What if the universe wasnt expanding but its actualy shrinking.  Would this knowledge change anything?
454817
the doppler effect means that if an object is moving away from us the light it is sending out is slightly more red than normal (the wave length is longer)-a red shift, if it is moving towards us the light from it is slightly more blue(wavelength is shorter)- a blue shift. Most of the galaxies we see in space are red shifted so everything is moving away from everything else. This proves that so far the universe is expanding. If gravity gets the better of us and all the galaxies begin to move in on each other then they would be blue shifted. This may well happen in the far off future- we can't tell yet, but Even if this was happening they wouldn't all meet in a 'big crunch' (the opposite of the big bang) for a few billion years so it's not really anything to worry about!
603134
In all actuality, your question makes no sense.  If you were to take out all the "space" in matter, there would be no matter.  Matter is basically made out of energy and forces interacting with each other.  If you compressed the universe into the size of a refrigerator, you wouldn't have matter anymore.
1158544
This "nothing" is what we perceive without the laws of physics. Our universe is limited by the knowledge we have about it. Recent theories (the "M" theory) suggest that endless universes exist, and sometimes they even collide one into other. Probably, out there, beyond the boundaries of 12 billions light years, others dimensions, other plan of existence exist.
1025063
It doesn't make sense that "everything contained in [the universe] is imploding in on itself". First, no one has the slightest clue as to what exists external to the universe. There's plenty of speculation, but there exists no observations that would point us in the right direction. The universe may indeed implode in itself if it is not expanding fast enough to resist the gravitational attraction of all the mass in the universe. Whether or not it is expanding fast enough is an important and open question in cosmology as well as philosophy.
161739
Nothing, in a logical sense of the word.\n\n\nThis is similar to the question, "OK, the universe is expanding, what is it expanding into?" Both questions are based on analogies which are designed to help us think about complex situations. They tend to be ones where we think of the universe as being something like the surface of an inflating beach ball which is being blown up. Our image of the "beach ball universe" includes space to expand into.\n\nThis is a limitation of the analogy, not the actual universe. The details of General Relativity describe the "shape" of the universe and how gravity effects different parts. GR works on the scale of galaxies and galaxy clusters. For smaller scales, dropping a pencil off your desk for instance, Newton's Gravity is fine. (GR turns into Newton's Law of Gravity at small scales.)\n\nOur brains are simply not designed to imagine curved space with all three spatial dimensions. To get around this the analogies use two-dimensional universes. But the analogies can't be taken too far. In this case, the only way to really understand deeply the structure of the universe is by understanding the mathematics. There is no exact mental picture.\n\nSo, the question has no answer, and in fact, logically speaking, makes no sense. (That isn't to say it is not a sensible question, it is a sensible question.)\n\nThe usual example of such a question is: "What is north of the north pole." Once one gets to the pole there is no more North. Everything is south. So asking what is north of the north pole is (logically) a nonsensical question.
1007231
Current information is insufficient to give a correct answer. Once we explore more of the universe, maybe we could have a logical answer.\nst
49948
the same thing thats on this side. new matter is not being formed it is just expanding from the force of the big bang all those millions of years ago. Some scientists say the expansion will eventually stop and the universe will collapse onto itself, and then maybe explode again. All theories so in effect we dont know.
387616
Originally it was thought that the expansion of the Universe was slowing, and would eventually stop, reverse, and end in a "big crunch".  Now it appears as if the expansion is not only *not* slowing, it's actually accelerating!  As close as we can tell, this expansion will continue until the Universe dies of cold-when the reaction potential reaches zero, and all the energy is lost either to waste heat or inert matter.  However, it is clear we have a very poor understanding of the Universe and what it is composed of, and the forces that drive it (the expansion, for example, seems to require a new force that opposes gravity).  There is also the possibility that humans, or some other intelligent species, will over the next few billion years, achieve enough knowledge and power to change the fate of the Universe.
703604
The universe is still expanding, and so far it's been dated at several billion years old, so assuming it began to collapse again, it would likely take just as long, before an immense black hole forms again and then there's another big bang.\n\nMy guess is that we'll be gone long before that, since our species uses more natural resources than the Earth can replenish.
1162299
The scientific theory is that the Universe started as a fluctuation of the vacuum. Such vacuum fluctuations make appear a small amount of energy, for a small time. \n\nNot so the Big Bang. That was a HUGE fluctuation. So big that a lot of energy came to appearance in the form of mass, elementary particles. These particles started expanding, before the vacuum could reclaim the energy.\n\nAnd it is still expanding today. 14 billion years later.\n\nNow for some speculation. Is our Universe the only one? Maybe not. The Big Bang was one big fluctuation, maybe other smaller or bigger, take place all the time.\nBut most of these fluctuations will produce Universes in which conditions are just not suitable for life.\nThe Universe we observe is by necessity one in which the conditions are just right for us to have evolved into Homo Sapiens capable of asking questions.
1059228
If the universe is everything, then what is it expanding into?\n\nBefore we can address that question, we must first define universe.  \n\nThe word universe denotes all space and everything (matter, energy) contained within it.  The prefix uni means one.  The root verse means word, carnate message, meaningful substance, matter.  Questions regarding our universe persist today.  Does it have a beginning and end, or does it go on forever and ever?  Is it linear or curved?  If it has limits of length or curvature, then what lies beyond the Universe?  If something lies beyond the Universe, then can’t we accurately call that the Universe?\n\nSome lay people and some scientists conceive of the universe as infinite space.  Others define the universe as finite, or limited (perhaps curved), space.  Still others incorporate the elements of matter and/or energy into their definition of the universe, as opposed to the space beyond matter and energy.\n\nGiven these concepts of our universe, some scientists conclude that the “totality of space could be infinite. Shrink an infinite space by an arbitrary amount, and it is still infinite. (Scientific American March 2005).”  \n\nAs to the notion that we live in an ever expanding universe, moving away from every other universe on the fabric of space-time, some scientists are careful to point out that “\n\nAndromeda, our nearest large galactic neighbor, is actually moving toward us, not away. Such exceptions arise because Hubble's law describes only the average behavior of galaxies (Scientific American March 2005).”\n\nIn accordance with your supposition that our universe is in another universe, “it has been hypothesized by some scientists that the universe may be part of a system of many other universes, known as the multiverse (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe).” Modern astrophysicists talk about multiple "pocket" universes that branch off from one another.  Stephen Hawking points out that parallel pocket universes can have no effect on a real observer inside a single pocket, so, according to Hawking, they are theoretical baggage that should be eliminated from cosmology, the study of the origins of the universe.\n\nSome string theories define the universe as a three-dimensional space in an invisible space having more dimensions. This is, in essence, a universe within a universe.  Our zone, a “braneworld” could periodically bounce into another parallel braneworld.  This may create what would appear as a Big Bang from one perspective or a Big Bounce of alternating expanding and contracting universe from another perspective.  Such a cataclysmic event is thought to occur 300 billion years from now, resulting in the rearranging and creation of a new universe.\n\nIf the universe is everything, then what is it expanding into?  It seems that our universe is all matter, space, and energy that we can perceive in this closed system.  However, that does not mean that there is not additional matter, space, and energy outside our universe.  In other words, there are probably other universes.  Therefore, the zone that we call our universe (or braneworld) may be moving through or expanding into other universes (or braneworlds).  In sum, all universes may be moving through a multiverse.\n \nSteve\n:-D
800785
Ah yes, people like to give mumbo jumbo bullshiet answers to this question to confuse you further.\n\nThe thing is, we really have no idea. This is half the reason the answer is so confusing.\n\nScientists, like myself, have defined the universe as everything and like to say it isn't expanding into anything because, quite frankly, they don't know what's going on and it's easier to just define the universe as that for the time being. I don't know, neither does anyone else.\n\nFrom recent science, we know that the universe is absolutely finite, therefore it's size is increasing; it is getting larger. This can also be seen by looking at microwave radiation maps of the universe.\n\nSo then, what is it expanding into? Well, if ANYONE could answer this question, they would probably go down in history as greater than even people like Einstein, Newton, Galileo...but the reality is, we don't know. All answers to this question are purely spectical and usually formed to fit a belief system that has been adapted from that person.\n\n\nPersonally, it's probably expanding into more space, which probably contains an indefinite number of universes and extends infinitely.\n\nBut that is only my personal view. Just like all other views.
2258
1. "What goes up must come down" is not a real law of science.\n\n2. The latest research seems to show that the universe is expanding at faster and faster rates... and might never actually collapse in on itself.
1067957
No matter how many 'experts' around here claim that there are alternate universes or other dimensions or a brick wall, nobody--repeat NOBODY--really knows. Tons of theories, but not one single shred of evidence to support any of them.\n\nScientific research has repeatedly indicated that our universe is infinite in scope, and that it will expand forever although its contents (mass and energy) will very, very gradually fade away to nothing.\n\nBefore our universe began, and right now, there's probably nothing else but an absolute and infinite void totally without energy, mass, spacetime, dimensions or anything else.
11829
On one theory, the space of the Universe (as well as its contents) is what's expanding. That theory says the total amount of space is finite, and that finite quantity just gets bigger every second.  What, you might then ask, is outside of space?  There's no outside!  It's like asking, "What's north of the North Pole?"
176516
This is an issue of science not religion. Science makes predictions based on observation, and if they come out right the theory is adopted. Based on Edwin Hubble's observations on the spectrum of faraway stars, where certain elements' lines were shifting to red along the time, the conclusion was withdrawn that they were increasing their distance from us, in all directions, therefore, the universe is expanding. Given the rate of expansion it was figured out that between 13 and 15 billion years ago all matter must have been clumped together. recent observations with anisotrophy probes showed that the background radiation of the cosmos dates back from 13.7 billion years. So at that time all matter/energy was clumped together and what we call a quantumn fluctuation set it in expansion. All matter was formed within a trillionth of a second followed by a quick expansion. This is proven by physics by means of mathematical equations that for the common mortal are just beyond mental reach, but fortunately some humans developed a very intelligent brain. Unless of course you prefer to think that a pink unicorn sneezed, and there you got the universe. In which case, be my guest, but deep down inside I'd pity you. (But in fact I know you don't believe such fanciful stories).
188759
There are a number of possible answers, and the subject is still being researched both by using theoretical arguments and  by looking for clues in the data we can gather from peering deep into space.   You're not crazy for asking questions like this, or, if you are, you're at least in good company.  These sorts of questions are the bread and butter of a subdiscipline of physics called cosmology.   \n\nOne common theory is the big bang theory, as others have mentioned.  This has had to be modified in a number of ways over the years as more data comes in, but many basic elements of the idea remain valid.  One is the idea that since were talking about an expansion of spacetime, there is no center to the expansion, or, alternatively, all points are equally the center.  This is hard to imagine in three dimensions, but it's easy if you consider only two.  Imagine you have a mathematically perfect balloon, that is one that can be shrunk down to a single point, and expanded to any size, and it perfectly symmetric.  If you expand this balloon, is there any point on the two dimensional skin of the balloon which can be said to be the center of this expansion?  No, all points are moving away from each other equally.  There is a center, but it occurs in a higher gemoetric dimension that the one the skin of the balloon has, so it's effectively off the map.  Our universe is expanding in much the same way, only it's a three dimensional volume and not a two dimensional sheet.\n\nAs for what was there before...  This is a difficult one to answer since we have no method for peering back beyond the start of the universe, so we need to make guesses about this.  One possibility is that the universe has existed forever, and it's cyclic, expanding, and then collapsing, and rising again, and so on.  This was a popular early idea in big bang theory, but doesn't seem likely now.  As best we can tell from observational data there isn't enough mass to pull the universe back together, and so it's expected to continue expanding and cooling, and eventually this expansion, which is actually increasing in rate due to dark energy, will achieve such a high rate that matter will be pulled apart at the subatomic level, ending in something that has been called "the big rip".  But, even if this is the case, there are mechanisms by which our universe could be the offshoot of an earlier one.  Theoretical work in string theory suggests that if compressed to a high enough degree, matter can trigger a spontaneous exapnsion of spacetime, which generates more energy as "tension" in spacetime, which can then come into exsitence as additional matter.  Some calculations of the minimum mass needed to create a universe the size of ours through this process run as low as a few tens of kilograms.  So, black holes in an earlier universe, if large enough and dense enough, can expand into their own universe, one which is disconnected spatially from the earlier one, which may or may not have enough mass to collapse again, but local areas within it can collapse to a high enough density to start the process all over again.  So, rather than a single universe pulsing in and out of existence as in the earlier oscillatory model, this model suggests something that would be rather like a tree or bush growing and branching, with each branch being a universe, and each bud which produces a new offshoot being a black hole which spawns another universe on the opposite side of it.  One universe could give rise to a great many more, and while each one is finite in the time for which it exists, each one is a branch of limited length, the entire tangle of univereses has been going on forever.