In a scenario where nothing exists on the outside of the larger balloon, those are exactly the same “animal”.
So reality is meaningless to you? Noted.
You do realize that the size of the coffee cup on my desk is not influenced by however much the universe expands or contracts during the time it took me to write this sentence, or that the size of the cup is not influenced by the size of the room around it, don’t you? The cup is what it is. It would only be influenced by the size of the space around it if that space were to contract so much that it became smaller than the size of the cup itself. Other than that, what you are saying makes no sense at all.
But go ahead and feel free to explain how the size of my coffee cup is changing from moment to moment based on how large the room is around it or how much the universe may have expanded or contracted in those however many seconds it took you to read this 
Good luck.
Huh? No, not at all. All you’re doing is reducing the meaning of the size of something to a relative comparison between its size and the size of something else. It’s fine to make those comparisons, and obviously the ratio of the sizes between two things will change if only one of those two things changes in size. But that doesn’t mean we cannot also speak about the size of something independent of the ratio of its size to the size of something else.
To say A and B are related is not necessarily also to say that A and B exist in such a way that any changes to A cause changes to B, and any changes to B cause changes to A. That would mean that all forms of relation are also forms of absolute relation across all possible spaces and directions/channels of influence, which would be absurd. For at least some A’s and B’s (let along probably the vast majority of them, whatever real things you want to plug in for those variables) it is the case that A can be affected by some changes to B but not affected by other changes to B. Obviously.
Which we know is not the case, because we know that something is.
Clearly logical thinking and basic deduction aren’t among your strengths.
There you go. Just adapt around the weaknesses in your ideas, pretend like that’s what you were saying all along without even saying it. CHeers 
=D>
Ah, you’re in your usual mood again. Noted!
Its size as compared to what? Not compared to your desk or your “self”, no; that much is true…
Also, are you suggesting it would or could be influenced by however much the universe expands or contracts during a longer time than it took you to write that sentence?
Great point!
As opposed to an absolute comparison?.. Between its size and what, then…
Obviously you don’t—can’t, won’t—understand relativity. This is not about B affecting A in some causal sense.
Right: “we” “know” that, because “we” “are”…
Right… Unbelievable that when I spoke of vacuum energy, I was actually speaking of [urlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy]vacuum energy[/url]!
You, like all your fellow objectivists, are a joke to me.
Nice evasion. Obvious though.
Yes, it is true. And also “compared to what” as in “compared to how much coffee it can hold”. My cup holds up to 16oz of coffee. So what you are saying is, if I were to change the size of the room around the cup it would magically hold up to something other than 16oz. Or even more absurdly, you claim that if the universe way way way out there trillions of miles away from us is expanding right now at some rate then this is causing my cup of coffee to hold a different amount of coffee than up to 16oz.
Yeah, no.
It’s nice to see that you can’t directly confront what I am saying. I already knew that, but at least you are showing all your cards.
And no, obviously. The length of time of expansion or contraction of the universe would not change how much coffee my cup can hold. Unless, as I already said, the universe were to shrink to such a size that the coffee cup itself would be physically imposed upon or cease to exist. Which is an entirely different matter from what you were claiming (I say were claiming, not are claiming, because it seems like rather than admit defeat you are content to just equivocate and shift little goalposts around the edges of the issue. Hope you can prove me wrong about that).
Glad you agree. Sarcasm notwithstanding, it is indeed a great point. Hence why you can’t offer any counter-point.
And again, your failure to respond speaks volumes.
Beyond comparison. You fail to see that comparison is irrelevant here. A thing has a size, you can compare that size to the size of other things. That does not mean that size itself = the comparison of sizes to one another. Size must be something first before it can even be compared to other things.
The fact that you can’t get your mind around this is interesting. I can see the precise limitation in your mind. A lot of people have this conceptual blockage. It relates to being unable to think past the prescriptions of language, in this case ‘units of measurement’ which for you has somehow become substituted for the idea of comparision-as-such. That’s fine, I don’t expect you to understand any of this. I’ve already made my point and refutation of your claim, and you have already chosen not to respond to that. To each his own.
Yes we know you’re another subjectivity bro. We were just talking about you in another thread
Just to beat the dead horse here, why don’t you explain precisely how the size of the universe leads to the size of the cup on my desk without “affecting it in a causal sense”. Go ahead, I’ll wait.
Another brilliant evasion. Well played =D> =D>
We will add argumentation and debate (not even to speak of intellectual honesty) to the list of things that are not among your strengths.
Saying that my cup of coffee holds 16oz of coffee and this fact is not altered by the size of the universe expanding or contracting, doesn’t make me an “objectivist”. Whatever that would even mean. I am a truth-ist, if that even needs to be a term. And I have disproven your silly claims several times here, you continue to fail to respond to any of the points. So… cheers [-o< :-"
Carry on 
It’s almost like you’re calling a vacuum the strong force.
It’s almost like everyone here has no idea what they’re even talking about.
This solar system was set up by greater intelligence.
The evidence is right in front of you everyday.
The moon has what’s called a parallax orbit.
This means that it rotates like the earth, but so synchronously with the earth so that we never see its other side.
By all accounts it’s a miracle.
Most people think the light is a shadow of the earth.
That’s only on eclipses.
The shadow quality is caused by the sun without the earth involved at all.
These are the types of things that can wake people up to how finely tuned life can be sometimes.
All this makes people wonder in awe.
Do be awestruck by existence …
Be oblivion.
Existence is a temptress.
Gravity bro
You do you I suppose. Yet you missed the most significant ‘coincidence’ of our solar system.
It is.
No, eclipses are when the moon casts a shadow on the earth. The phases of the moon are when the earth casts a shadow on the moon.
Grow up already.
Only you bro, only you.
You are truly a unique wonder to us all.
Have they made any improvements to anti-psychotic pills lately? I’ve heard the side effects are brutal
Can we go back to “no one here knows what they’re talking about”?
And think about this:
What is the REAL coincidence in our solar system that is “beyond scientific-rational explanation”?
Tantalus. Tantalizing.
Our solar system was intelligently designed
The question is what are you going to do with that knowledge.
God didn’t make it. Beings billions of years older than us made it.
You have no way of knowing that, so stop lying.
Just another silly religitard who thinks his own beliefs = absolute proof of what reality is. And as usual feels zero need to justify or explain why.
Your form of religion is called dogmatism or ideological extremism. You are unable to distinguish between ideas in your head and what we can reasonably know and validate out in the world.
Either that or just trolling.
Yeah, I suspect just trolling
Do you have any clue, from what you’d call randomness a parallax moon actually is by odds alone?
It’s astronomical…. Don’t mind the pun.
What are the odds on eclipses that the distance of the sun and the moon from the earth make perfect coverage for lunar and solar eclipses?
I’m not trolling. Use your brain for a second.
It’s proof of intelligent design.
Some think it’s god ….
I think it’s an alien race.
God would never cause the mechanism and the three structural problems. We’re in a Nintendo game with no programmer.
What if the aliens never rebelled against God and always recognize every self as other and vice versa? What if we’re the problem?
There’s no doubt that a parallax moon in a system on a planet where the moon and the sun during eclipses have perfect coverage of each other is intelligently designed.
The statistics for that happening are beyond astronomical.
There’s zero doubt that this solar system was intelligently designed. From what or who though?
I’ve ruled out god though …. By definition, god doesn’t make mistakes.
So I turn to an extraterrestrial species that didn’t know about the mechanism or the three structural problems of existence.
That’s why I’m so lonely…
The aliens didn’t even get me.
Well they understand it. It’s just that you have to think about it while you’re playing piano & dedicating a song to me. Then they’ll hear what you’re thinking.
Then they harvest the chemicals and kill the entire planet.
So maybe don’t do that.
My encryption code for dedicating a song to you is giving me my computer password. I can’t get into it. It’s been in my closet for over a year.