Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 73 (8962 total)
143 online now:
jar, PaulK, Tangle (3 members, 140 visitors)
Newest Member: Samuel567
Post Volume: Total: 871,055 Year: 2,803/23,288 Month: 994/1,809 Week: 113/313 Day: 30/39 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is the speed of light constant between galaxies?
Taq
Member
Posts: 8233
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 8 of 66 (679710)
11-15-2012 11:48 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by sunshaker
11-15-2012 10:12 AM


Galaxies and star are in pockets of lower d space, and that is where we get the speed of light as a constant,
But once we leave a "galaxy bubble" we enter the realms of higher d space (dark matter-energies), where as before light travelled with no resistance through lower d space, it cannot pass through these higher d energies and can only follow the path of lower d space around these dark matter energies.

But you never leave galaxies. Gravity attracts across all distances. There is nowhere in our universe where you are out of the gravity well of a star or galaxy. There is nowhere in our universe where spacetime is not being distorted by gravity.

If I understand my physics correctly, light bends in gravity wells because light does move at a constant speed. The curved path preserves the constant speed of light in areas with distorted spacetime.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by sunshaker, posted 11-15-2012 10:12 AM sunshaker has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by sunshaker, posted 11-15-2012 12:59 PM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8233
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 9 of 66 (679711)
11-15-2012 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by sunshaker
11-15-2012 10:23 AM


I was also thinking, correct me if i am completely off track on this, That basically dark matter is a field of "ions", and as our universe continously expands it causes the ions to be electrcally charged and give of "gamma energy" which we see as these "gamma ray bursts", Seeding new areas of the universe with these new atoms.

Electrons would produce Compton scattering which would be observed as blurred images or opaque areas where light does not pass. That is not what we observe. Dark matter does not appear to interact with light at all, outside of gravitational lensing.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by sunshaker, posted 11-15-2012 10:23 AM sunshaker has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by sunshaker, posted 11-15-2012 1:10 PM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8233
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 11 of 66 (679723)
11-15-2012 1:05 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by sunshaker
11-15-2012 12:59 PM


space is different within our solar bubble "heliopause",

Where did you demonstrate that?

each is made up of varying degrees of lower and higher dimensional energies,

Where is the evidence for this?

And as you say lights bends in "gravity wells" and follows a curved path, so depending where light is coming from and the path it as to take around untold gravity wells through different densities of space, can we be sure where anything is?

Of course we can. Light is bending around the Earth's gravity well right now. Do you have problems finding anything?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by sunshaker, posted 11-15-2012 12:59 PM sunshaker has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8233
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 16 of 66 (679737)
11-15-2012 1:50 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by sunshaker
11-15-2012 1:47 PM


but i do believe that "all" matter and energies(dark matter), first came from a higher dimension, which dropped into this lower d spaces and rapidly expanded, so all matter and energies used to be "dark matter",

Based on what evidence?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by sunshaker, posted 11-15-2012 1:47 PM sunshaker has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8233
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 17 of 66 (679738)
11-15-2012 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by sunshaker
11-15-2012 1:10 PM


The ions in dark matter only have electrons when they have been electrically charged

Where are the experiments and observations that show this?

From everything I have read, dark matter is supposed to have no charge.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by sunshaker, posted 11-15-2012 1:10 PM sunshaker has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by sunshaker, posted 11-15-2012 2:06 PM Taq has responded
 Message 21 by NoNukes, posted 11-15-2012 4:20 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8233
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


(2)
Message 22 of 66 (679769)
11-15-2012 5:09 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by sunshaker
11-15-2012 2:06 PM


It is the expansion of dark matter that gives the charge.
Hydrogen H http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/hydrogen/index.html#non-dop

This fails on several fronts. First, hydrogen interacts with light. Dark matter does not. Second, your cite is arguing for a tired-light hypothesis which has already been falsified:

http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/tiredlit.htm

I mentioned Compton scattering before, and it applies to other non-doppler redshifts. These mechanisms scatter light. This will result in either an opaque universe or a universe where distant galaxies are very blurry. We don't observe either. Therefore, dark matter can not be ions, and the observed redshift can not be due to photons interacting with hydrogen or ions.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by sunshaker, posted 11-15-2012 2:06 PM sunshaker has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by sunshaker, posted 11-15-2012 6:27 PM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8233
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 23 of 66 (679770)
11-15-2012 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by sunshaker
11-15-2012 2:03 PM


As i see all matter and energies as being "higher dimensional" and the space we are expanding into as lower dimensional,

You can see the Moon being made of green cheese, but that doesn't turn the Moon into green cheese. You need to supply evidence for your claims instead of just stating "I believe".


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by sunshaker, posted 11-15-2012 2:03 PM sunshaker has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8233
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 28 of 66 (679896)
11-16-2012 9:40 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by sunshaker
11-15-2012 6:27 PM


If like i mentioned earlier that we cannot really tell where anything is as light is always bending around dark matter, and other galaxies, could this refocus the blurring of said given objects.

No. There is no putting Humpty Dumpty back together again. Once light is scattered you can not realign it.

if you turn and look at your pc monitor in a mirror you will see a sharper more colourful screen.

Sandblast the mirror to a dull finish and then look at the reflection. That is a scattered image.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by sunshaker, posted 11-15-2012 6:27 PM sunshaker has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8233
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 29 of 66 (679897)
11-16-2012 9:42 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by sunshaker
11-15-2012 6:01 PM


But also what i am saying "dark matter" is higher dimensional space,

You can say that the moon is made of cheese, but that doesn't make it true. What we need to see is actual evidence for your claims.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by sunshaker, posted 11-15-2012 6:01 PM sunshaker has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8233
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


(1)
Message 30 of 66 (679903)
11-16-2012 9:58 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by sunshaker
11-16-2012 6:35 AM


as we continnue to expand the properties of dark matter change, whether we call these expanded particles, nucleons, ions, or hydrogen h,

Dark matter certainly can't be ions as we have already discussed.

Also, it appears that dark matter can not be hydrogen either. Scientists found two galaxy clusters in the midst of a collision. What they found is that the luminous matter interacted and slowed during the collision. However, there was matter that did not absorb or emit light, and it sailed right past without interacting like normal matter would.

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap060824.html

The only type of interaction that dark matter has with normal matter is through gravity. That is inconsistent with hydrogen which would interact with other molecules or atoms of hydrogen, and would emit light at those temperatures.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by sunshaker, posted 11-16-2012 6:35 AM sunshaker has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by sunshaker, posted 11-16-2012 8:37 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8233
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


(1)
Message 33 of 66 (679951)
11-16-2012 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by nwr
11-16-2012 4:20 PM


Re: Constant Speed of Light
As I see it, the constancy of the speed of light is used as a sort of standardizing principle, so as to find ways of translating measuring scales between different inertial frames.

I don't think that is the case here (unless I am misunderstanding you).

Photons are not like bullets. People in different inertial frames would measure a different speed for a bullet. Not so with light. The speed of light is measured as being the same in all inertial frames. It isn't standardized to be the same. It IS the same.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by nwr, posted 11-16-2012 4:20 PM nwr has acknowledged this reply

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8233
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 56 of 66 (680379)
11-19-2012 11:54 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by sunshaker
11-19-2012 10:18 AM


If dark matter is anti matter, matter and light would be pushed away,

No they wouldn't. It would produce copious amounts of photons as matter and anti-matter annhialite. It would be the most luminous matter in the universe, the very opposite of dark matter.

You might also read about positron emission tomography, otherwise known as PET scans. This technique acutally uses anti-matter to produce photons.

Also, anti-matter absorbs light just like regular matter, so again we have the problem if scattered or absorbed light which is not seen.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by sunshaker, posted 11-19-2012 10:18 AM sunshaker has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by sunshaker, posted 11-19-2012 1:36 PM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8233
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 57 of 66 (680381)
11-19-2012 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by sunshaker
11-19-2012 11:06 AM


Sticks and Stones, i am only trying to put to words what i see,

It seems as if you are just making it up as you go. Reference to evidence in the real world would be very helpful at this point.

I myself think of many "humans" as "one dimensional entities" who may live in this world but never really understand what is in front of them, being unable to see beyond their conditioning.

It would appear that person is you because you simply don't understand how reality works. Instead, you have a fantasy that you have invented which you "see", but can never evidence.

as there is yet no "science" around that comes close to explainning,

You have made it abundantly clear that you don't understand what the science actually is, nor the current state of the evidence.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by sunshaker, posted 11-19-2012 11:06 AM sunshaker has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by sunshaker, posted 11-19-2012 1:18 PM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8233
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 60 of 66 (680403)
11-19-2012 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by sunshaker
11-19-2012 1:18 PM


the evidence is there, but it as been interpreted wrong,

What is this evidence you are talking about?

physics first went off tracks when the "big bang" theory was put forward, at roughly the same time as the universal background radiation was detected, because they seemed to fit each other it became excepted by most, which as threw science back decades, now all "evidence" is made to fit into this big bang theory.

Lemaitre proposed the Big Bang in 1927. The CMB was not detected until 1964. The CMB was a prediction of the BB model for almost 40 years before it was finally discovered. The Big Bang was first proposed because of the observed correlation between distance and redshift for distant galaxies.

now all "evidence" is made to fit into this big bang theory.

Umm, no. The model is changed to fit the evidence. The latest evidence demonstrates that the expansion is accelerating, so this has been incorporated into the BB model.

There is nothing in the big bang theory that does not fit better in a free falling expanding universe in lower d space,
it explains dark matter, blackholes, gamma ray bursts , gravity , galaxy formation, and much more.

What evidence is there for "lower d space"?

You have not got the ability to see a complete picture.

Apparently not since you have dark matter being made up of ions which just doesn't work.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by sunshaker, posted 11-19-2012 1:18 PM sunshaker has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8233
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 62 of 66 (680408)
11-19-2012 1:45 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by sunshaker
11-19-2012 1:36 PM


Like i said you have not the ability to think for yourself,

Yes, I do. I actually look at the evidence instead of making stuff up like you do.

As the universe expands lower d space is rushing in,

Based on what evidence?

dark matter also expands as the space within is "unfolded" and ripped, produceing these massive amounts of photons, this is picked up and deposited by the lower d space, which we see as "gamma ray bursts", from what i understand quite luminous.

Based on what evidence?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by sunshaker, posted 11-19-2012 1:36 PM sunshaker has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020