Why is space black? – If you know any scientist’s, please pass this along to them for their critique.
The below quote was taken from NASA’s Starchild site in an attempt to answer the question, “Why is space black?”
“Many different explanations have been put forward to resolve Olbers’ Paradox. The best solution at present is that the universe is not infinitely old; it is somewhere around 15 billion years old. That means we can only see objects as far away as the distance light can travel in 15 billion years. The light from stars farther away than that has not yet had time to reach us and so can’t contribute to making the sky bright.” – https://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/doc…
Well, we aren’t asking if the night was full of stars, nothing but stars would definitely make the night sky to appear, “bright”.
What we are asking is what’s behind the stars and why it is black. Even Hubble’s deep field space photograph still shows black, and these are too far away to even see with the naked eye. Even if the Universe was infinitely large as NASA stated, we couldn’t ever see them all; let alone making the night sky bright.
Let’s look at the “best” solution NASA had. They know for a fact, the Universe isn’t infinitely old, but still don’t really know why the sky is black reputedly referring back to stars making the night sky bright.
So I guess the question should be rephrased for NASA. Why is the night sky black even if there weren’t any stars? Well, one thing we do know, the outside of the Universe doesn’t have a light shining on it so light could fill the sky. This is one reason the night sky is black.
If there were a light shining on the outside of the Universe, it would be one big sun, as big as the Universe itself, and something like that just wouldn’t exist. Even if it did it could only light up half of the night sky at a time, as the sun lights up half of all spheres or 3D objects. This fictitious sun would also need to be bigger than our Universe to light half of it up.
Obviously we can’t see the most distant stars and galaxies, as their light is just too dim. The blackness will always over come, even if we could see forever, nothing is bright enough. The, “packets of energy” lose their energy, what the photons are, as Einstein once said. The photon has lost a lot of its energy over those “billions” of light years, this is why it is dim or can’t be seen without help. Photons traverse gases, dust, radiation and even temperature, taking its energy away so we can’t see it that far away.
Another subject entirely, but photons losing energy is the reason for a redshift, not that light is being stretched or space being stretched. The entire spectrum shifts when it loses energy, and space isn’t being stretched faster than the speed of light as scientists say some galaxies 13.4 billion light years away are doing by their redshift. That is just a story which I can’t believe science is sticking to.
How do we know the Universe has an outer edge, perhaps defined as chaos or probability? The CMB (Cosmic Microwave Background) is said to be the outer edge of our Universe, where microwaves bounce off of it as “leftovers” from creation. Scientists also say the CMB was created at the time of inflation. If that were true then it would have needed enough time to hit the outer edge of the Universe and bounce back to us, over and over. We can go out and measure the CMB any time we want, because it’s always there.
Space is black, correct, so light waves outside of the Universe are too big for us to see, as we can’t see atoms using light, the light waves are too big. This is the second reason why space is black. This is one basis for my theory I’ve coined, Scale Theory, which I’ve started a book for. Even if it isn’t all true, I do think it will hold peoples interest where it could in fact be true.
If the Universe made all the atoms and atomic particles, shouldn’t the Universe be atom like then?
Why does the Big Bang theory have so many dogmas, yet it’s still believed, almost as some believe in a god. That might be taking it a bit too far, but it almost seems that way as science keeps defending it, even if it breaks the speed of light barrier. Why is science’ interpretation of our beginning so far from what nature has demonstrated to us? Something starting out with millions if not billions of degrees is something of science fiction. As stated, if the Universe made all the atoms, shouldn’t the Universe be atom like?
What the blackness we see could mean only one thing, as strange as it might sound. Humor me for a bit while we go to a multiverse analogy quantum mechanics predicts.
Say we are as big as a billion Universes, no, bigger still. We are the size of human is to an atom, only an atom is the size of our Universe.
Now would we be able to see light in that scale? Well, if we used the light waves we are using now, 500 nm or so, no, they are too small, it would be the same way they are for us to see an atom. The only way we can see an atom is with electrons, light waves are just too big to illuminate anything so small. The smaller the wave/frequency the more likely it is to be reflected off a single atom, such as microwaves and the CMB.
The only problem with the CMB being at the far reaches of the Big Bangs Theory, nothing can be bouncing off the outside of our Universe yet, if it is still expanding as they say. No “echo” could be heard back until it stopped expanding, hence their reason for an expanding Universe. A “Bang” of sorts wouldn’t ever stop expanding. The solutions lie when we aren’t expanding and redshifts are caused by loss of energy in the “packets of energy” a photon is.
The Big Bang states we went faster than the speed of light, just so we can exist 13.8 billion years ago according to NASA’s calculations. What made microwaves at the beginning when atoms didn’t even exist? I have also read the CMB started when inflation began and we can still see it somehow. What makes more sense is it has bounced off the inside of the Universe since it began and is still being made.
An atom starts with all of its components, ready to do what it was intended for. This is Scale Theories explanation for the Universe. The Universe didn’t grow up so to say, waiting for the first atoms to be made, 300,000 years later, it evolves and learns, as everything else does. So whatever the Universe was intended for when it was made, it couldn’t do it if the Big Bang was correct.
This NASA site got one part right at least.
“Astronomers now realize that the universe is not infinite. A finite universe—that is, a universe of limited size—even one with trillions and trillions of stars, just wouldn’t have enough stars to light up all of space.”
It still doesn’t answer why space is black, we know that there aren’t enough stars to hide the blackness though.
Before I forget, if the night sky or outer edge of the Universe was reflective, as it is with the CBM and its waves, electromagnetic microwaves can bounce off of it. With that thinking, wouldn’t the most outer stars and galaxies closest to the edge already been lighting up the outer shell, so to speak?
So, in theory, in line with the Big Bang Theory, when we overexpose an image for just the right amount of time, we should be able to see brightness lighting up the most outer region of the Universe. Remember, we can’t see anything past what we already do see, the outer edge of the Universe is just too far away.
If there is one, an outer shell of the Universe, as we do have a snapshot of the CMB. So, something is there. Only, I bet, it doesn’t reflect light, hence another reason for the blackness. Light wouldn’t really reflect off a single atom, as we know they are too big of a wave. Light does however; reflect off of many atoms and why we see color etc.
One thing to add, if we were to look at our Universe from the outside looking in, we would see an opaque mass. Something as we see when we look at a mapping of the Universe resembling a brain or neuron. If we zoom out even more than the picture, (below also) to the real size of the Universe, eventually everything would look solid, as mass does.