Summations Only

Of course. Every last single bit of stuff that exists is interacting with every other bit that is present no matter how far any of them are apart. The intensity of that interaction is a function of distance. That is the inverse square law.
That is the given configuration whatever is the concrete mechanism of such mutual influence of all that exists and that is felt as gravity. This much is certain since the opposite proposition runs into contradictions. That's Mach principle.
The ape is sent that supreme reason by God or the Universe yet it keeps receding from the red-shifted gift attracted instead to all sorts of collective idiocy. It wants to believe space is something that can expand and it foolishly persists in such a bizarre superstition. Now logically there are only two possibilities and both exclude any expansion of space. Either the Universe does not expand and the redshift is an effect having nothing to do with any recessional motion or the observable cosmos is indeed expanding into a wider area though in this case it is again the objects that are uniformly moving away making the Earth an absolute centre of that expanding region.
In both cases space may not expand having no properties whatsoever. Simple. But the silly creature may go on believing this nonsense for a few decades more.

It's not a matter of belief. It is a fact that gravity is pulling them together. That's what the evidence shows. Who? What "others"? Name a scientist that has come to a different conclusion based on the evidence. NoNukes gave a great answer to it, with the math to support and explain it. No one has said anything about the space ceasing to expand. You've already been explained all of this. You, as usually, don't understand what is being explained to you.At this point, believe whatever you want to believe. It really doesn't matter. It's not like anything you're saying will change the evidence or the conclusions long established and studied at universities.You have the opportunity to learn you just seem more comfortable in ignorance. I can't help you with that. So, fine, have it your way: Nothing is expanding. Nothing is red-shifting or blue-shifting. There is no shifting of any kind and the Big Bang is not real. You feel better now? You broke the conspiracy. We've been making it all up.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.

So given that the expanding distance between a theoretician's ears is about one hundredth of a femtoparsec what is the peculiar velocity of the ears proper holding the head in one piece? Can you give the cat a figure?

As are you. You are claiming that a universe can not expand unless there is something to expand into. Where is your support for this claim?

False. I am challenging the claim that room is needed in each and every case. Where is your support? Evidence please.

Why couldn't it have been created from existence? Lightning has a beginning, so does that mean lightning comes from non-exsitence?You are just like Mr. Maddenstein. You are making claims you have zero evidence for.

That's false as well. The force of gravity and dark energy are well defined. Gravity decreases over distance while dark energy increases.

What gall you've got, Tacky!! Your shyster skills are missed in the court of law. In science we don't deal with dubious evidence to persuade the jury and the crowd. In science we conceptualise and explain. The verb to expand is conceptualised from all the instances of the process. In every instance such a process involves two entities. The expanding entity always has a physical border. The other entity is always greater in size. No exceptions. No monkey tricks. Expansion in this case is claimed to signify an increase in the physical volume of the Universe. The volume must necessarily be gained from another already existing volume. The Universe is surrounded by nothing by definition. Nothing takes no place to exist, what takes no place to exist has no volume to impart. Contradiction in your shyster story. Therefore the concept "expanding universe" is a piece of gobbledegook you are peddling to the jury and the crowd.It's up to you to show the judge how this clear meaning of the physical term could be violated without you being laughed out of court for lying through your teeth and dealing in nonsense. What you do instead is abusing language and claiming that the prosecution must bring evidence that you do not.
Show how it is possible to move when all the free room is blocked, impeded or absent. Space is exactly what allows motion so itself it may not move, silly. If you deal crap to the cat, he will make you eat all of it.

The problem isn't with the science behind the cosmology, the problem is with the limited scope of the usage of the word used to describe it: "expand".But the limited scope of the usage of the word "expand" places no limits or errors on the underlying science behind the cosmology. That you think a semantic argument has any effect on the scientific data shows that your either stupid or trolling. The scientific data is not contrained by the clear meaning of the english words that are used to analogize them.Its the fault of language, not the fault of science.

In science, we do deal with evidence. That's the whole point. Evidence please. Evidence please. Where? From everything I have read, there is no evidence one way or the other. No, it is up to you to show that your claims are backed by evidence. Shifting the burden of proof only shows how shallow your claims are.

Hi Taq, That is my point it was. There had to be existence for the Uiverse to begin to exist. You know better than that.Lightning happens when specific conditions occur in the atmosphere.So no, there is a cause for lightning.God Bless,

Hi Taq, Does that mean that there is no dark energy between the Milky Way and Andromeda?God Bless,

Hi Taq, Take the balloon you guys are always talking about and put your dots on it. Get you a 1 qt. syrup bottle that has the very small neck. Stuff the balloon into the bottle. Once you have all the baloon in the bottle you will notice that there is a lot of space between the balloon and the glass of the bottle. Now begin to blow air into the balloon and it will began to fill the space inside the bottle until the bottle is full. You will notice then that the balloon will try to escape out of the bottle at the point you are introducing air. But try as you may you will not get the balloon to expand any further inside the bottle, as it has reached the limit it can expand.Now take another balloon and do not put it in anyting and begin to blow it up. It will burst before it fills the space around it.Therefore if the Universe is expanding it is expanding into existence.If there had not been existence for that little pea sized thing I am told existed at T+1/100 of a billionth of a second it would still be that size.As the cat says for something to expand it has to have something to expand into.God Bless,

Hi NoNukes, Shouldn't that number read 300 km/h?God Bless,

well if you...fygyfyj then ugukguknhmv you will begin to see bbjfyfyugu, once you grasp this then cdserhg is the only clear outcome.