|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The infinite space of the Universe | |||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3644 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
Unless of course things move in space. If that is the case then is space not expanding? Things can move in space AND space is expanding. If we observe a distant galaxy, then its observed motion will be made up of two components - it's own intrinsic motion, known as 'peculiar velocity'; and the recessional velocity, an observed effect resulting from the expansion of the intervening space.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Agobot Member (Idle past 5530 days) Posts: 786 Joined: |
So you're saying there was space before the big bang? Because i'm sure you said in another thread that there was nothing before the BB.
PS. In another thread you claimed the universe is spherical and there is nothing outside of it. Now you say there is space outside of it. I am not saying you are supposed to know this but which one is the statement that represents your opinion? Edited by Agobot, : No reason given. Edited by Agobot, : No reason given. Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4717 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
peculiar velocity Thank you. Per a question I asked somewhere or other. Kindly There is a spider by the water pipe.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Agobot Member (Idle past 5530 days) Posts: 786 Joined: |
quote: That's right. You are a cosmologist. One of many. And like all the rest, you are entitled to your own opinion(right or wrong) on matters for which the humanity has found no answer yet. But that's what this message board is for - you can certainly voice your opinion on any matter being discussed. Edited by Agobot, : No reason given. Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3644 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
So you're saying there was space before the big bang? No. How the hell do you get this from what I have just said???
In another thread you claimed the universe is spherical No, I did not.
Now you say there is space outside of it. No, I do not.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Agobot Member (Idle past 5530 days) Posts: 786 Joined: |
quote: quote: Then why the Hell did you use the surface earth as an analogy of how you'd return to where you started if you travel 100 billion light years in space? Don't you know the Earth is spherical?
quote: quote: You SAID the first photon has travelled through space(see previous page). If that's the case, there must have been space prior to the photon's movement, which clearly means space was there before the BB. Edited by Agobot, : No reason given. Edited by Agobot, : No reason given. Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3644 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
because that is a good analogy *IF* the Universe is compactified. This is a possibility. But it is not the only possibility.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
It means what it says. Is mass a property of space?
Mass is spacetime curvature as I understand it. Does this mean mass is a property of space? An effect of space? Are they too interrelated for the question as to which is a property of what to make sense? Although unintended on your part I think the question you ask is too profound and complicated for me to answer. Having just read the replies of Cavediver and Son Goku has confirmed that in terms of field theory etc. I would be out of my depth with regard to this matter (no pun intended ).
Having read the three conflicting opinions about what matter is and what space is in the last messages, I've become even more convinced that my (being similar to other advocates of static boundless space) POV on space is the only correct and sensible one.
If you are happy to ignore all of the observational evidence, all of the practical results that we actually use in current technologies and the lifes work of some of the most brilliant minds ever to have lived then I suppose that it is indeed possible that you have seen through the fog and achieved an insight unvailable to everyone else....... Buz if there is one thing an even vague understanding of physics should teach you it is that limited human perception and resulting "common sense" conclusions are insufficient to describe and predict reality. The main problem in all these threads is that you obviously do not have even this vague understanding and seem depressingly unwilling to educate yourself regarding these matters. A clock on a satellite or even at the top of a mountain will run faster to exactly the degree predicted by General Relativity which is a theory of spacetime curvature. Until your model can explain this time differential and predict the exact empirically tested and calculated effect it is not even worth considering. Your philosophical objections and preferences are irrelevant. The empirical objective evidence is ultimately against you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3644 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
If that's the case, there must have been space prior to the photon's movement, which clearly means space was there before the BB. Ah, you are thinking there was such a thing as a photon at T=0. There was not.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Straggler writes: If you are happy to ignore all of the observational evidence, all of the practical results that we actually use in current technologies and the lifes work of some of the most brilliant minds ever to have lived then I suppose that it is indeed possible that you have seen through the fog and achieved an insight unvailable to everyone else....... 1. I don't ignore the observational evidence. Many minds far more educated and intelligent than mine don't interpret the observational evidence as compatible to the majority POV. Nor do they accept some of what is claimed to be observational evidence by the majority as valid. 2. As I've said before, Imo some of the majority folks loose their way from logic, common sense and reality. When I asked what properties of space allow for a straight rigid bar to reconnect it's ends the answer was that space curves. That does not answer the question. Whether space curves or not, there has to be some property in space which bends steel to reconnect itself. I cannot accept something that violates all reality, common sense and logic. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Straggler writes: A clock on a satellite or even at the top of a mountain will run faster to exactly the degree predicted by General Relativity which is a theory of spacetime curvature. Until your model can explain this time differential and predict the exact empirically tested and calculated effect it is not even worth considering. There's less air, friction, (abe: gravity) and pressure to restrict the mechanism. Wouldn't that factor in? Edited by Buzsaw, : noted in context BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 8996 From: Canada Joined: |
There's less air, friction, (abe: gravity) and pressure to restrict the mechanism. Wouldn't that factor in? Buz, Buz, Buz, You manage to top yourself. I didn't think that was possible. No it does not factor in at all. Not in the slightest. You have no idea of how funny you can be. I'm sure we won't lose the fun since you have shown no signs of stopping going on about topics which you know absolutely nothing about. The clocks used for these tests are extremely precise and accurate clocks the size of a small fridge. The time changes we are talking about are down around millionths of a second. All factors are considered. The fact is that the changes in times are very, very precisely what general and special relativity calculations predict. In fact, I understand the GPS navigation can't work unless they are factored in. The fact that you have to explain can't be waved away by "what abouts". The predictions of relativity are borne out to an extraordinary degree. It is the precision and accuracy that you have to explain. Be sure, though, you have no chance of understanding the physics or the math involved. (I can't handle the math of GR either. SR isn't so bad.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Libmr2bs Member (Idle past 5727 days) Posts: 45 Joined: |
Could you explain how a photon could or would have a very limited lifespan. They appear to be the most traveled identified thing in the universe and probably of greatest quantity. Please explain a "pre-star light" as this is a new term I've never heard.
I suggest that photons may be the oldest remnants from the history of the universe originating before atomic structures formed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Libmr2bs Member (Idle past 5727 days) Posts: 45 Joined: |
I am trying to understand how the first photons would have been reabsorbed. Your description of the early universe "extremely dense" and "no free space" would appear in my mind to describe a universe that was bound in a dense structure that extended to infinity. I might be missing something but my vision from your early universe appears to be a universe that is collapsing into comglomerates of matter (and space between) rather than expanding to fill space. It would appear that photons could only exist after "space" is created.
The formation of protons as I understand are the result of decomposition of neutrons which produces protons and eletrons. I'm interested in knowing your interpretation. If you don't mind can you explain. I assume from your reply that regardless of my lack of understanding about how your model formed, the universe is boundless and that the first photons are still traveling which seems to correlate that the edge of the universe is wherever the furthest photon has traveled.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2284 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.8 |
There's less air, friction, (abe: gravity) and pressure to restrict the mechanism. Wouldn't that factor in?
Do you really think we're talking about wind up mechanical clocks here Buz? soon I discovered that this rock thing was true Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world And so there was only one thing I could do Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On *not an actual doctor
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024