Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creation
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


(1)
Message 706 of 1482 (833213)
05-18-2018 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 705 by ICANT
05-18-2018 1:01 PM


Re: Poor Tom:
you don't understand what an analogy is do you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 705 by ICANT, posted 05-18-2018 1:01 PM ICANT has seen this message but not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 707 of 1482 (833214)
05-18-2018 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 703 by Modulous
05-18-2018 10:26 AM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Hi Mod,
Mod writes:
The pinpoint expanded.
I actually thought the standard theory said the space that existed at the pin point is what expanded. That would mean all the space between the tinny, tinny, little parts of the pin point, expanded. Spreading the pin point apart. The parts that were nearer to the center of the pin point would not move nearly as far in the first second as those on the outside of the pin point. Because there are those that are farther away from others today. Had they left together and traveled the same speed there would be a ring like a donut today.
My biggest problem with this little pin point is how everything in this massive universe was squished into such a small volume.
Mod writes:
All material is the same age. When we look at the CMBR we are seeing the universe at its youngest.
I would assume it was all the same age as it all existed at the pin point or at least that is what I am told, and read. Guth would disagree as he believes in a free lunch, and a zero energy universe.
But it all could not have left the pin point at the same time. The outside would have left first and the last 3 whatever you want to call them would leave last and head in 3 different directions.
Think of three raisins touching each other on the table. The space between them begins to enlarge in all directions, which way would the different raisins go? Wouldn't each one of them go in a different direction?
Mod writes:
And that would be everywhere.
And how would that be brought about? And what do you mean by everywhere?
Mod writes:
But that's not what we observe. Otherwise we could tell the direction of the pin point.
We observe stuff going in all directions from us. If you look east a lot of stuff is headed that way. If you turn and look west a lot of stuff is headed that way. If you look north a lot of stuff is headed that way. If you look south a lot of stuff is headed that way. If you were to look any direction on a circle you could turn you would see stuff heading that way.
Now some of that stuff may be traveling in the same direction as where you are located just at a slower pace as you are traveling making that object appear to be moving away from you. You should be able to find that picture in Stiles rubber road.
But they have found just such a place. A super black hole that is expanding very rapidly.
Mod writes:
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.
If a balloon is filled with air it has height, width, and depth, that means it is a 3d object.
A balloon with no air in it would represent anything other than an airless balloon. It certainly would not be representative of the universe.
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 703 by Modulous, posted 05-18-2018 10:26 AM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 709 by DrJones*, posted 05-18-2018 1:56 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 712 by Modulous, posted 05-18-2018 3:54 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 713 by AZPaul3, posted 05-18-2018 11:09 PM ICANT has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


(1)
Message 708 of 1482 (833216)
05-18-2018 1:47 PM
Reply to: Message 705 by ICANT
05-18-2018 1:01 PM


I have the best rubber
ICANT writes:
A rubber road would not expand like space in all directions at one time.
The one in my example does.
Space expands in "all" directions - all the directions space has - meaning 3 directions. Because it's 3D.
My road expands in "all" directions - all the directions the road has - meaning 2 directions. Because it's 2D.
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.
My road is not made of the rubber a rubber band is made of.
It's made of stronger rubber.
You don't have to worry about it breaking.
It will just keep stretching more and more and more just like the expansion of space.
Never breaking. Never snapping. It's good stuff, I promise.
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 is not true.
My table shows that if the truck starts out 10 yards away from Tom, then Tom reaches his truck.
However, my other table shows that if the truck starts out 20 yards away from Tom, then Tom never reaches the truck. Regardless of if Tom could keep chasing his truck forever and never die. Tom would never, ever reach his truck. Because Tom's movement is not enough to overcome the expansion of the rubber road over that distance.
In both scenarios, the expansion of the road is the same rate, Tom's movement is the same speed, and the truck remains stationary on the road.
You also don't have to worry about the road breaking. This rubber doesn't break and doesn't snap back. It only keeps expanding forever and ever. Like space.
This turkey is done.
If you don't want to get to the bottom of why you can't understand my 2D road example, and therefore why you can't understand 3D space expansion, that's fine.
I like explaining these things anyway, it's interesting and fun for me.
Just let me know if you'd ever like to seriously consider what expansion of space is actually like again.
These posts will always be here and you can return whenever you feel up to it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 705 by ICANT, posted 05-18-2018 1:01 PM ICANT has seen this message but not replied

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 709 of 1482 (833217)
05-18-2018 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 707 by ICANT
05-18-2018 1:42 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
If a balloon is filled with air it has height, width, and depth, that means it is a 3d object.
A balloon with no air in it would represent anything other than an airless balloon. It certainly would not be representative of the universe.
He's not talking about a balloon as a whole, he's talking about the SURFACE of the balloon.

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 707 by ICANT, posted 05-18-2018 1:42 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 710 by NoNukes, posted 05-18-2018 2:49 PM DrJones* has not replied
 Message 716 by ICANT, posted 05-19-2018 9:27 AM DrJones* has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 710 of 1482 (833222)
05-18-2018 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 709 by DrJones*
05-18-2018 1:56 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
He's not talking about a balloon as a whole, he's talking about the SURFACE of the balloon.
I may be wrong, but I think the issue here is trying to communicate abstract ideas using analogies to someone who simply does not want to make sense out of the idea. It seems to me that we are not just fighting misunderstanding, but are instead trying to fight willful resistance.
Good luck with that.

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 709 by DrJones*, posted 05-18-2018 1:56 PM DrJones* has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 711 of 1482 (833225)
05-18-2018 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 705 by ICANT
05-18-2018 1:01 PM


Methods Of Approaching Discussion.
I am curious if what they say is true.
NN writes:
I think the issue here is trying to communicate abstract ideas using analogies to someone who simply does not want to make sense out of the idea. It seems to me that we are not just fighting misunderstanding, but are instead trying to fight willful resistance.
From my perspective, I sense that you are trying to reason with Modulous, Dr.Jones, Stile, and the rest, but that you approach your reasoning with the presupposition of your belief that God exists and that the universe was created by Him. Your opponents, however, are not so concerned with connecting creation to a Creator as they are about trying to explain to you how natural laws work and how the universe was formed/created through these laws. Does that sound about right?

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
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith

This message is a reply to:
 Message 705 by ICANT, posted 05-18-2018 1:01 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 714 by ICANT, posted 05-19-2018 8:51 AM Phat has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 712 of 1482 (833234)
05-18-2018 3:54 PM
Reply to: Message 707 by ICANT
05-18-2018 1:42 PM


ballooning pinpoints
I actually thought the standard theory said the space that existed at the pin point is what expanded
All of space expanded. It's size was at one point, the size of a pin point.
The parts that were nearer to the center of the pin point would not move nearly as far in the first second as those on the outside of the pin point.
There was no centre to the pin point.
My biggest problem with this little pin point is how everything in this massive universe was squished into such a small volume.
There was no other place for it to be.
All material is the same age. When we look at the CMBR we are seeing the universe at its youngest.
I would assume it was all the same age as it all existed at the pin point or at least that is what I am told, and read
Yes, all material is the same age. But when we look at CMBR we are looking at light that has taken 13 billion years to get to us. What we're seeing is what it looked like 13 billion years ago.
But it all could not have left the pin point at the same time. The outside would have left first and the last 3 whatever you want to call them would leave last and head in 3 different directions.
There was no leaving the pin point. The pinpoint was all of space - we have not left space. It all expanded.
And how would that be brought about? And what do you mean by everywhere?
How would what be brought about?
By everywhere I mean everywhere. All of space.
We observe stuff going in all directions from us. If you look east a lot of stuff is headed that way. If you turn and look west a lot of stuff is headed that way. If you look north a lot of stuff is headed that way. If you look south a lot of stuff is headed that way. If you were to look any direction on a circle you could turn you would see stuff heading that way.
Yes we do - so either you are right and the pinpoint was earth, or I am right and we'd see the same thing from every place in space. There is nowhere in the universe we could look and see 'more universe' to our left than our right.
If a balloon is filled with air it has height, width, and depth, that means it is a 3d object.
Correct. But I am talking about a 2D object that is the surface of the balloon. There is no depth to a 2D object.
Take a map of the earth - where is the centre? There is none. If your map is on a rectangular piece of paper there is a centre to the piece of paper - but that wouldn't be a place which would be regarded as the centre of the surface of the earth would it? After all we could produce another map with a different location in the centre of the paper. Because the surface isn't actually a rectangle.
As I said - until you can understand the expanding curved 2D topologies, your prospect at understanding a 3D curved topology is not going to work. You're ape brain, like my own, is used to dealing with flat 3D topology. You need to start simple. We can picture a curved and expanding 2D topology. But you still have to try.
A balloon with no air in it would represent anything other than an airless balloon. It certainly would not be representative of the universe.
If you'd prefer you can forget the balloon. Consider a curved and expanding 2D space with no boundaries. Tell me how I could determine the centre of this space.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 707 by ICANT, posted 05-18-2018 1:42 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 718 by Phat, posted 05-19-2018 10:32 AM Modulous has replied
 Message 724 by ICANT, posted 05-19-2018 11:36 AM Modulous has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 713 of 1482 (833266)
05-18-2018 11:09 PM
Reply to: Message 707 by ICANT
05-18-2018 1:42 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Think of three raisins touching each other on the table. The space between them begins to enlarge in all directions, which way would the different raisins go? Wouldn't each one of them go in a different direction?
Now that is a good analogy. Not so much as an analogy for space as for a way to explain the nature of analogy.
The hard part of analogy is to ignore the reality of the mechanism and concentrate on the instructive symbology that is the heart of the analogy.
So, you have three raisins touching each other on a table and they start moving. Yes, they will move away from each other in different directions.
Now, lose the table. No, the raisins will not fall to the floor. We are just going to ignore the table. It no longer exists for the purpose of our analogy. In reality it is still there but (Hard Part #1) put the table out of your mind. It no longer exists. We are left with the three raisins moving away from each other.
Make yourself really small tiny and stand on one of the raisins. Climb to the top of one of the raisin-mountains and look out at the space around you. What do you see? You see the other two raisins moving away from you. To your perspective you are on the privileged raisin in this limited raisin universe since the other raisins are moving away from you. You are the central raisin. The center of the universe. I make myself really small tiny and I stand on one of the other raisins. I climb to the top of one of my raisin-mountains and look out at the space around me. What do I see? I see the other two raisins moving away from me. To my perspective I am on the privileged raisin in this limited raisin universe since the other raisins are moving away from me. I am the central raisin; the center of the universe.
Relate this to the balloon analogy. The central learning feature of the balloon analogy is the surface of the balloon. Just like ignoring the table in our raisin universe above we choose (Hard Part #1) to ignore the reality of the air inside the balloon, ignore the blow hole, ignore all the reality of the balloon except for the surface. The surface is the instructive symbol that is the heart of this analogy. This is our analogy for a 2D space. Everything real about the rest of the balloon, except this surface, is ignored and is put out of the mind as non-existent. Just pretend.
Put a bunch of dots on the balloon surface. Dozens of them all over the surface. Now blow up the balloon.
Back to Hard Part #1. Ignore all the rest of the reality of the balloon. Everything about the balloon is non-existent, in this imagining, except for the surface, our symbolic, analogous 2D space.
Make yourself really small tiny and stand on one of the dots as the balloon inflates (space expands). Look out at the space around you. What do you see? You see all the other dots moving away from you. To your perspective you are on the privileged dot in this limited 2D universe since the other dots are moving away from you. You are the central dot; the center of the universe. I make myself really small tiny and I stand 22 dots over from you. I look out at the space around me. What do I see? I see all the other dots moving away from me. To my perspective I am on the privileged dot in this limited 2D universe since the other dots, including you, are moving away from me. I am the central dot, not you. My dot is the center of the universe.
Every other dot on the balloon surface sees exactly the same thing. All the other dots are moving away and so every dot is the center of its own view. Every dot is the center of the universe, so there is no center to the universe.
Hard Part #2.
If the balloon analogy makes sense to you now (if I’ve done this right I hope it does) the next big step is to try to imagine this balloon analogy extended into 3D. Not just the 2D surface of the balloon but the 3D of our actual universe.
Every galaxy is a dot on the surface of the balloon. Except the balloon surface is no long there and there are hundreds of billions of dots extending as far as we can see in every direction we look. Space is expanding everywhere at once in 3D just like the surface in our balloon analogy in 2D. Any/every galaxy sees exactly the same thing we see from our galaxy. Every other galaxy is moving away (local movement due to gravitational bonding excepted, of course) and the closer galaxies to it move slower than the ones further away. Every galaxy sees itself as the center of the universe just like my privileged dot on the surface of the balloon. Every galaxy is the center of the universe, just like ours, therefore there is no one center of the universe.
All analogies are bad analogies if you lose yourself in the reality of the mechanism instead of concentrating on the instructive symbol that is the heart of the analogy.
Edited by AZPaul3, : spelin
Edited by AZPaul3, : more stuff

This message is a reply to:
 Message 707 by ICANT, posted 05-18-2018 1:42 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 717 by Phat, posted 05-19-2018 9:28 AM AZPaul3 has replied
 Message 720 by ICANT, posted 05-19-2018 10:38 AM AZPaul3 has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


(1)
Message 714 of 1482 (833281)
05-19-2018 8:51 AM
Reply to: Message 711 by Phat
05-18-2018 3:04 PM


Re: Methods Of Approaching Discussion.
Hi Phat,
Phat writes:
I sense that you are trying to reason with Modulous, Dr.Jones, Stile, and the rest, but that you approach your reasoning with the presupposition of your belief that God exists and that the universe was created by Him. Your opponents, however, are not so concerned with connecting creation to a Creator as they are about trying to explain to you how natural laws work and how the universe was formed/created through these laws.
Phat I am actually trying to understand what it is they are trying to say. But I guess Einstein was right when he said that if you could not explain your proposition where it could be understood you did not know the subject well enough yourself.
What is expansion of the universe? No one seems to know.
Edwin Hubble made the observations in 1925 that the universe was expanding.
Expansion of the universe is the increase of the distance between two distant parts of the universe with time.
To me that means that the stuff that looks empty but is filled with dark matter and dark energy is what is expanding.
The galaxies are said to not be expanding.
Then there is the balloon analogy that everybody wants to use to tell me what the universe looks like and how it is expanding.
I am told take a balloon and put a bunch of dots on it to represent the galaxies. Then I am to inflate the balloon which causes the dots to move apart. This is supposed to give me a picture of what is taking place with expansion.
All those dots are on the outside of the balloon which represents that all the galaxies is on the outside of the universe, with nothing inside the balloon and I assume the universe as well.
That is not what is observed.
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 711 by Phat, posted 05-18-2018 3:04 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 715 by Phat, posted 05-19-2018 9:11 AM ICANT has seen this message but not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 715 of 1482 (833283)
05-19-2018 9:11 AM
Reply to: Message 714 by ICANT
05-19-2018 8:51 AM


Re: Methods Of Approaching Discussion.
AZ Paul seemed to explain rather well what he was trying to get the reader to see in message Message 713. Perhaps his point is that there is no center of anything. One could argue, however, that from my personal perspective, I am indeed the origin of my own observational and reasoning capability...at least subjectively from my perspective.

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
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith

This message is a reply to:
 Message 714 by ICANT, posted 05-19-2018 8:51 AM ICANT has seen this message but not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


(1)
Message 716 of 1482 (833284)
05-19-2018 9:27 AM
Reply to: Message 709 by DrJones*
05-18-2018 1:56 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Hi Dr.
Dr writes:
He's not talking about a balloon as a whole, he's talking about the SURFACE of the balloon.
Yes I understand he is talking about the surface of the balloon. The surface is on the outside of the balloon. The dots representing the galaxies are on the outside of the balloon.
I am supposed to see these dots as representing the galaxies of our universe.
But there is nothing outside of the universe according to cavediver and Son Goku. We had a pretty heated debate about that exact thing over the balloon analogy.
To me the balloon analogy explains nothing. Because the galaxies are not attached to the fabric of the universe.
That balloon does have a center around which the exterior surface of the balloon surrounds and keeps the air inside when inflated.
The Hubble telescope can let scientist see over 13 billion light years away. There is all kinds of stuff between our Milky Way and the extent of what the Hubble telescope can let us view.
It does not make any difference which way the Hubble telescope is pointed it produces the same results.
I am told that the space between our Milky Way and Hubbles's extent of vision is expanding between all the galaxies. Because at one time everything in the universe was in one place.
Now the balloon analogy would lead me to believe that all those objects in the view of the Hubble telescope is the same distance from me as it is attached to the fabric of space.
So for now I am going to try to clear my mind about the balloon and think of something different.
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 709 by DrJones*, posted 05-18-2018 1:56 PM DrJones* has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 726 by ringo, posted 05-19-2018 11:58 AM ICANT has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 717 of 1482 (833285)
05-19-2018 9:28 AM
Reply to: Message 713 by AZPaul3
05-18-2018 11:09 PM


Perhaps I CANT understands my pretend analogy
Make yourself really small tiny and stand on one of the dots as the balloon inflates (space expands). Look out at the space around you. What do you see? You see all the other dots moving away from you. To your perspective you are on the privileged dot in this limited 2D universe since the other dots are moving away from you. You are the central dot; the center of the universe. I make myself really small tiny and I stand 22 dots over from you. I look out at the space around me. What do I see? I see all the other dots moving away from me. To my perspective I am on the privileged dot in this limited 2D universe since the other dots, including you, are moving away from me. I am the central dot, not you. My dot is the center of the universe.
As long as we are pretending and attempting analogies, allow me to attempt to add to your analogy using some pretend stuff of my own. Say you are the Creator of all seen and unseen. You are a singular intelligence, presence, and Being. You choose to make yourself really small and tiny (by becoming a human) and stand on any dot that you choose. In fact, you stand before the expansion even begins, if this were possible. As the Creator of all seen and unseen, you didn't simply create the dots, the "space" and the "time"...you created every word, every object that words describe, every language, every living (and non-living formation of substance, and in fact the singularity itself. In essence, your dot is the singularity. Your raisin is the singularity. Other dots, raisins, stars, whatever...appear to move away from you only when you speak them into existence or imagine them. (which I suppose means that You Create through imagination)..One could argue that you are indeed standing on the privileged dot as your dot is, in fact, the initial singularity. Does that make any sense? Shall I attempt to run with it and pretend further or shall I throw the analogy away and begin again?

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
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith

This message is a reply to:
 Message 713 by AZPaul3, posted 05-18-2018 11:09 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 750 by AZPaul3, posted 05-22-2018 12:12 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 718 of 1482 (833288)
05-19-2018 10:32 AM
Reply to: Message 712 by Modulous
05-18-2018 3:54 PM


Re: ballooning pinpoints
I just read an interesting article in Forbes, If The Universe Is Expanding, Then Why Aren't We? Synopsis:
...The best answer to these questions is, as usual, a lot of math. But it’s hard to find a decent answer online that is not a pile of equations, so here’s a conceptual take on it.(...)
in science a question must be answerable by measurement, at least in principle. We cannot observe space and neither can we observe space-time. We merely observe how space-time affects matter and radiation, which we can measure in our detectors.(...)Just as you could insist on defining space so that the universe doesn’t expand, by willpower you could also define space so that a city, like Brooklyn, does expand. Let’s say a block down is a mile. You could simply insist on using units of length in which tomorrow a block down is two miles, and next week it’s ten miles, and so on. That’s pretty idiotic — and yet nobody could stop you from doing this.
But now, consider that you make a measurement. Say, you bounce a laser-beam back between the ends of the block, at fixed altitude, and use atomic clocks to measure the time that passes between two bounces. You would find that the time-intervals are always the same.
My question is whether there would be a way to hypothetically verify the redshift within a singularity.(or am I stupified by the explanation?)
Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

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
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith

This message is a reply to:
 Message 712 by Modulous, posted 05-18-2018 3:54 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 719 by Modulous, posted 05-19-2018 10:35 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


(1)
Message 719 of 1482 (833289)
05-19-2018 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 718 by Phat
05-19-2018 10:32 AM


Re: ballooning pinpoints
My question is whether there would be a way to hypothetically verify the redshift within a singularity.(or am I stupified by the explanation?)
Redshift occurs to the wavelength of light. If a singularity did exist, there would be zero space, and thus zero length. So what does wavelength even mean in this condition? It's all these zeroes turning up resulting in divisions by zero and the like that physicists are talking about when they say that our maths breaks down in singularities.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 718 by Phat, posted 05-19-2018 10:32 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 720 of 1482 (833290)
05-19-2018 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 713 by AZPaul3
05-18-2018 11:09 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Hi AZ,
AZ writes:
Now that is a good analogy.
Thanks, I am going to try to expand on that analogy and see if maybe I can explain what I am trying to say. Remember I am a learning process in progress, hopefully.
Lets change that 3 raisins to 10 lbs of raisins.
Now let us do a little imagining.
Lets imagine that 10 lbs of raisins is compressed into a ball of raisins the size of a symmetrical English pea.
I don't know what psi it would take to accomplish that feat but I would think it would be in the range of thousands or millions of lbs psi.
Regardless there would be space between the raisins. All of a sudden the space between the raisins begins to expand. The raisins on the surface would separate from the ball of raisins first as the space would expand faster at the surface than the interior of the ball.
Lets say the space is expanding at the rate of 50,000 miles per second, for our thought experiment. That would mean the raisins on the surface of the ball would be 50,000 miles from the one it was touching 1 second earlier. But that raisin would have moved as the space between it and the other raisin it was touching expanded. This space could not expand at the same rate as the earlier space due to the restraints of the pressure it was under.
After a couple of minutes that 10 lbs of raisins would be spread over quite a large area. The space between each raisin would continue to expand driving the raisins further and further apart. After an hour or so there would be no raisins that was anywhere near the raisins they had been in contact with just 1 hour prior.
Unless there is some other mechanism to bring these raisins together there would never be any contact between any of the raisins in the future.
AZ writes:
Make yourself really small tiny and stand on one of the raisins. Climb to the top of one of the raisin-mountains and look out at the space around you. What do you see?
Yes I understand that. Just like if I jumped on one of the raisins leaving my ball of raisins. Even the raisins following me would look like they were going in the opposite direction from my location. The raisins to my left would be going away from me. The raisins to my right would be going away from me. The raisins I could look up and see would be going away from me. The raisins I could look down and see would be going away from me.
All of that would be taking place because the space is expanding between all objects.
But all of a sudden I look ahead and I got one mean ugly raisin that is headed toward me and we are going to collide. That tells me the space between us is not expanding but decreasing which tell me there is something wrong with my thought experiment or the real thing of expansion.
I am referring to Andromeda and its collision with the Milky Way.
If they started in the same place and the space expanded between every object the collision could not take place.
AZ writes:
To your perspective you are on the privileged dot in this limited 2D universe since the other dots are moving away from you.
No I don't think I am on a privileged dot. I just see everything moving away from me. Although I know some are moving in the same direction as I am. Because the space is expanding between my dot and all the other dots.
AZ writes:
Every dot is the center of the universe,
No dot is the center of the universe. It is in the center of the surface of the balloon relative to all the other dots on the surface of the balloon.
AZ writes:
Every galaxy sees itself as the center of the universe just like my privileged dot on the surface of the balloon.
If the galaxies were on the exterior of the universe as the dots on the balloon they would be at the center of the surface of the exterior of the universe relative to all the other galaxies on the surface of the universe.
The problem is that the galaxies are not on the surface of the universe. They are in the universe as they are apart of the universe. They are scattered throughout the universe just as my raisins were scattered relative to the location of the ball of raisins when it started to expand.
Let me see if I can sum up what I see, according to the standard theory.
The universe was very small in the past. In fact everything in the universe was in the self-contained universe that was all in a place the size of a pea or pinpoint that began to expand. The space between each object expanded at a very rapid pace.
Everything in the universe is contained in that expanded pea sized object that is very large at the present.
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 713 by AZPaul3, posted 05-18-2018 11:09 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 721 by Phat, posted 05-19-2018 11:04 AM ICANT has not replied
 Message 722 by NoNukes, posted 05-19-2018 11:14 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 733 by AZPaul3, posted 05-19-2018 1:19 PM ICANT has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024