Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The infinite space of the Universe
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 256 of 380 (469393)
06-05-2008 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 253 by Buzsaw
06-05-2008 10:36 AM


Re: Curved
Mine is straight in all trajectoral dimensions.
But the "trajectoral dimensions" themselves are not "straight" so if the bar is straight in all "trajectoral dimensions" the bar is not "straight" in the flawed way that you insist on persisting with.
Imagine a steel bar. Imagine in bent into a circle. The inner circumference of the steel is compressed right? The outer circumference of the bar is stretched right?
In the case of the universe proportioned steel bar under consideration the inner and outer circumference of the bar are the same length. Becuase space itself, not the bar, is "bent".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by Buzsaw, posted 06-05-2008 10:36 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 258 by Buzsaw, posted 06-05-2008 2:05 PM Straggler has replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 257 of 380 (469405)
06-05-2008 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 237 by IamJoseph
06-04-2008 8:22 PM


Re: NATURE is a Brick Wall.
But we do not know where anything comes from?
We know where lots of things come from, including the notion of an intelligent designer.
This obvious question was taken up by Moses, and the answer given him is the only scientific definition of INFINITE:
Who is Moses? When did he exist? What credentials does he have to make this claim and prove that he got it from the actual source?
'I am the Lord I have not changed'.
Well thats convinient, here I'll give it a try, "I am Oni and I have not changed", boy thast was easy. What do you think, are you convinced?
The 'further' from this point is, there must be a creator for all things - same as with cars. PERIOD.
To include a creator for your devine creator as well right? Oh wait thats right Moses...
Yes, these two ARE the same thing. The modes vary, not the basic aspect of creating. We are emulating and acting in the creator's image: Creating.
This is an opinion. If you can't prove the creator and explain his back story(without using a single religions doctrine of course), then your opinion becomes void of evidence and as such is rejected, as have all theological explanations been rejected.
There is no evidence anything intervened?
Picky picky...I thought you would understand that to mean any such 'designer' or 'creator' with intelligence that must guild all things. In other words the Universe acts randomly and chaotic, not in a uniformed order that is being guilded. I know you'll argue that the laws of the Universe are intelligently designed but, this is only your obseved interpretation of the Universe. The actual events leading up to what we can define as order were chaotic and it is only by chance and pure coincedental luck that our species is here to observe it. Hindsight says its intelligently designed however, the moments after T=O and till about 4 billion years ago were a chaotic mess, in respects to organic life(that we know of). As such the idea of a designer would only point to an incompetent designer. Of course the future of the Universe also points to an incompetent designer(if of course we mean a designer who values humans as His greatest achievement).

All great truths begin as blasphemies
I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your fuckin' mouth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 237 by IamJoseph, posted 06-04-2008 8:22 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 280 by IamJoseph, posted 06-07-2008 12:20 AM onifre has not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 258 of 380 (469416)
06-05-2008 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 256 by Straggler
06-05-2008 12:01 PM


Re: Curved
Straggler writes:
But the "trajectoral dimensions" themselves are not "straight" so if the bar is straight in all "trajectoral dimensions" the bar is not "straight" in the flawed way that you insist on persisting with.
Again my definition of straight is more bonafide and complete than yours when applied to my model which I'm using. Yours is incomplete for my model, allowing curvature by applying a 2d in place of my all dimensional bar which becomes a circle to accommodate your POV. Again, my model is the bar going through the earth's axis. Yours belts the circumference of the earth.
If my all dimensional bar, say 500 miles long, were resting on the face of the earth it would look like a teeter toter No property of space is going to change that, no matter how long it is extended.
If not, what are the properties of the straight bar in all trajectoral dimensions which allegedly allows it to rejoin itself? You have yet to answer that which is vital to the debate.
Straggler writes:
In the case of the universe proportioned steel bar under consideration the inner and outer circumference of the bar are the same length. Becuase space itself, not the bar, is "bent".
There's where you abandon reality and logic. In order for the bar to rejoin physically, it must bend/curve. It then looses it's property of straightness as per the dictionary primary #1a/b definition of straight which I have provided.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Straggler, posted 06-05-2008 12:01 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 259 by Straggler, posted 06-05-2008 2:37 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 261 by lyx2no, posted 06-05-2008 4:09 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 263 by onifre, posted 06-05-2008 6:53 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 259 of 380 (469423)
06-05-2008 2:37 PM
Reply to: Message 258 by Buzsaw
06-05-2008 2:05 PM


Re: Curved
If not, what are the properties of the straight bar in all trajectoral dimensions which allegedly allows it to rejoin itself? You have yet to answer that which is vital to the debate.
The property of the straight bar in "all trajectoral dimensions" (i.e. I assume you mean 3D space by this?) which allow it to rejoin itself is the property of straightness in curved 4D spacetime.
There's where you abandon reality and logic. In order for the bar to rejoin physically, it must bend/curve.
Do you deny that space is curved?
If you agree that space is curved how do you achieve the sort of "straightness" you are insisting upon in curved space?
If you do deny that space is curved how do you account for the practical calculations of curved spacetime that allow GPS satellites to function?
You are the one denying reality and logic by trying to separate the concept of the "straightness" of an object from the space in which the object exists.
The question comes down to whether or not you actually accept the curvature of space or not. So do you?
Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Buzsaw, posted 06-05-2008 2:05 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Agobot
Member (Idle past 5530 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 260 of 380 (469427)
06-05-2008 3:01 PM


The bar can be perfectly straight and yet bend around the universe. That's because of the distance that the bar has to travel - probably 999 billion trillion miles. You cannot claim straightness at such lenghts, what would seem perfectly straight for 10, 15 or 1000 miles will not be straight after 110 billion trillion miles. This of course is valid only if we assume a spherical shaped universe, not a flat one(hotly contested topic among cosmologists, and the answer you'll get depends on who you'll ask).
However, the bar may start to turn around but there is no property of space that will make the end come back to the begginning. It can only happen on the surface of the earth, but since galaxies are not spread out only on the "surface" of the universe, there is no way the bar will rejoin itself. We are within a sphere(our universe), and not onto the sphere's surface.
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

lyx2no
Member (Idle past 4716 days)
Posts: 1277
From: A vast, undifferentiated plane.
Joined: 02-28-2008


Message 261 of 380 (469436)
06-05-2008 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 258 by Buzsaw
06-05-2008 2:05 PM


Re: Curved
If my all dimensional bar, say 500 miles long, were resting on the face of the earth it would look like a teeter toter .
This is true, but the standard that the bar was to meet on Earth was not "straight", but "level". Is your bar level?
Rerun the Earth experiment of making the bar level, but this time you're the size of a virus. Virus Buzsaw might not understand that the foot long bar he had imagined as perfectly "level" was following the surface of this Earthiverse and if continued along its perfectly level course it would eventually circle the Earthiverse and rejoin itself. If Virus Buzsaw restricts the methods of establishing a baseline to spirit levels or differential leveling he'd not even be able to detect the curvature in theory, yet alone measure it.
Admittedly, Virus Buzsaw's bar would not be "straight" ” a hypernym of level in his world. It would curve into a loop. His bar has a familiar, other dimension to curve in.
You, Buzsaw, don't have a familiar, other dimension for a "straight" bar to curve in, so fail to recognize that a Universe spanning, "straight" bar has a curvature of space to follow. And because all possible methods of establishing a baseline of "straightness" are subject to the shape of the Universe ” something you might begin to understand if you were to think through the difficulties of the task ” will you ever be able, even in theory, to detect that curvature. Your bar will measure perfectly straight all the way around. And, an excellent point straggler made too subtly, both the inside and outside of the bar will have the exact same lengths (else it would be way to measure the curvature).
That your global definition of "straight" is inadequate on a universal scale will be forced upon upon you in the same way Virus Buzsaw's Lilliputian definition of "level" is inadequate on the global scale will be forced upon it: when you each find you're path is blocked by one end of a perfectly "straight/level" steel bar.
Let me reiterate: If we are talking about your model of a universe ” a trivial discussion to be sure ” and not a model of The Universe then nothing here applies.
Edited by lyx2no, : Spelling.

Kindly
There is a spider by the water pipe.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Buzsaw, posted 06-05-2008 2:05 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 262 by Buzsaw, posted 06-05-2008 6:41 PM lyx2no has not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 262 of 380 (469484)
06-05-2008 6:41 PM
Reply to: Message 261 by lyx2no
06-05-2008 4:09 PM


Re: Curved
lyx2no writes:
Let me reiterate: If we are talking about your model of a universe ” a trivial discussion to be sure ” and not a model of The Universe then nothing here applies.
My position has always been from the beginning to here in the thread that I consider space infinite, static and boundless, having no properties except area in which everything else exists included forces matter and energy. There is nothing left to effect curvature or expansion.
Satellites orbit in space due to things/forces in space/area and not due to space itself. That's my position and has been all along but everybody wants me to debate my concept of space to fit their model.
Btw, I thought I made it clear that my bar was straight and not level to the earth.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 261 by lyx2no, posted 06-05-2008 4:09 PM lyx2no has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by Straggler, posted 06-05-2008 7:23 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 267 by Son Goku, posted 06-05-2008 8:53 PM Buzsaw has replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 263 of 380 (469487)
06-05-2008 6:53 PM
Reply to: Message 258 by Buzsaw
06-05-2008 2:05 PM


Re: Curved
If my all dimensional bar, say 500 miles long, were resting on the face of the earth it would look like a teeter toter No property of space is going to change that, no matter how long it is extended.
Could I ask a question. If you laid the bar on the floor(Earth) and connected it in 20ft sections, and you followed a straight line, would you eventually attatch it to the opposite end of the first bar you laid on the floor?
However, in your scenario are you saying that your bar is straight and doesn't obey any laws? In other words how would you lay a bar on the Earth for it to teeter toter? Unless you're just saying that for your example it DOES lay there and teeter toter because you say so. If thats your case, then in this world you've created for this particular example no laws have to exist, you win, its straight forever in your imaginery world that you've created to suspend the laws of physics.

All great truths begin as blasphemies
I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your fuckin' mouth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Buzsaw, posted 06-05-2008 2:05 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 264 of 380 (469491)
06-05-2008 7:23 PM
Reply to: Message 262 by Buzsaw
06-05-2008 6:41 PM


Re: Curved
Satellites orbit in space due to things/forces in space/area and not due to space itself. That's my position and has been all along but everybody wants me to debate my concept of space to fit their model.
Because your model of the universe is flawed and has been experimentally refuted.
Satellites orbit in space due to things/forces in space/area and not due to space itself. That's my position and has been all along but everybody wants me to debate my concept of space to fit their model.
Why do atomic clocks on satellites measure time at a faster rate than those on the Earth's surface?
How does your model of the universe explain this? Can your model of the universe predict these different rates?
Why is it that this time differential is exactly that as predicted by general relativity? Exactly that as based on a model of space and time in which spacetime is curved?
Unles your model of the universe can match the practical results of the truly scientific model it will receive no shred of recognition as anything other than a philosophically inspired piece of wishful thinking on your part that is unworthy of the attention of anybody else.
Prediction and empirical results Buz. They keep on coming back to blow apart your pet theories of the cosmos. Time and time again.
Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by Buzsaw, posted 06-05-2008 6:41 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by Libmr2bs, posted 06-05-2008 8:22 PM Straggler has replied

Libmr2bs
Member (Idle past 5727 days)
Posts: 45
Joined: 05-15-2008


Message 265 of 380 (469499)
06-05-2008 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 240 by Agobot
06-05-2008 4:16 AM


Re: Who we are
I was thinking of a philosophical question. How can something exist unless some entity has the ability to recognize it? How can there be a universe unless we are able to see beyond our galaxy? Would there be a god if there is no one to know there is a god? How could he be a god if he had no one to be god of?
A slightly different slant on the purpose of the universe. Something for me to ponder on a while.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 240 by Agobot, posted 06-05-2008 4:16 AM Agobot has not replied

Libmr2bs
Member (Idle past 5727 days)
Posts: 45
Joined: 05-15-2008


Message 266 of 380 (469501)
06-05-2008 8:22 PM
Reply to: Message 264 by Straggler
06-05-2008 7:23 PM


Re: Curved
Careful - atomic clocks slow down while orbiting this planet but not in relation to the satellite they are riding on. But then we have to adjust our calendars and clocks to account for the computed time it takes the earth to revolve around the sun.
Edited by Libmr2bs, : No reason given.
Edited by Libmr2bs, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by Straggler, posted 06-05-2008 7:23 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 270 by Straggler, posted 06-06-2008 6:16 AM Libmr2bs has not replied

Son Goku
Inactive Member


Message 267 of 380 (469504)
06-05-2008 8:53 PM
Reply to: Message 262 by Buzsaw
06-05-2008 6:41 PM


Re: Curved
Space has two measurable properties. Its Weyl curvature and its Ricci curvature. More simply we may say it has curvature. The presence of such curvature has been measured by several satellites in orbit. Also we have evidence of such curvature from lensing of distant galaxies, where their apparent shape is distorted by the curvature.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by Buzsaw, posted 06-05-2008 6:41 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 268 by Buzsaw, posted 06-05-2008 9:43 PM Son Goku has replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 268 of 380 (469510)
06-05-2008 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 267 by Son Goku
06-05-2008 8:53 PM


Re: Curved
Son Goku writes:
Space has two measurable properties. Its Weyl curvature and its Ricci curvature. More simply we may say it has curvature. The presence of such curvature has been measured by several satellites in orbit. Also we have evidence of such curvature from lensing of distant galaxies, where their apparent shape is distorted by the curvature.
How do we know that forces or other factors occupying space/area are not effecting what is being called space curvature?

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by Son Goku, posted 06-05-2008 8:53 PM Son Goku has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by Son Goku, posted 06-06-2008 4:41 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 271 by Straggler, posted 06-06-2008 7:35 AM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 272 by Buzsaw, posted 06-06-2008 8:11 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Son Goku
Inactive Member


Message 269 of 380 (469569)
06-06-2008 4:41 AM
Reply to: Message 268 by Buzsaw
06-05-2008 9:43 PM


Re: Curved
Well first of all, it acts exactly like curvature. Secondly, the satellites in a sense directly measure the curvature of space, rather than test the effects we associate with curvature. You see there is a standard way to calculate/measure the curvature of a space/spacetime. The satellites simply carry out that procedure and have found a non-zero curvature of spacetime in the vicinity of Earth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by Buzsaw, posted 06-05-2008 9:43 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 270 of 380 (469573)
06-06-2008 6:16 AM
Reply to: Message 266 by Libmr2bs
06-05-2008 8:22 PM


Re: Curved
Careful - atomic clocks slow down while orbiting this planet but not in relation to the satellite they are riding on. But then we have to adjust our calendars and clocks to account for the computed time it takes the earth to revolve around the sun.
I am not sure that we are talking about exactly the same thing.
This is from wiki so I don't claim it as the last word in scientific knowledge.
From wiki
The effect of gravitational frequency shift on the GPS system is due to General Relativity, which states that a clock closer to a massive object will be slower than a clock farther away. Applied to the GPS system, the receivers are much closer to Earth than the satellites, causing the GPS clocks to appear faster by a factor of 510^(-10), or about 45 s/day. Gravitational frequency shift is also a noticeable effect.
Combining the time dilation and gravitational frequency shift, clocks on the GPS satellites tick approximately 38 s/day faster than clocks on the ground or in GPS receivers. Without correcting for these effects, errors in position determination of roughly 10 km/day would accumulate, resulting in a worthless system.
There is also a slowing effect due to motion as per special relativity but, as I understand it, the overall effect is that satellite clocks run fast in comparison to Earthbound clocks once both gravitational effects (i.e. GR) and motion effects (i.e. SR) are taken into account.
It appears Son Goku has taken up the reigns on this topic so no doubt he can clarify.
Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by Libmr2bs, posted 06-05-2008 8:22 PM Libmr2bs has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024