If acceleration implies movement inward while deceleration implies movement outward, then since the expansion of the universe was decelerating until about 5.5 billion years ago it must have been an outward movement up until then.
Then after 5.5 billion years ago the expansion began accelerating, so in your view the movement must have become inward.
Can you explain how outward movement suddenly became inward?
Hi Percy.n Where do you get this idea that the expansion slowed. There is absolutely no evidence of any 'slowing down' of the expansion. The expansion started slowly and has since accelerated.
Wrong, wrong and wrong.
When the expansion settled down after the period of inflation around 13.8 billion years ago, it was decelerating. It began accelerating around 5 billion years ago. This is from the Wikipedia article on the Accelerating Universe:
Wikipedia writes:
In 1998, observations of type Ia supernovae also suggested that the expansion of the universe has been accelerating since around redshift of z~0.5
The universe turned its expansion from past deceleration to recent acceleration at the moment when its size was about 3/5 of the present size if the density parameter in matter is about 0.3 (or the turning point redshift is 0.67).
A red shift of .67 corresponds to about 9 billion years ago. Gee, Peter, how could you not know that the expansion hasn't always been accelerating?
Percy, any accelerating expansion is inward.
Yes, we know you think this. So since the expansion was decelerating until around 5 billion years ago when it began accelerating, how did an outward expansion suddenly become an inward expansion?
Will you at some point be explaining how the expansion turned from outward to inward between 5 and 10 billion years ago when the expansion of the universe stopped decelerating and began accelerating?
The observational evidence that all the observable universe was in roughly the same place at the same time around 13.8 billion years ago is unequivocal.
Percy, I may be a loon, either that or very intelligent.
No, definitely a loon. An intelligent person would base their claims upon evidence. You not only have no evidence, you don't even know what evidence is.
I explain this in my Observational Evidence, at the beginning of this thread.
Yes, I know. As Admin I explained to you that it wasn't evidence. You kept claiming it was too evidence and AdminPhat finally dumped your thread here in Free For All, land of the loons. This includes the supposedly sane among us who for who knows what perverse reasons decide to engage with you guys. Hopefully I'll recover soon.
Observational evidence ? That all the Observable Universe was in the same place? What nonsense!
The observational evidence says that you already responded to this message a few days ago, and now evidently caught up in your hysteria you have become opaque to such details and have replied again.
And I see you've also done a double reply to my Message 87.
To touch lightly on one of your points, like the story of being chased by a bear, it isn't necessary that I be smarter than Newton, only smarter and saner than you.
Have you considered the possibility one's own insanity isn't apparent to oneself?
I just don't believe in Anti-Gravity. I believe in Gravity alone, running the Universe.
That's nice. I won't be engaging with you on any actual technical topics as I already tried that a couple times and you demonstrated you weren't capable of discussing them. Repeatedly doing the same thing and expecting a different result is a mark of insanity, and I'm not the one who's crazy.
But maybe you should join JustATruthSeeker in the thread The cosmic conspiracy. You believe gravity runs the universe, he believe's plasma runs the universe, maybe between the two of you you can work it all out.
You're repeating yourself, Peter. What did I just say about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result? The answer hasn't changed. I don't have to be smarter than Newton, only smarter, or in this case saner, than you.
But I'm the head-case, right? Not you? Are you sure?
Oh, yes, I'm very sure. As we've all discovered, you're not really responsive to external stimuli, only to whatever it is that is going on in your own head. You're generating your own reality - it should come as no surprise that the real world is different from your own random internal mental machinations.
Now hold on, Percy. You believe in a Universe run by Anti-Gravity...
You're experiencing delusions, another sign of insanity. Search as you will through this thread, you'll never see me state that I "believe in a Universe run by Anti-Gravity."
The difference between sane and insane people is that sane people believe what we observe of the world and universe, while insane people believe whatever their own minds happen to produce, like that the accelerating expansion of the universe is like dust rushing toward a vacuum cleaner nozzle.
As Panda has pointed out over and over, the dust is getting closer and closer together, while in our actual universe the galaxies are getting further and further apart.
And as I pointed out, up until between 5 and 10 billion years ago the expansion was decelerating, after which it began accelerating, and you never explained how an expansion outward suddenly became an expansion inward.
And as others have pointed out, you're terribly confused about something as simple as density.
The facts pretty much confirm that you're terribly confused and totally daft. Your delusions are also fairly persistent, as I see from your Wikipedia user page that you've been arguing this position since at least 2011.
™ Version 4.2
(1)