# [ExI] Dark Energy and Causal Cells

John Clark johnkclark at gmail.com
Thu Feb 15 17:38:20 UTC 2018

```On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 4:52 PM, Stuart LaForge <avant at sollegro.com> wrote:

> *But John by your own logic, all the matter in universe cannot possibly
> have a non-zero average velocity*

You need a reference point to set to zero, it could be anything but average
velocity would be convenient , its the reference frame that shows zero
dipole moment in the Cosmic Microwave Background.

*> unless there was something *else* out there for the all the matter in
> our universe to be moving toward or away from.  *

I don’t see how that follows. Suppose there were only 3 objects in the
universe X,Y and Z,  Y has 98% of the mass and X and Z have 1%, X is moving
relative to Y due east at speed v and Z is moving due west  relative to Y
at speed v. In that situation observers at both X and Z would conclude that
there were moving relative to most of the mass in its universe (or most of
the mass of the universe was moving relative to them, take your pick) while
a observer at Y would conclude that he was not moving relative to most of
the mass in the universe. In a similar way when we observe CMB dipole
anisotropy we can conclude that the Solar System is moving at a speed of
368 km/sec relative to most of the mass in the universe in the direction
of galactic longitude 263.85 degrees   and latitude 48.25 degrees. So we're
not moving the exact same way as most of the matter in the universe, oh
well, if movement is allowed at all then everything can't be moving in the
same direction at the same speed  because it would make no sense to say the
entire universe just moved 3 feet to the left.

*> Freidmann says that galaxies are  like raisins in a loaf of raisin bread
> rising in the oven. The raisins  don't move through the dough, but as the
> dough expands, the raisins are pushed apart by the expanding dough. The
> problem is that our "raisin" is clearly moving through the dough.*

If you were living on one of those raisins and measured the speed of the
dough relative to the raisin a short distance from it you'd get a speed
that was almost zero, and the shorter the measured distance the closer to
zero it would be. The movement you're talking about is incidental and has
nothing to do with the general expansion of the universe. And its small,
only   368 km/sec .

*> The big CMB hot spot, the Shapely super-cluster, and Dark Flow are all
> in  the same octant of the sky in the direction of the constellation
>  Centaurus. What could be out there pulling the Laniakea super-cluster and
> even the Great Attractor toward itself if not another causal cell?*

Nobody thinks that the entire universe consists of a sphere with a 13.8
billion light year radius with the earth at the center, which is what we
actually observe, so if earth is not the center of the universe then there
must be stuff we can't see. So if we  observe  large scale movement 10
billion light years away its probably because something more distant than
13.8 billion light years that we can never see is attracting it
gravitationally.

*> What is surprising is that the observable universe has a  non-zero
> average velocity for the earth's velocity to differ from.*

You set the universe's average velocity at zero and compare things to that
because, as I said before, it would make no sense to say  the entire
universe just moved 3 feet to the left.

*> I am not talking about the minor cold spots and hot spots, I am talking
>   a bout the big one. At its maximum, the difference is more like one part
> in  10,000 to 20,000.*

A statistical analysis of the biggest CMB cold spot shows it's  probably
just caused by random variation produced by quantum uncertainty before
inflation started when the universe was about 10^-43 seconds old; the
evidence to support the theory its more than just random noise only has a
2.2 sigma; that's pretty lousy, you need 5 sigma to claim to have made a
discovery.

https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.07894

*> Or better yet, try to get infinity to cancel itself out like
> renormalization does in QFT.*

That would be nice but the discovery of Dark Energy made the canceling out
trick like Feynman used in Quantum Chromodynamics much harder. Quantum
Field Theory predicts something like Dark Energy will exist but it predicts
a value that is 10^120 times larger than what we observe,  its been called
the worst prediction in the history of science. If the value of Dark Energy
were precisely zero you could hope that some very smart person could find a
way for 10^120 to cancel out, but now they must find a way to cancel
everything out EXCEPT for one part in 10^120. And that would be about
10^120 times harder to figure out how to do.

*> No doubt induction is a useful tool. But when infinity is involved,
>  induction breaks down.*

Induction always breaks down if you extend it far enough, but it usually
works most of the time.

​ ​
John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20180215/b9820eb0/attachment.html>
```