• Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Can you describe what mechanism of shrinking you’re referring to? I assume you’re talking about some sort of compression where atoms remain the same size but get closer together.

    • cynar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      That wouldn’t work. You would need to change the orbital sizes, bonding forces (EM strong and weak, at least), and flow of time exactly in lockstep. Any deviation would show up in quantum mechanical experiments. None of these appear to have simple relationships to each other. It would be a huge new lump of physics to allow this to happen.

      The more likely explanation is that space has a very slight tendency to expand. It would need intergalactic (not just interstellar) distances to be detectable. We also know that (very strongly suspect) that space expanded rapidly in the very early universe. Space then collapsed into a cooler, more stable state. It was initially thought the expansion tapered off to zero, but it might be slightly positive still.

        • cynar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          You’re the one who made the suggestion, I’m just pointing out the problems you would need to overcome.

            • cynar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Compression of size is getting smaller, your claim/idea.

              Ultimately, the ratio of intergalactic distances to atomic ones are changing in an unusual way. We have made the assumption that it is the single factor changing, and not a dozen, in lockstep, that don’t seem able to change that way.

                • NiHaDuncan@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  If the application of an idea is both in-line with its definition and shown to be inconsistent in foundation or correctness then the idea is either wrong, not sufficiently defined, or both. In lieu of a redefinition, it can be presumed wrong.

                  These are the natural shocks that test hypothesis and theory.