We Are in the Middle of the Universe

When you examine our universe from the smallest scale, which is the Planck length (1.6×10−35 meters) to the largest, which is the observable universe (91 billion light years across), we are in the middle.  And when I saw “we,” I am talking about our cells, or in effect, life as we know it.

It might seem strange, but the living cells inside a human body are smack dab in the middle between the smallest and largest things we know.  Whether that’s luck of the draw or a requirement for life or some other requirement for balancing the universe, we don’t know.  But we do know that generally things are positioned in the universe with design and reason and less by random selection, except for things found in the quantum world.

So, let’s speculate on why life is found in the center of the universe.  It may be the “goldilocks” zone for life to exist.  In other words, it may be the area that is just right for life to survive.  We know that the earth is in a “goldilocks” zone for protecting us from radiation and other hazards within our galaxy.  Our solar system situated about three quarters of the way outside the center of the Milky Way is in a fairly safe and habitable part of the galaxy.  And our earth is in a perfect location within our solar system for life to exist.  Perhaps, the same can be said about the location of our cells within the universe.

The center of the universe might be the safest zone as it is in the middle of two extremes.  Extremes, as a general rule, do not bode well for a fragile life form.  It might be the safest location for life forms.  Life, which would be susceptible to death from extreme environments, must have a safe nest for birth, growth, and development.  Cells and molecules appear to have that nest in a perfect location in the middle of the universe.

Now as the space-time fabric expands, the center of the universe does not change.  Life stays in between Planck length and the observable universe, no matter how much the universe expands.  It would be like placing a line in the middle of a balloon and then blowing up the balloon, watching the line remain in the center as the balloon increased in size.  The same could be said about the universe if it contracted; life would remain in the center if the space-time fabric decreased in size.  If we were on that line, we couldn’t tell if the universe were expanding or contracting.  Only observers from outside our universe could tell which direction it was going.

And whether our universe is contracting or expanding may not matter much for a majority of the time.  However, it may be important if we form a Big Crunch at the end of the contraction period.  That may be a point when life can no longer survive until we go from the Big Crunch to the Big Bang again.  This seems to suggest that the universe is a perpetual motion machine, which makes sense in a closed universe.

Speculation is permitted in a situation when our senses cannot provide us the information we need to answer life’s questions.  Because being in the center of the universe may block us from seeing the whole picture.

Expansion of Universe?

Why do scientists get so entrenched in the expansion of the universe theory?  Since Edwin Hubble discovered the red shift which led to the argument that our universe is expanding, scientists have gotten into the expansion rut and can’t seem to entertain other possibilities.

There are some practical problems with the expansion theory.  First of all, it does not comport with the design of the universe, which is in orbits or some other forms that permit an infinite movement.  Our universe recycles and does not run out of gas.  The expansion theory starts with the Big Bang and ends with the Big Freeze with all the stars eventually consuming all the hydrogen and everything coming to an end in the dark somewhere in deep space.  There is nothing in our universe that shares this design.

It is more likely that we either have a universe that is much larger than we can even imagine, so that we cannot see the slight curvature in the circular universe.  Our current understanding of our universe may be similar to how early man perceived our earth as being flat.

We could also have an alternating pattern between the Big Bang and the Big Crunch or a space-time fabric that moved back and forth between present-future to past-future.  Or we could speculate that after a period of expansion, then we switched back to a period of contraction.  These theories are better suited for the patterns that we see in our universe.

There also are practical problems with the expansion theory.  How could we view the light from ancient galaxies, which no longer exist, since that light would have traveled faster than our expansion?  In other words, how could we see a light that streaked into the future past us billions of light years ago?  Further, how could a universe that is 100 billion light years wide have expanded into this depth of field within 13.8 billion years?

Observations have revealed that objects three times more distant are moving three times faster relative to nearby galaxies, and the farther we look into space, the faster the galaxies are moving.  In fact, they may surpass the speed of light at these vast distances. However, the speed of light is the universal speed limit. So how can this be?

Well, the speed of light is the fastest that objects can travel.  This restriction does not apply to space and time.  For example, in the period after the Big Bang, this early expansion probably exceeded the speed of light.  Also, our view back into space, which is also back in time, may be distorted by time itself, which is not restricted by the speed limits.

It is also possible that the actual universe extends much farther than we can comprehend.  The observable universe may be about 50 billion light years in all directions, but the actual universe may be infinitely larger than that.  This might be a good argument for our universe actually being in a never-ending gargantuan orbit with our view only reaching the horizon embracing a small piece of the universe.

But back to the question of how a universe that is about 100 billion light years wide could be formed in only 13.8 billion years?  Well, as we said, some of that early expansion could have been faster than the speed of light, but that probably does not explain everything.  Could that 100 billion light years, much of which is in the past, be in a space-time fabric that can move faster than the speed of light?  And if some of that time reversed from present-future to past-future, would we be able to detect the reversal?  Would it all appear the same to us from our perspective?

I can only ask questions, but scientists who are so stuck in the expansion theory do not want to hear questions.  That is unfortunate because questions lead to better answers and, in this case, better theories.

Expansion and Contraction of the Universe

The Big Bang occurred about 13.8 billion years ago and most scientists believe that there was a very rapid expansion of our universe, perhaps even exceeding the speed of light.  The speed limit for light, which normally cannot be exceeded, could be broken because more than likely it was space expanding and not matter.

And when scientists examine the universe, they are amazed at how consistent the matter is positioned, almost like the matter has remained the same with only space moving.  So, what happens after the heat of early expansion cools down?  What happens as the expansion slows down and follows the law of entropy?  It seems logical that contraction would be the next logical action of the universe as expansion came to a halt and then reversed.

The famous “red shift” discovered by Edwin Hubbell indicated that most of the galaxies were distancing themselves from each other at an increasing rate.  It does not seem logical that expansion is increasing in speed after 13.8 billion years.  But it may make sense to wonder if our universe is contracting at an increasing rate.  The “red shift” can explain both expansion and contraction equally well.  If the galaxies are racing away from each other, we would see a red shift.  Also if the galaxies remain proportionate to each other, if they shrink away from each other, this would also show a red shift.

The four fundamental forces: gravitational, electromagnetic, weak nuclear, and strong nuclear were forged within the first second after the Big Bang before matter had mass.  Scientists believe that matter was given mass from interacting with the boson force and the Higgs boson, sometimes referred to as the “God particle.”  Without the Higgs boson, atoms could not have formed and the matter in the universe would never have been created.

But before the first second was over, the matter had to defeat its archenemy, antimatter.  And it was able to barely survive that onslaught.  If antimatter had won, we would all be antimatter humans, living on an antimatter earth.  What is the difference between matter and antimatter?  There probably is not much that separates the two other than having opposite electrical charges.  But it was critical that the two did not have exactly the same amount or they would have wiped each other out, leaving nothing behind.

We believe the Big Bang occurred about 13.8 billion years ago, so assuming that we could see all the way back to that event would that mean that our observable universe was 13.8 billion light years wide?  Well, probably not since as we indicated earlier, space can expand at a speed faster than light; so some of that expansion of space was going faster than the speed of light.  We also need to consider our sight line back to the Big Bang would be a radius, so you may have to double the distance for the full width of the observable universe.  Thus, the observable universe is thought to be about 90 billion light years across.

Arguably, the observable universe would keep increasing in size if the universe continued to accelerate in its expansion.  It seems more likely that the observable universe, which appears to be very homogeneous, is shrinking in size.  The most distant galaxies, which are about 13 billion light years away, would not be visible to us if the expansion of space which exceeded the speed of light were still accelerating.  The fact that we are able to see these ancient galaxies tells us that the expansion slowed down, allowing the light from these galaxies to catch up with us, or possibly that we reversed direction and the shrinking of the universe allows us to see this slower light.

These are just several reasons why we may be inside an incredible shrinking universe.  But the best reason of all is that we live in a closed recycling universe that perpetually goes from a Big Bang to a Big Crunch.  If the universe, which is uniform, were accelerating, dark energy would be pulling it further out into space, stretching it to the breaking point.  We don’t see that happening.  It is more likely that the expansion has stopped and we are collapsing back as dark energy draws us back to the origin of the Big Bang.