Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 82 (8871 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-16-2018 10:43 AM
220 online now:
Aussie, Meddle, PaulK, ringo, Son of Man, Tangle (6 members, 214 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Son of Man
Post Volume:
Total: 842,050 Year: 16,873/29,783 Month: 861/1,956 Week: 364/331 Day: 23/69 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
5354
55
56575859Next
Author Topic:   Falsifying a young Universe. (re: Supernova 1987A)
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19666
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.9


(1)
Message 811 of 879 (841716)
10-20-2018 11:15 AM
Reply to: Message 809 by creation
10-20-2018 10:10 AM


Re: Voyager 1 enters new space ... Voyager 2 follows ...
If you look at this pic,

https://www.sciencenews.org/...les/images/voyager_oort_0.jpg

you see a little yellow dot in the center. Some folks include the Oort cloud and comets whose orbits involve the sun as basically part of the solar system. (either way it goes to showing how far voyager has gone)

So far I guess we could say Voyager has went approx to the edges of the yellow dot!! So, in the universe, that is nowhere. Yes, they experienced some surprises even in the yellow dot. Whoopee doo.

Glad you followed the link and looked at the other letters. Funny how you are now using he Oort Cloud when it is outside your "fishbowl" to make comments that are still as meaningless in terms of the validity of the current space-time model as your previous comments on the size of your "fishbowl" ...

In the SN lines you drew, one line goes from the edge of the ring to the center..right? Then you use that line with lines drawn to earth...right? If so there is a problem here that is fatal.

We do not know what time is like where the star is. ...

As shown by the formulas, time is irrelevant where the star is. Thus any argument based on time is irrelevant.

... So any line from the center of the star area to the rings or whatever would represent unknown time and space. ...

And time in that sector is still irrelevant, as shown by the equations.

... You cannot draw a line to earth, and then measure the whole thing as if it represented time and space here. ...

Which, amusingly, is not what was done, nor is it how the equations work, and it is not what playing the game shows. It appears you are functionally incapable (cognitive dissonance?) of understanding this.

... That is religion. Playing games.

I think that covers your points.

Nope. Denial, non-comprehension, and unevidenced assertions are not arguments that cover points supported by evidence.

Getting back to the Voyagers ... Voyager 2 is almost outside the sun's protective bubble gives us an update (October 9, 2018):

quote:
The Voyager 2 spacecraft, which left Earth more than 40 years ago to survey the outer planets, just detected a 5 percent uptick in these cosmic refugees, NASA announced. The new measurements bring a long-expected sign that the probe is approaching the edge of the sun’s protective influence, which for many researchers defines the line between interplanetary and interstellar space. Crossing that boundary will provide a valuable second data point in the quest to determine its shape, but precisely when the probe will leave the solar system remains unknown.

"We're seeing a change in the environment around Voyager 2, there's no doubt about that," said Voyager Project Scientist Ed Stone of Caltech in a press release. "We're going to learn a lot in the coming months, but we still don't know when we'll reach the heliopause. We're not there yet—that's one thing I can say with confidence."

The rate of energetic interstellar particles detected by
Voyager 2 started to rise at the end of August 2018.
Each point represents a 6-hour average.
Charlie Wood using NASA data

If you feel like you’ve heard this story before, it’s because you have. The craft’s speedier sibling, Voyager 1, returned data showing a similar increase of interstellar cosmic rays in May of 2012. In addition to light, the sun also spits out a plasma of charged particles in all directions. Too hot to contain, this solar wind streams outward past the planets, pushing back on of the interstellar particles and creating a bubble researchers call the heliosphere. Three months later, on August 25th, Voyager’s aging instruments detected a drop in solar particles and a further rise in interstellar particles—strong evidence that it had left the heliosphere at last.

A leaky balloon

“All these boundaries could be moving with solar activity, and we really don't know where they are,” says Merav Opher, an astronomer who studies the shape of the heliosphere at Boston University. At more active points in the sun’s 11-year cycle, such as the one we’re in now, the sun blows the heliosphere up like a balloon, pushing the boundary out by a handful of AU over the course of a couple years. Later in the cycle, a less active sun lets it deflate.

The shape of the heliosphere may not be as uniform as its name implies either. “In general, nature doesn't have very smooth boundaries. The question is how bumpy and at what scale,” Opher says. Her past simulations have suggested it may even be shaped more like the wake of a boat than a sphere.

Voyager 1’s close-up look at one point of that boundary brought a number of revelations. For one, the heliosphere is leakier than physicists had thought, equipped with a magnetic connection that allows an exchange of particles in some areas. Voyager 1 also revealed surprising features just past the edge. The probe has “surfed” a series of outwardly directed pulses triggered by sudden spurts of matter from the sun, and has detected an unexpectedly gentle pileup of interstellar material, suggesting that the solar system careens through the galaxy less wildly than astronomers had thought. Opher is even more excited for Voyager 2, since—unlike Voyager 1—it still has a working plasma instrument, and should be able to record first-of-a-kind data of both the boundary and the interstellar medium.

Solving that local mystery could have universal ramifications. Astronomers can see that the “astrospheres” around other stars also make waves in the space around them, but their plasma remains too sparse to probe directly. Figuring out how the sun shapes our neighborhood and protects us from some cosmic rays will be an essential step toward understanding where, and if, the same process is happening elsewhere.

“If you want to study how life develops in other stellar systems, you need to understand how other astrospheres behave,” Opher says. “Let's start in our own backyard.”


Start with what you know, build a model from that knowledge and then use it to make predictions that can be tested ... how science works.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 809 by creation, posted 10-20-2018 10:10 AM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 814 by creation, posted 10-21-2018 9:12 AM RAZD has responded

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 3964
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


(2)
Message 812 of 879 (841724)
10-20-2018 3:19 PM
Reply to: Message 806 by Son Goku
10-19-2018 4:35 PM


Re: Confusing
Because Jesus, silly.

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53

The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286

Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134


This message is a reply to:
 Message 806 by Son Goku, posted 10-19-2018 4:35 PM Son Goku has not yet responded

    
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1120
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 4.0


(2)
Message 813 of 879 (841741)
10-20-2018 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 808 by creation
10-20-2018 9:55 AM


Re: Confusing
Interesting claims. Let's look at the first one. So we see light bent where a star is. You claim that star is distance X. Tell us how you think that the bent light fits your distance.

Remember, if the star distance was not known, neither would it;s size, etc etc be know. So yes there is bending of light possibly caused by gravity of some sort out there. That would be true at almost any size and distance I suspect?


Alright, let's go even simpler.

Of all the different curves we see stars move along, every single curve is consistent with general relativity. Even ignoring how far the star is, the actual shape of the curves are correct and match those predicted by General Relativity.

We never see a curve that General Relativity cannot predict and there are an infinite number of such curves in principal.

This is just like when somebody kicks a ball, seeing it move in a helix up into the air, stop and do three circles is impossible under Newtonian gravity, regardless of the distance the ball is from us.

Secondly, the colours coming out of the stars are exactly those predicted by stellar models. Out of the continuous range of the electromagnetic spectrum we only see those colours that are predicted by our models for what stars are made of.

Being wrong about distance isn't a factor in either of these.

Edited by Son Goku, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 808 by creation, posted 10-20-2018 9:55 AM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 815 by creation, posted 10-21-2018 9:16 AM Son Goku has responded

  
creation
Member
Posts: 437
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 814 of 879 (841746)
10-21-2018 9:12 AM
Reply to: Message 811 by RAZD
10-20-2018 11:15 AM


Re: Voyager 1 enters new space ... Voyager 2 follows ...
Oort cloud....the possibly imaginary cloud helps show how small the area of what we normally think of as the solar system really is.

Bottom line, people that have not even been a light day away, and who do not even so much as know what time is either, are in no position to teach us about the unknown time in far far space.

Your formulas to measure stars depend on the space and time being equal. That is not known. We do know what it is like on earth and the area of the solar system. Not there.

Voyager 2 getting out there also. Interesting Let's wait and see if the edges of the solar system on that side yield similar results. No use speculating.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 811 by RAZD, posted 10-20-2018 11:15 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 816 by RAZD, posted 10-21-2018 10:04 AM creation has responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 437
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 815 of 879 (841747)
10-21-2018 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 813 by Son Goku
10-20-2018 5:24 PM


Re: Confusing
OK, so if we do ignore how far a star is, show us one star that examples your claim..?

Colors from stars: The problem is if we were only able to detect say, 50% of what is out there (or any other % than 100%) then what we see streaming into the fishbowl would not represent what is out there in any meaningful way.

We may only be seeing part of the picture, of things we happen to be able to detect.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 813 by Son Goku, posted 10-20-2018 5:24 PM Son Goku has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 817 by Son Goku, posted 10-21-2018 3:48 PM creation has responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19666
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.9


(2)
Message 816 of 879 (841753)
10-21-2018 10:04 AM
Reply to: Message 814 by creation
10-21-2018 9:12 AM


Re: Voyager 1 enters new space ... Voyager 2 follows ...
Oort cloud....the possibly imaginary cloud helps show how small the area of what we normally think of as the solar system really is.

Bottom line, people that have not even been a light day away, and who do not even so much as know what time is either, are in no position to teach us about the unknown time in far far space.

Still irrelevant.

As long as the current space-time model is validated and there is no evidence of it being invalid, no reason to involve made-up fantasy (there never is when using science as science deals with facts and fact based concepts), then it rational to use the current space-time model as the best known explanation for the universe. It would be irrational to discard it because it doesn't model fantasy scenarios.

Irrational fantasy cannot be tested, especially when the proponent of the fantasy keeps making up stuff.

However, the current space-time model can be tested and is being tested and to date all data conform to the current space-time model. That is what makes it rational to accept it as the best current explanation of the universe.

Your formulas to measure stars depend on the space and time being equal. ...

Please show me where time enters these equations (D is distance):

(Dstar to ring to us) ~= (Dstar to us + Dstar to ring)

and thus

(Dstar to ring to us - Dstar to us) ~= ((Dstar to us + Dstar to ring) - Dstar to us)

= (Dstar to ring)

This is why we know the distance to SN1984A is not dependent on time being the same at the star. Time only enters the picture when the light reaches us, here on earth, here in the present time, well within the "fishbowl" and thus well within the known and validated space-time portion of the universe.

Voyager 2 getting out there also. Interesting Let's wait and see if the edges of the solar system on that side yield similar results. No use speculating.

No use speculating on space and time being different in the far reaches of the universe.

However, theory is not mere speculation, it is fact-based logical deduction developed to explain the current known facts and then make predictions that can be tested for validity.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 814 by creation, posted 10-21-2018 9:12 AM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 818 by creation, posted 10-21-2018 6:00 PM RAZD has responded

  
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1120
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 4.0


(1)
Message 817 of 879 (841765)
10-21-2018 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 815 by creation
10-21-2018 9:16 AM


Re: Confusing
OK, so if we do ignore how far a star is, show us one star that examples your claim..?

I answered that in the post you are responding to:
Son Goku writes:

Of all the different curves we see stars move along, every single curve is consistent with general relativity.


So that is all of them. Every star.

Colors from stars: The problem is if we were only able to detect say, 50% of what is out there (or any other % than 100%) then what we see streaming into the fishbowl would not represent what is out there in any meaningful way.

This can be applied to anything, even a duck. A duck you see at the park might be only the 8% of the duck's true 14-dimensional Lovecraftian body that protrudes into our reality. The stuff we can see is adequately explained by duck biology. So one goes along with that explanation for now.

Sure there might be and probably is stuff we cannot detect, but what we see matches exactly what the stellar models predict. So at least those observations can be explained consistently in terms of current stellar theory. Scientifically there is nothing else one can say, until somebody observes the stars doing something stellar theory can't explain.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 815 by creation, posted 10-21-2018 9:16 AM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 819 by creation, posted 10-21-2018 6:03 PM Son Goku has responded
 Message 824 by Phat, posted 10-22-2018 12:02 PM Son Goku has not yet responded

  
creation
Member
Posts: 437
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 818 of 879 (841782)
10-21-2018 6:00 PM
Reply to: Message 816 by RAZD
10-21-2018 10:04 AM


Re: Voyager 1 enters new space ... Voyager 2 follows ...
Current space time model in many ways may be validated...on earth, and the solar system.

How shallow.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 816 by RAZD, posted 10-21-2018 10:04 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 821 by RAZD, posted 10-21-2018 11:10 PM creation has not yet responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 437
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 819 of 879 (841783)
10-21-2018 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 817 by Son Goku
10-21-2018 3:48 PM


Re: Confusing
Name a star with a curve that supports GR then, let's have a lookie.

As for your duck parable...GONG. No. A duck is on earth. We can get hold of it. A star is not. Now if ducks exited only far away from the solar system, and we only ever saw them in light as it entered the fishbowl here, well then you may have a point.
Until then, no quacking way.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 817 by Son Goku, posted 10-21-2018 3:48 PM Son Goku has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 820 by Son Goku, posted 10-21-2018 6:56 PM creation has responded

    
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1120
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 4.0


(1)
Message 820 of 879 (841785)
10-21-2018 6:56 PM
Reply to: Message 819 by creation
10-21-2018 6:03 PM


Re: Confusing
I don't see why tactile contact suddenly refutes the points you're making. Sure it is on Earth and you can get hold of it, but you still only have access to the parts of it that interact with either your senses or your observation equipment.

Either way what you observe might only be 10% of the totality of the thing. Just because something is spatially closer this general point doesn't go away.

Also the light that we do see perfectly matches stellar theory, until the time when somebody observes light or any other emission that doesn't match stellar theory, there is nothing else to say scientifically.

Name a star with a curve that supports GR then, let's have a lookie.

S0-38 near the Galactic core

Edited by Son Goku, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 819 by creation, posted 10-21-2018 6:03 PM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 822 by creation, posted 10-22-2018 9:12 AM Son Goku has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19666
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.9


(1)
Message 821 of 879 (841788)
10-21-2018 11:10 PM
Reply to: Message 818 by creation
10-21-2018 6:00 PM


Re: Voyager 1 enters new space ... Voyager 2 follows ...
Current space time model in many ways may be validated...on earth, and the solar system.

Indeed, glad you concede that point.

That validation of the current space-time model means we can have confidence that it projects beyond the data/evidence we know to predict what we shall find with further investigation. That further investigation then tests the predictions, and when they validate the model we proceed further. And this process continues until we find an anomaly, something that doesn't fit the predictions of the model.

It is only when test results don't match the model predictions that we need to consider modification or replacement with a new theory. Note that any new theory would have to incorporate all the information of the current space-time model plus the new information.

For instance relativity defaults to the Newton gravity formula in near earth applications and explains the actions previously explained by Newton's gravity formula. It also explains the orbit of Mercury that was an anomaly with Newton's formula.

How shallow.

Depth is irrelevant to the application of the model.

What this all means is that, yes, we only know a little about the universe. That leaves a lot of potential unknowns to discover, and that is an exciting prospect for science.

And it gets really exciting when anomalies appear. Anomalies discovered through application of science, not belief in some other nature.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 818 by creation, posted 10-21-2018 6:00 PM creation has not yet responded

  
creation
Member
Posts: 437
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 822 of 879 (841805)
10-22-2018 9:12 AM
Reply to: Message 820 by Son Goku
10-21-2018 6:56 PM


Re: Confusing
Stellar theory is born of religion. It stems from the beliefs of science. It is based on certain rules..fishbowl rules. So whatever they see is and must be interpreted according to the religion. The light they see coming into the fishbowl will look a certain way to them. That does not mean that what they can see (and they admit most of the universe is dark to them) is all that there is out there. Nor does it mean that time is the same out there. What we see take say, a day, could involve a much different level of time out there. Etc.

S0 38 So, rather than get into how far away and big they claim this light to be, can you tell us how it shows time is the same exactly? Redshifted light shows time is the same...how? Ha.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 820 by Son Goku, posted 10-21-2018 6:56 PM Son Goku has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 823 by ringo, posted 10-22-2018 11:54 AM creation has responded
 Message 827 by Son Goku, posted 10-22-2018 12:39 PM creation has responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 15577
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 823 of 879 (841812)
10-22-2018 11:54 AM
Reply to: Message 822 by creation
10-22-2018 9:12 AM


Re: Confusing
creation writes:

That does not mean that what they can see (and they admit most of the universe is dark to them) is all that there is out there. Nor does it mean that time is the same out there. What we see take say, a day, could involve a much different level of time out there. Etc.


To me, the obvious question is: How can YOU see outside the "fishbowl" to know that science is wrong?

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 822 by creation, posted 10-22-2018 9:12 AM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 825 by Phat, posted 10-22-2018 12:04 PM ringo has responded
 Message 831 by creation, posted 10-23-2018 11:15 AM ringo has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 11416
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 824 of 879 (841814)
10-22-2018 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 817 by Son Goku
10-21-2018 3:48 PM


Re: Confusing
...Scientifically there is nothing else one can say, until somebody observes the stars doing something stellar theory can't explain.
I like that! You always explain things that are difficult in a way that makes simple minded people like me understand them. Thanks.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 817 by Son Goku, posted 10-21-2018 3:48 PM Son Goku has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 11416
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 825 of 879 (841815)
10-22-2018 12:04 PM
Reply to: Message 823 by ringo
10-22-2018 11:54 AM


Re: Confusing
To me, the obvious question is: How can YOU see outside the "fishbowl" to know that science is wrong?
He likely will claim that though he himself can't see that far with 100% certainty, God certainly can and does. He is basically defending God...though I never knew that God needed backup!

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 823 by ringo, posted 10-22-2018 11:54 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 826 by ringo, posted 10-22-2018 12:07 PM Phat has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
5354
55
56575859Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018