The position at which I eventually arrived was something like this:
Outside; greater density of matter leading to greater gravitational attraction.
Inside; lower density of matter leading to lower gravitational attraction.
Matter tends to move from area of lower attraction to area of higher attraction, so dense areas will become more dense, while less dense areas become even less dense.
With increasing density outside, relative to inside, outward motion will accelerate.
Posts so far suggest that reaction to this will be mixed.
As you all know, I’m not terribly bright…but I have spent the last couple of years focused on this very issue.
As a matter of fact, I think that this subject is; to the macroscopic universe what quantum mechanics is; to the microscopic universe.
It occurs to me that this topic is related to another thread entitled “The universes expansion acceleration solved”.
I find it curious that no one has mentioned “Dark Flow” yet since it may relate to this issue and is well documented.
I think that this subject intertwines with, Hubble’s Equation, Hubble’s constant, gravity (and its math), gravity as warped space, the physical characteristics of the “bubble”, Dark Flow and infinite progression/regression. (Oh, and what happens to pi when you quantize it.)
I think that the most glaring issue with gravity as the expander is Hubble’s linear equation vs. gravity’s parabolic equation. Except for some anomalies like Dark Flow and the Great Attractor, observation demonstrates that the acceleration is linear and increasing. With only a few exceptions, the parabolic influence of a supposedly dominant force is nowhere in sight.
As a cause and effects type of person it seems compelling to discard the notion…that a very real impasse has been reached. The universe as a whole seems to behave like there’s a different force at work…Dark Energy perhaps.
It may surprise you to know that I am a proponent of gravity as the accelerant.
Once again, the devil is in the details. It does seem to me that despite the overwhelming observational evidence that there is a combination of circumstances that allow gravity to be compatible with observations.
Should I go on?
