Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 91 (8839 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-26-2018 4:05 AM
270 online now:
caffeine, ICANT, PaulK, Phat (AdminPhat) (4 members, 266 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Calvin
Post Volume:
Total: 832,481 Year: 7,304/29,783 Month: 1,528/1,708 Week: 419/474 Day: 8/68 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
4546
47
4849
...
57NextFF
Author Topic:   Creation
ICANT
Member
Posts: 5851
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 691 of 843 (832955)
05-15-2018 2:30 AM
Reply to: Message 687 by NoNukes
05-14-2018 6:24 AM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Hi NoNukes

NoNukes writes:

The mass/energy was there before the stars formed.

According to the standard theory all energy and mass in the observed and unobserved universe existed at T=0-43 and was about the size of a pin point.

The first stars did not exist until about 100 million years after T=0-43.

The quarks and leptons were amongst the first particles to appear. but atoms did not appear for another million years.

My question still is how could these atoms get together to form anything if the space between them had been expanding at near the speed of light and some say faster than light since T=0-43?

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 687 by NoNukes, posted 05-14-2018 6:24 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 694 by Modulous, posted 05-15-2018 1:57 PM ICANT has not yet responded
 Message 695 by NoNukes, posted 05-15-2018 5:17 PM ICANT has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10608
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 692 of 843 (832957)
05-15-2018 4:46 AM
Reply to: Message 690 by ICANT
05-15-2018 1:31 AM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
ICANT writes:

The moving walkway was never represented to mimic the universe and space as I said in my post.

Yes, that was the original plan. It was not you who suggested the stretching road.

Stile writes:


I'll try to explain with an example.

Let's imagine a rubber road that expands as Tom walks along it.

If they are not relevant to the topic, just what is the point of even talking about airports?

My question still is how could these atoms get together to form anything if the space between them had been expanding at near the speed of light and some say faster than light since T=0-43?

Space was not expanding at the speed of light. That point has been explained several times. If you care to understand, I would recommend looking back on the posts that discuss this. I'd also suggest dropping your non-stretching roads that don't match what any is saying. They seem to be confusing you.

I'll try it one more time.

The rate of expansion is about 70 km/hour per megaparsec. That means that when we are looking at huge distances, we can see separations from us that are increasing at light speed.

One megaparsec is about 3 * 10^22 meters.
On the other hand, an atom is about 10^-10 meters.
According to Hubble's law, the expansion of things within an atomic distance would be about 10^-30 meters per second. That means in 10^20 seconds, a time great than the age of the universe, quarks near enough to each other to be in the same nucleus would separate about the width of an atom. That tiny rate of expansion means that quarks that are near each other are not being stretched apart at any appreciable speed due to expansion. AND the strong nuclear force would pull those quarks together anyway. There is absolutely no problem with quarks separating due to the expansion of the universe.

I am sure that this math and logic is an utter waste of your time, but maybe someone else will benefit.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World.

Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith

No it is based on math I studied in sixth grade, just plain old addition, substraction and multiplication. -- ICANT


This message is a reply to:
 Message 690 by ICANT, posted 05-15-2018 1:31 AM ICANT has not yet responded

    
Stile
Member
Posts: 3168
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 693 of 843 (832960)
05-15-2018 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 680 by ICANT
05-11-2018 8:14 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe

I noticed I confusingly didn't increase the time value in the charts I've made. I've gone back and updated them now. Hopefully things look a little clearer now.
I was also referring to Tom's position as the time value a bit in my original post. I fixed that too.

This didn't affect the positional values at all (those were correct).
And definitely didn't affect the point of the example. However, hopefully that point is clearer now without the confusing errors in the table!


ICANT writes:

I am not sure but I think you got your thought experiment a little wrong.

No, I don't think so. At least, your post doesn't indicate a way that it's wrong to me.

Perhaps we can start from a position of agreement and see where any issues arise from there?

You have been in airports that have moving floors I will assume.

Yes. I know what you're talking about.

Your rubber road would be like the moving floor as you travel on the moving floor you gain just as much distance as the person in front of you.

No. This is incorrect.

Here's the first table again with both Tom and the truck both being stationary starting 10 yards apart as the rubber road expands:

quote:
Here's how it looks for 10 seconds:

Time (s)Tom (yards)Truck (yards)Distance between Tom and Truck (yards)
0010.0010.00
1011.0011.00
2012.1012.10
3013.3113.31
4014.6414.64
5016.1116.11
6017.7217.72
7019.4919.49
8021.4421.44
9023.5823.58
10025.9425.94

So, after 10s we can see that Tom is now almost 26 yards away from his truck!


As you can see, here we have Tom is stationary and the truck is stationary. Yet the distance between them keeps increasing as time goes by.
This would not happen on an airport's moving sidewalk.
On a non-expanding, moving sidewalk, stationary Tom and his stationary truck would remain 10 yards away from each other as the sidewalk rolled along regardless of us waiting 10s or any amount of time (until one hit the 'end of the line' of course.)

This would be our first possible 'position of agreement.'
Do you understand how comparing my stretching rubber road is different from a moving sidewalk?

If yes, then great, the rest of this post should hopefully make more sense to you.
If no, then don't worry about the rest of this post as it hinges on your understanding of the above concept.
If no, just ask questions about the above and we can hopefully reach a position of agreement before moving forward.

If that person stands still you will catch up to them If you are moving on the moving floor.

On a moving sidewalk, yes.

On my rubber road, this only worked for Tom when the truck started out at 10 yards away.
When the truck was 20 yards away, the truck remained stationary and Tom moved towards it. However, Tom couldn't reach his truck and eventually only got further and further away from the truck, even though Tom kept moving towards the truck.

The reason for this difference is the expansion of the rubber road.

When the truck was 10 yards away, Tom's movement could overcome the expansion of the rubber road.
When the truck was 20 yards away, Tom's movement could not overcome the expansion of the rubber road.

Such a difference depending on how far away Tom's truck originally is from him would never happen on an airport's moving sidewalk.

Edited by Stile, : Corrected time value in table.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 680 by ICANT, posted 05-11-2018 8:14 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 696 by ICANT, posted 05-17-2018 6:28 PM Stile has responded

    
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7736
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 694 of 843 (832970)
05-15-2018 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 691 by ICANT
05-15-2018 2:30 AM


expansion, how did God do it?
The quarks and leptons were amongst the first particles to appear. but atoms did not appear for another million years.

Quarks appeared very early. It wasn't very long after that (within minutes) that they would have started to bond to form protons and neutrons. The universe was expanding rapidly - but things were very very close together still so things such as the strong nuclear force would be able to overcome the expansion of the universe to form bonds.

Within a few hundred thousand years, things had cooled down enough that electrons didn't have the energy to resist being captured by protons and neutrons and thus atoms formed.

My question still is how could these atoms get together to form anything if the space between them had been expanding at near the speed of light and some say faster than light since T=0-43?

The rate of expansion depends on distance. There would be some quarks that were too far away from other quarks and thus the space was growing between them faster than the speed of light. But some quarks - and later protons and neutrons, were close enough to one another that the space was not expanding fast enough to keep them apart.

Are we ready to move on to the next part of your OP?

quote:
...we can move on to how God might have accomplished that event.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 691 by ICANT, posted 05-15-2018 2:30 AM ICANT has not yet responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10608
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 695 of 843 (832981)
05-15-2018 5:17 PM
Reply to: Message 691 by ICANT
05-15-2018 2:30 AM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
ICANT writes:

According to the standard theory all energy and mass in the observed an unobserved universe existed at T=0-43 and was about the size of a pin point.

The first stars did not exist until about 100 million years after T=0-43.


NoNukes writes:

The mass/energy was there before the stars formed.

Right. The energy existed from the time the universe was tiny. That means that gravity was present. So there was no obstacle to gravity holding quarks within some vicinity. But in addition to gravity there were three other forces present including the strong nuclear force. So there was no obstacle to quarks finding each other. As soon as the amount of energy was small enough, the quarks that happened to be nearby could join together.

Let's talk some more about the picture of the universe prior to 300,000 years after T=0. The universe was opaque to light, so not even light could travel very far. It was only after the electrons cooled down to a certain temperature that the light could escape and the universe became transparent. So quarks and stuff were not flying away at light speed prior to that point.

Beyond that, your idea that the expansion was faster than the speed of light is completely flawed. Try reading some of the posts by Modulus, Stile, and myself on this topic. You are not tasked with accepting the picture as the truth. Just with understanding the position you disagree with.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World.

Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith

No it is based on math I studied in sixth grade, just plain old addition, substraction and multiplication. -- ICANT


This message is a reply to:
 Message 691 by ICANT, posted 05-15-2018 2:30 AM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 699 by ICANT, posted 05-18-2018 1:21 AM NoNukes has not yet responded

    
ICANT
Member
Posts: 5851
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 696 of 843 (833146)
05-17-2018 6:28 PM
Reply to: Message 693 by Stile
05-15-2018 10:20 AM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Hi Stile

Stile writes:

Do you understand how comparing my stretching rubber road is different from a moving sidewalk?

That would work only if the rubber road was anchored where Tom is standing. If it is anchored 10 yards behind Tom the part he is standing on will be moving.

This won't work like space expanding.

quote:
The universe is not expanding out from a centre into space; rather, the whole universe is expanding and it is doing so equally at all places, as far as we can tell.
http://math.ucr.edu/...aez/physics/Relativity/GR/centre.html

That really sounds like an oxymoron to me.

No center yet expanding equally at all places. But I find it in many places.

If the pin point expanded equally at all places it would have expanded equally in all directions from the pin point. Therefore the pin point would be the center.

But your road can only go in one direction.

Since your road or my walkway does not do that we should dispense with them to the garbage can.


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 693 by Stile, posted 05-15-2018 10:20 AM Stile has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 697 by NoNukes, posted 05-17-2018 6:59 PM ICANT has responded
 Message 698 by Modulous, posted 05-17-2018 7:52 PM ICANT has responded
 Message 704 by Stile, posted 05-18-2018 12:38 PM ICANT has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10608
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 697 of 843 (833147)
05-17-2018 6:59 PM
Reply to: Message 696 by ICANT
05-17-2018 6:28 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
That would work only if the rubber road was anchored where Tom is standing. If it is anchored 10 yards behind Tom the part he is standing on will be moving.

Let's be clear about what you are saying. What is "it" that won't work if the rubber road is not anchored at the point where Tom is standing.

Because that is not how the universe works

quote:
The universe is not expanding out from a centre into space; rather, the whole universe is expanding and it is doing so equally at all places, as far as we can tell.

The universe is not anchored in that way. I cannot make sense out of what you said, so I am asking for you to explain what you mean.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World.

Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith

No it is based on math I studied in sixth grade, just plain old addition, substraction and multiplication. -- ICANT


This message is a reply to:
 Message 696 by ICANT, posted 05-17-2018 6:28 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 700 by ICANT, posted 05-18-2018 2:04 AM NoNukes has responded

    
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7736
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 698 of 843 (833151)
05-17-2018 7:52 PM
Reply to: Message 696 by ICANT
05-17-2018 6:28 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
If the pin point expanded equally at all places it would have expanded equally in all directions from the pin point. Therefore the pin point would be the center.

Problem is - is that there is no pin point. It expanded. Where I am sat right now is as much a part of that pin point as where you are sat, as Mars is as Alpha Centauri is etc. You can point to the left, point to the right, point up and point down and you will be pointing at what you call the pin point.

That's why in whatever direction you look at - you see the CMBR. It is the earliest moments of the big bang and it isn't 'in the middle', or it would only exist in one direction - it's around us. Because there is no centre.

It's kind of hard to imagine 3D topology - hence why 2D or even 1D topology (such as the road) are used.

So imagine a spherical balloon the size of a pinpoint. All that exists however, is the surface of the balloon. There is no 'interior' to the balloon (that would be 3D and we're talking 2D only here), as the balloon inflates there is nowhere on the surface of that balloon that is the centre. There is no centre to the surface of a sphere! If you say 'the centre is the pin point' we would retort - 'but that's everywhere'. If you insist that the centre is in the middle of the sphere - then you are saying that the centre of the universe is not in the universe.

In one dimension this would be like the surface of a rubber band. There is no centre where the band is stretching 'from'. It's all stretching from every point along it.Even if the 'resting state' of the rubber band was only a pin point in size, and its now 100 million light years in length - the small size in the past is not the centre.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 696 by ICANT, posted 05-17-2018 6:28 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 701 by ICANT, posted 05-18-2018 3:51 AM Modulous has responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 5851
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 699 of 843 (833153)
05-18-2018 1:21 AM
Reply to: Message 695 by NoNukes
05-15-2018 5:17 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Hi NoNukes,

NoNukes writes:

Right. The energy existed from the time the universe was tiny. That means that gravity was present.

If gravity existed and was holding everything together when everything in the universe was the size of a pin head, what mechanism caused it to begin to expand?

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 695 by NoNukes, posted 05-15-2018 5:17 PM NoNukes has not yet responded

    
ICANT
Member
Posts: 5851
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 700 of 843 (833155)
05-18-2018 2:04 AM
Reply to: Message 697 by NoNukes
05-17-2018 6:59 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Hi NoNukes,

NoNukes writes:

Let's be clear about what you are saying. What is "it" that won't work if the rubber road is not anchored at the point where Tom is standing.

Stiles numbers.

If the road was not stretching at the point Tom was standing he would remain in the same position until he moved towards the truck.
When he covered the first 3 yards the road would be stretching under him and he would be moving more than the 3 yards because he would move as far as the road stretched plus his 3 yards. A rubber road would stretch not expand.

NoNukes writes:

The universe is not anchored in that way. I cannot make sense out of what you said, so I am asking for you to explain what you mean.

According to the Standard theory the universe existed and was about the size of a pin point at the earliest we can know anything.

At this time some mechanism caused the pin point to begin to expand. If all space expanded it would have expanded in every direction equally, symmetrically.


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 697 by NoNukes, posted 05-17-2018 6:59 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 702 by NoNukes, posted 05-18-2018 9:49 AM ICANT has not yet responded

    
ICANT
Member
Posts: 5851
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 701 of 843 (833163)
05-18-2018 3:51 AM
Reply to: Message 698 by Modulous
05-17-2018 7:52 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Hi Mod,

Mod writes:

Problem is - is that there is no pin point. It expanded.

Did the pin point expand or did the material that the universe is composed of expand from that point?

Mod writes:

That's why in whatever direction you look at - you see the CMBR. It is the earliest moments of the big bang and it isn't 'in the middle', or it would only exist in one direction - it's around us. Because there is no centre.

Why would you or anyone think the earliest moments of the big bang would be at the center of the universe?

The material that is the farthest from the pin point is the oldest because it was the first material that left the pin point. Then the material that left a few seconds later would be closer to the pin point etc.

The material that is the closest to the pin point was in the center of the pin point. But it would be a long way from the pin point. That pin point is getting bigger and bigger all the time. That could be what is call the biggest black hole in the universe. Everything has been expanding away from that pin point and leaving nothing but space behind.

Mod writes:

So imagine a spherical balloon the size of a pinpoint. All that exists however, is the surface of the balloon. There is no 'interior' to the balloon

Do you really want me to believe there is no 'interior' to a balloon?

There is an interior to the universe just as there is an interior of the earth.

Everything did not leave the pin point at the same moment as the space between each smallest part of energy that had space between had the space growing between them.

I don't like the balloon as it will not make the same expansion that the universe made.

I was searching for s good example and I found one I think fits the same thing the standard theory says happened. You can find it at http://www.wwu.edu/skywise/hubble_pudding.html.

It will expand as soon as you reach the site. To see it expand click on big crunch and it will disappear. Then click on big bang to make it expand.

Notice this starts off with nothing but a black screen. But what if the screen was not there?

As you can notice the raisins get further apart as the pudding expands. The raisins will be scattered all the way to the starting point of the expansion. With the exception the ones closer to the starting point of the expansion would leave an area without any raisins. If the pudding were to grow larger and larger the raisins near the center would leave behind a larger space that would have no raisins.

You could cut the pudding and you would find raisins scattered throughout the pudding. With a large space at the middle with no raisins.

The only problem with that is that the pudding could only be so big. The universe is different in that it has no limits it can expand.

Providing space is expanding equally everywhere symmetrically there would be a very large space that is growing constantly where the pin point used to be. I suppose that space would have to be filled with Dark Matter if it exists.

Mod writes:

If you insist that the centre is in the middle of the sphere - then you are saying that the centre of the universe is not in the universe.

But even your balloon has a center as it has a diameter. Half of that diameter is the radius. The radius could be placed anywhere from the center around in the balloon. Now you say the balloon has no interior, but it does but it contains only air.

Are you saying the universe expanded as the balloon when filled with air? In other words there is nothing between the fabric of the universe and the point expansion began. Is that what you are saying? The only way you could get that is if an explosion took place in the middle of the pin point. But that is not what the standard theory supports.

God Bless


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 698 by Modulous, posted 05-17-2018 7:52 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 703 by Modulous, posted 05-18-2018 10:26 AM ICANT has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10608
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 702 of 843 (833177)
05-18-2018 9:49 AM
Reply to: Message 700 by ICANT
05-18-2018 2:04 AM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
If the road was not stretching at the point Tom was standing he would remain in the same position until he moved towards the truck.

The road is stretching at every point which kinda moots this if you are providing. But my question is about the "anchor" you claimed was required. I do not see a single thing in your response related to my question. Is it because that idea of an anchor is just a mistake on your part?

If all space expanded it would have expanded in every direction equally, symmetrically.

The expansion is believed to be extremely isotropic, but this does not explain the ideas that you derive from it.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World.

Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith

No it is based on math I studied in sixth grade, just plain old addition, substraction and multiplication. -- ICANT


This message is a reply to:
 Message 700 by ICANT, posted 05-18-2018 2:04 AM ICANT has not yet responded

    
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7736
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 703 of 843 (833179)
05-18-2018 10:26 AM
Reply to: Message 701 by ICANT
05-18-2018 3:51 AM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Did the pin point expand or did the material that the universe is composed of expand from that point?

The pinpoint expanded.

The material that is the farthest from the pin point is the oldest because it was the first material that left the pin point. Then the material that left a few seconds later would be closer to the pin point etc.

All material is the same age. When we look at the CMBR we are seeing the universe at its youngest.

The material that is the closest to the pin point was in the center of the pin point.

And that would be everywhere.

Everything has been expanding away from that pin point and leaving nothing but space behind.

But that's not what we observe. Otherwise we could tell the direction of the pin point.

Do you really want me to believe there is no 'interior' to a balloon?

There is no interior to the 2 dimensional surface of a balloon, no. There is left-right and up-down but no in-out. Until you can understand the principle in 1 or 2 dimensions, you haven't a hope of understanding it in 3.

Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 701 by ICANT, posted 05-18-2018 3:51 AM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 707 by ICANT, posted 05-18-2018 1:42 PM Modulous has responded

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 3168
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 704 of 843 (833202)
05-18-2018 12:38 PM
Reply to: Message 696 by ICANT
05-17-2018 6:28 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
ICANT writes:

That would work only if the rubber road was anchored where Tom is standing. If it is anchored 10 yards behind Tom the part he is standing on will be moving.

But the part that Tom's standing on IS moving.
The part the truck is standing on IS moving as well.
All of the road IS moving because all of the road is expanding.

Just like how if Tom and the Truck were both on a moving-airport-sidewalk... they would both be moving as the sidewalk has a constant motion - but the distance between Tom and the Truck would stay the same (as long as Tom and the Truck are stationary on the moving sidewalk).
If you were standing off the sidewalk, you would see both Tom and the Truck moving in the same direction. Even though both Tom and the Truck are not moving in relation to the moving-sidewalk they're stationary on.

Here, Tom and the Truck are both on a moving-expanding-roadway... they are both moving as the roadway has a constant expansion - but here the distance between Tom and the Truck is changing because the constant expansion affects the roadway in between them. Even though both Tom and the Truck are stationary on the moving (due to it's expansion) road.
If you were standing off the roadway, you would see both Tom and the Truck moving apart from each other. Even though both Tom and the Truck are not moving in relation to the expanding-road they're stationary on.
If you were standing off the roadway behind Tom... you would see Tom moving away from you and the Truck moving away from you faster than Tom is.
If you were standing off the roadway between Tom and the Truck... you would see Tom moving away from you in one direction while the Truck moved away from you in the other direction.
If you were standing off the roadway behind the Truck (the far side of Tom).. you would see Tom moving away from you faster that the Truck is also moving away from you... both of them in the same direction.
In all of these scenarios... both Tom and the Truck are stationary on the expanding road.

My numbers don't start at Tom because Tom isn't moving.
My numbers merely pick Tom as a "reference point" and therefore the "reference point" isn't moving (because I've chosen to define it as such).

My "reference point" is sort of similar to what you're thinking of as an "anchor."
But not quite. An anchor would imply some sort of prevention of the expansion of the road.
A reference point definitely does not do this. A reference point is more like an "imaginary camera" from where you're viewing everything.

And yes, if we move my reference point to 10-yards-behind-Tom, on the road... then Tom will be moving away from the reference point (even though Tom isn't moving on the road... the road is just expanding) just as the truck is seen to move away from Tom even though both Tom and the Truck are not moving on the road.
But even this wouldn't change the Distance between Tom and Truck (yards) value in the table... it would merely change the other values which are used to calculate the Distance between Tom and Truck (yards) value:

Here's the original table again:

quote:
Here's how it looks for 10 seconds:

Time (s)Tom (yards)Truck (yards)Distance between Tom and Truck (yards)
0010.0010.00
1011.0011.00
2012.1012.10
3013.3113.31
4014.6414.64
5016.1116.11
6017.7217.72
7019.4919.49
8021.4421.44
9023.5823.58
10025.9425.94

So, after 10s we can see that Tom is now almost 26 yards away from his truck!


But if we moved the "reference point" off of Tom and put it 10-yards-behind-Tom, we would have this table:

Time (s)Tom (yards)Truck (yards)Distance between Tom and Truck (yards)
010.0020.0010.00
111.0022.0011.00
212.1024.2012.10
313.3126.6213.31
414.6429.2814.64
516.1132.2216.11
617.7235.4417.72
719.4938.9819.49
821.4442.8821.44
923.5847.1623.58
1025.9451.8825.94

As you can see, changing the reference point from being "at Tom's original location" to being "10 yards behind Tom" doesn't change the resulting Distance between Tom and Truck (yards) as the road expands. It simply makes the numbers and calculations longer to get to the same result. But being smart and choosing our reference point to be Tom's original location... it makes the calculations simpler.

This is as expected... no matter where you're "looking at" the situation (no matter where your "reference point" is...) it doesn't change the result of what's going on.

Here is a more in-depth explanations for the table's headings, just for clarity's sake:

Time (s) is simply time measured in seconds as time moves forward. This one should be easy to understand.

Tom (yards) is the distance Tom moves from his original reference point.
Tom's original reference point is an imaginary point I make up that "floats" above the road and indicates exactly where Tom originated.
This point is not affected by the road's expansion because it's not "on the road."
If we put a camera on this point above Tom and looked down at Tom... we would see Tom's head as Tom stands still... and the road expanding away behing him as well as expanding away in front of him.

For this table, as Tom doesn't move on the expanding roadway - this value never increases. That's why it's 0 for the whole table.

Truck (yards) is the distance the Truck is away from the initial reference point created above at Tom's original reference point.
This value will increase as the road between the Truck and Tom's original reference point expands.

Distance between Tom and Truck (yards) is the absolute distance between Tom and his Truck wherever they happen to be at that moment. Nothing to do with Tom's original reference point. It's a simple measurement.

For this table, since Tom and the Truck are both not moving on the road, this value will match the expansion of the road between Tom's original reference point and the Truck (the previous column).

This won't work like space expanding.

It's actually a perfect analogy for how space is expanding. Only in 2D instead of 3D.

Your inability to see it as such doesn't make the analogy wrong. It's an indication that your idea on how space expands is faulty.

ICANT writes:

ICANT's link writes:

The universe is not expanding out from a centre into space; rather, the whole universe is expanding and it is doing so equally at all places, as far as we can tell.


That really sounds like an oxymoron to me.

It is not if you understand how "expansion" works.

No center yet expanding equally at all places. But I find it in many places.

Not only should you find it in "many places" but you should find it in "all places." Just like you stated in the first sentence... equally at "all places."

If the pin point expanded equally at all places it would have expanded equally in all directions from the pin point. Therefore the pin point would be the center.

No.

Try this:

If the pin point expanded equally at all places it would have expanded equally in all directions from all pin points. Therefore any pin point (after the expansion) will be the centre. And, indeed, all pin-points (now) are "the centre" of what was.

I understand the conceptual error you're making. And it's the same conceptual error that makes you think my expanding-road-way isn't a good analogy.

It's not the expansion of the universe (or my expanding road-way) that's in error. It's your conceptual error.

If you want, I will help you understand the conceptual error you're making with my expanding-road-way analogy. Then (hopefully) you can apply this correction to your conception of the expansion of space.

But your road can only go in one direction.

Two directions, actually. In front and behind Tom. In front and behind the Truck.
2D example, two directions. We're just doing a simple example that limits our focus to that between Tom and the Truck. Because it's easier to understand the conceptual error you're making.

Since your road or my walkway does not do that we should dispense with them to the garbage can.

I agree that your walkway does not do that.

By my road DOES do that.
It is your conceptual error that is blocking you from seeing it.

We can continue to try and correct your conceptual error, if you wish.

Please ask questions about the road example. I will attempt to explain them to you as best I can.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 696 by ICANT, posted 05-17-2018 6:28 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 705 by ICANT, posted 05-18-2018 1:01 PM Stile has responded

    
ICANT
Member
Posts: 5851
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 705 of 843 (833208)
05-18-2018 1:01 PM
Reply to: Message 704 by Stile
05-18-2018 12:38 PM


Poor Tom:
Hi Stile,

Stile writes:

Here, Tom and the Truck are both on a moving-expanding-roadway... they are both moving as the roadway has a constant expansion - but here the distance between Tom and the Truck is changing because the constant expansion affects the roadway in between them. Even though both Tom and the Truck are stationary on the moving (due to it's expansion) road.

A rubber road would not expand like space in all directions at one time.

A rubber road would only get longer in the direction it was stretched from a stationary starting point and would eventually reach a breaking point. Try a rubber band and see how far you can stretch it.

Tom would either eventually reach his truck or die trying by the end that broke between him and his truck snapped back and struck him like the rubber band did your hand.

This turkey is done.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 704 by Stile, posted 05-18-2018 12:38 PM Stile has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 706 by DrJones*, posted 05-18-2018 1:42 PM ICANT has acknowledged this reply
 Message 708 by Stile, posted 05-18-2018 1:47 PM ICANT has not yet responded
 Message 711 by Phat, posted 05-18-2018 3:04 PM ICANT has responded

    
RewPrev1
...
4546
47
4849
...
57NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018