that energy is not actually conserved in either case. Do you have a backup line of reasoning for rejecting the infinite universe?

Anonymous at Thu, 16 May 2024 20:35:36 UTC No. 16178853

>>16178625
Yes.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 May 2024 20:54:47 UTC No. 16178894

>>16178838
>still not conserved
yes it is
gravity potential energy is negative, it balances out the expansion energy
https://youtu.be/IcxptIJS7kQ?t=33m

Anonymous at Thu, 16 May 2024 20:54:51 UTC No. 16178895

>>16178838
Expanding space does not imply creation of more energy.
Energy stays the same, the space increases. (This implies that energy density goes to zero with time, but this should be expected).