Aussie astronomer wins $1m prize!

[xelasnave]

The expansion is of space which is everywhere. The only problem there is as space is everywhere (presumably even inside an atom) everything must be expanding , so maybe against an "outside ruler" we may all have expanded since birth ... my observations at Makas tells me this must be so .
alex

[Shawn]

I see your point

Your ruler is to small .

But lets consider an explosion, something Ive had a lot to do with, detritus is radiated from a central point with very little variance, any variance is caused by collisions between bits if detritus. this however if the big bang thheory is t be considered accurate which I believe it is...contradicts our observations of the universes expansion ,,ie everything moving away from everything else, like currents in a bread bun being baked...Now. does this observation of these two contradictory observations suggest that time may not be uniform universally...just a thought...

[Shawn]

I know its a bit deep, I was a 60,s baby and gawd knows what my parents were taking,,,

[xelasnave]

Well you picked the right bloke to ask because I dont believe it one way or the other ... a start and a finish to the Universe is what the human brain needs to be somewhat acceptable but I see no reason why there should be a start or a finish for that matter. It is difficult to reconcille however the big bang as we "see it" goes back to a point, set in nothing (not space for it was the big bang that created space itself) from which everything grew and that initial seed contained all that is now before us (behind us above us and everywhere). Once that seems so clear to me now I am not so sure. Our problem is confounded as you say from the "explosion" visualisation but it is probably the scale in which we work that makes any observation of a varience noticable, I mean if we really looked would we find that one "side" shows a slightly greater expansion than elsewhere. Looking at the Universe Maps nothing stands out yet but the scale is so great it is beyond human comprehension...and of course what we see is the Observable Universe... there is so much more. Although 13.5 billion years old (and one would think the diameter would therefore be in the vicinity of 26 billion light years as one will try to bind the expansion to the speed of light) I have seen estimates that it is out to at least 160 billion light years distance... but really it can only be infinite one would think..and many agree that it is by virtue that an edge can never be found. The baking bread anology is used often but I think we are dealing with a loaf of bread with no top no sides and no bottom... so my point finally is if there is different expansions it would be difficult to see.. but they will surely be noticed in time one hopes.
As to time and its relevance and the perception of time differences through out the Universe it sounds interesting but as you probably gather I think so much surrounding "time" in this area is "artificial" and observations caused simply by the limitation the speed of light places upon the simplest of observations.
and I close with this thought ..
"It is a wise man who can imagine a stick with no ends.."

( it cant be done but sit under the stars one night and try it, see if you can end up with a Universe on a stick . floating in a cocktail of nothing)
alex