Kosmocosm, Essay, Geeky

Blowing Bubbles at the Edge of the Universe

The Hubble tension isn’t a crisis, but a clue to the Universe’s true shape.

Blowing Bubbles at the Edge of the Universe
Sidebar List Group

Here I stand in the shade on this glorious spring day, sunlight dancing through the trees, as I watch my little boy darting along the edge of the pond. With eager hands, he dips his hoop into the frothy soap suds swirling in his bucket. A quick flick of his wrist sends the magic wand slicing through the air, and like magic, a shimmering, colossal bubble takes shape. It floats free, glistening in the golden light, and begins its graceful ascent into the endless blue above. 

We’ve all watched such bubbles drift and burst, but perhaps we’ve overlooked the quiet metaphor: our universe, too, may be a kind of bubble — curved, finite, and mysteriously radiant from within.

For over a century, astronomers have wrestled with the same question: how fast is the Universe expanding? The answer, it turns out, depends on how you look. When we measure the speed of galaxies nearby, using the pulse of Cepheid stars or the flicker of distant supernovae, we find the cosmos racing outward at one pace. We see a different pace when we measure the whisper of the cosmic microwave background, a relic from the infant universe. Both values are exquisitely precise, yet they disagree. This “Hubble tension” has been called a crisis in cosmology, a rift between two truths that refuse to meet.

The reigning framework, ΛCDM, allows three possible cosmic shapes: flat, open, or closed. For convenience, flatness has long held the spotlight, since the microwave background suggests the Universe is nearly flat. But “nearly” is not “exactly.” Even the faintest hint of positive curvature transforms the picture into something richer: a finite hypersphere, a shell expanding through higher dimensions.

Most discussions set this aside, treating curvature as a minor footnote. But what if the Universe is not an infinite plain at all, but a rind — like the skin of a watermelon — expanding outward from an unseen interior? The rind holds all matter, stars, and galaxies. The interior swells with dark energy, pressing us ever outward. In this geometry, light does not travel straight but bends gently along arcs of the shell. Photons from the early cosmos crossed smaller, tighter spheres before reaching us, curving inward on their journey. When we analyze them as though they traveled through flat space, we mismeasure distances, and expansion appears to quicken. The contradiction is an illusion, born of flat maps laid across a round world.

Correct the perspective, and the two discordant voices of the Universe merge into one. The Hubble tension dissolves — not because the cosmos has changed, but because our gaze has deepened.

There is humility in this realization. We need not discard Einstein’s general relativity, nor summon exotic new forces. The resolution lies in geometry itself, in the recognition that we live on a curved surface expanding outward from a hidden center. Locally, nothing changes: apples still fall, planets still orbit, galaxies still cluster. But globally, light and time bend to the roundness of a deeper sphere filled with unseen energy, pushing us ever outward.

And so, the child’s bubble drifts on the breeze. Its fragile film holds a universe inside, finite yet luminous. We, too, live upon such a surface, carried forward by an interior we cannot touch, yet which gives us the gift of space and time itself.

The Hubble tension has shadowed our understanding of cosmic expansion for over a century. In my recent work, Resolving the Hubble Tension Through Hypersphere Cosmology and Rethinking Cosmic Structure, I have shown how this tension may not be a crisis at all, but a geometric truth waiting to be recognized. What once appeared as contradiction may instead be the cosmos reminding us of its true shape — curved, finite, and radiant from within.

Sidebar List Group
View all Articles
Comments to
So where is the universe expanding from. Is there just one center? Was there really a "big bang? Just one? As the universe expands, does the rind (your watermelon story which I liked) get thinner as it stretches or thicker as it also expands? Since measurements are in light years how can change in distance be measured in a lifetime?


Cosmologists call the source of the ONE big bang a ‘singularity’ meaning one ultra tiny dot of near-infinite energy.  The explosion converted some of that energy  into mass and speed (M=E/C^2).

Comparing,the Universe to a thin rind or “watermelon skin,” in this analogy, the radial thickness of the physical shell could scale with the expansion. If expansion occurs isotropically at the speed of light in the radial direction, then both the outer and inner radii increase simultaneously, maintaining a constant thickness.

The distance of galaxies are measured two ways: the further, the dimmer compared to a standard "candle" super nova brightness; by parallax— angular difference when measured from Earth’s opposing orbit (six months apart). Speed is measured using Doppler effect of the light’s frequency.

The light photons emitted by a galaxy ten billion years ago remain within the universe 3-sphere as the universe expands. Their wavelengths just stretch over the ten billion years.

BTW: I’m too timid to put this out, yet, but my calculations place the Kosmocosm age at more like 47 billion light years rather than the accepted 13.7 billion light years.

One other thing: mass/energy wise, that outer shell’s volume is 25% of the whole sphere whereas, although unintuitive, the core is 75% (that’s the dark energy). The conservation of energy, a basic law of physics and my demonstration of quantile layering allows for energy (and gravity) conservation. Entropy, the 2nd law of thermal dynamics is not an issue as it is confined within the universe itself (that’s where all the matter is).

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.