If space is expanding everywhere, what is happening to the space within the atom? Will everything slow down?
403152
Subatomic particles are under the influence of totally different forces than the large objects that are affected by gravity, etc.  The forces affecting subatomic particles act ONLY under extremely short distances and despite the efforts of Einstein and everybody since him, those forces cannot be resolved or integrated with gravity, etc.\n\nIn other words, you are comparing two totally different things: apples and elephants.
398088
I asked that question to Dr. Brian Greene, author of "The Elegant Universe".  His answer was "the Universe is continually expanding", and therefore, you can't put a size on it.  The Universe, in a sense, CREATES the space it's expanding into.  It is all-encompassing.
791870
The size of the atom decreases as you move right.  As you move across the period you fill up the s and p orbitals.  These are then pulled closer to the nucleus.
243688
it has unlimited space in which to move outwards. Therefor the radiation from the big bang is the  first outward layer of the expanding space, then everything else. Turn on your tv to a snow channel, that is space radiation, and from our sun. It shows up like that. The concept of unending universe is hard for a human to grasp. We live in a finite life.
1113632
What is beyond the borders of the universe?\nIs it truly possible for the universe to go on forever? If there is an end, what’s on the other side?\n \nBefore we can address these questions, we must first define universe.  The word universe denotes all space and everything (matter, energy) contained within it.  The prefix uni means one.  The root verse means word, turn, or whole.  Thus our universe has traditionally been thought to be the one whole of all substance or 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 “Andromeda, 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\nBeyond the borders of the universe, there are other universes moving through a multiverse.  While scientists do not commonly believe that our universe goes on for an unlimited distance, despite its present expansion, they allow for the possibility that the multiverse may go on forever.  If there is an end to our universe, what’s on the other side is called the multiverse.  If there is an end to the multiverse, another term may need to be coined to describe what lay people commonly refer to as infinite space.\n\nSteve\n:-D
338901
Contrary to popular belief, empty space is not empty, and it is certainly not a vacuum. In fact, a true vacuum has never been created, anywhere, where the atomic count is zero.\nresearch it, its true.\n"Empty" space actually contains an average of 1 hydrogen atom for every 32 cubic centimeters of space, this data is per NASA.\n\nIn our own Milky Way, space is more dense with 1 hydrogen atom for every 1 cubic centimeter.\n\n One day the misinformation of space as a vacuum will finally die out.\n\nSo depending on the size of your jar and where the sample was taken from, it would contain 1 hydrogen atom per cubic centimeter.\n\nspread the knowledge
1134920
It depends on which space you are referring to. Common people refer to space as the void in which everything else is contained. This space is infinite.\n\nScientists commonly think of space as a fabric acting like a balloon which is being blown into and expanding. At a given moment, this three-dimensional space of our universe is finite (having an end), although two-dimensional travel through space fabric is thought to be curved (and therefore endless). This balloon that scientists refer to as our universe containing what they call space is defined as being one of many universes moving in a larger multiverse. This multiverse is very similar to what most people would call space and may well be endless.\n\nIn sum, lay space never ends, but scientific space does.
297208
As my education impressed on my mind; there is no empty space.  What we think of as "space" is not empty but a constant dance of virtual particals (protons/antiprotons, etc) constantly appearing out of the vacuum travelling a short distance, then touching and annihilating into nothing once again.  \n\n"Empty" space is filled with these interactions which I believe are known as vacuum fluctuations.  The law of "convservation of energy" is really something that holds on average.  Another principle called the uncertainty principle states that we cannot measure simultaneously the energy and time of a (system of particles?) more accurate than a constantant called h or hbar (a very small but finite number). \n\nSo in theory the universe can "borrow" energy from nowhere as long as that energy is returned before the h bar uncertainty in time runs out.  And thus "empty" space is filled with these vacuum fluctuations and is not really empty after all.  Of course I don't think I explained that too well.  See "In Search of Schrodinger's Cat" by John Gribben for a more coherent description
24021
All the techno babble apart - space has no end.\n\nThere is a distinction between space and universe. When talking about space in common man's language we talk about what is outside earth's atmosphere. That space has NO END. It is infinite in all directions and contains the moon, the planets, the sun, the starts, the galaxies, our universe formed after the big bang and beyond (probably several more universes formed of separate big bangs that are dying or forming like stars do).\n\nNow about a sphere's surface having no end but an area, well this has nothing to do with end of either universe or space or a sphere.. when viewed from the center of a sphere, a line drawn in any direction will intersect the surface of the sphere and therefore the entire surface of the sphere is an end. Space on the other hand has no end, it extends out to infinity.\n\nA simple way of understanding this is imagine you are in a room in a building. The room ends with the walls, but beyond the walls there is something - maybe more rooms. The rooms end with he building's walls but even beyond that wall there are more buildings. There is no end, if you imagine an end and if you could stand at the end there would still be something beyond that end more empty space maybe. No matter how large a number you imagine there is always something bigger. Numbers just like space go till infinity.
710476
Outside the space there is more of Space\nSpace is Infinite
410246
Well, this is uncertain. I will explain it as it is currently understood. There are three possibilities based on relativity and the Standard Model. There are three types of expansion depending on the mass-energy density of the universe - open, flat and closed.\n\nIn an open universe, expansion will continue and will actually increase with time. This is because there is not enough mass and energy in the universe to pull it back in.\n\nIn a flat universe, the universe will continue to expand, but expansion will begin to slow at a certain point and as time approaches infinity the expansion will stop. Of course, since infinity means forever, the expansion will continue but slow down constantly, little by little.\n\nIn a closed universe, there is enough mass and energy to cause a collapse of the universe, known as the "big crunch."\n\nAnyway, current theory holds that we live in a flat universe and that inflation will continue forever, as mentioned.\n\nOh. It expands into nothing - as in before the universe is there, there is nothing there.
554735
space probably does not end.  space-time may be something like the two-dimensional surface of a sphere.  it has no center and no edge.  nothing inside or outside the sphere exists for the two-dimensional surface, and nothing exists outside space-time in this model.
1101831
everything is made up of energy so if space is infinite then something must be there and if something is infinitely there then energy would be infinite
320898
If something moves the speed of light will it become light, just pure energy? Or do atoms gain more and more mass as they approache the speed of light and eventually begin behaving like black holes?  I think it will be hard to find a "correct" answer to this question ;)
1035265
Which is the end of expanding universe? If any end exists, what will be behind this end?\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.  \n\nThis 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\nWhich is the end of expanding universe? That may be determined in 300 billion years, when it stops expanding (like a balloon).  If any end exists, what will be behind this end?  A multiverse void containing other expanding and contracting balloons, referred to as universes, may exist beyond our own.\n\nSteve\n:-D
324188
It is refering to the end of the universe.  Matter will keep expanding endlessly.  Eventually, everything will burn out.  There will be nothing to collide with for heat.  The universe will be black and cold.  This will result in the "Big freeze".
407630
Very good.  You are close to the truth.\n\nSpace alternately expands and contracts over a two billion year cycle.\n\nWe are now nearing the end of the expansionary phase.  So all the scientists on primitive planets hypothesize a big bang and talk about red shift.\n\nIn the following phase, scientists on other primitive planets will hypotehsize a fiery, incandescent end in the middle of everything and talk a lot about blue shifts.\n\nThe reasons for this have to do with the benefits of dynamic equilibrium.  Static would not work.  Apparently God already knows about this, but so do some physicists.\n\nSoem Dutch guy named DeSitter was also close, I have heard.