Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   bulletproof alternate universe
Melchior
Inactive Member


Message 241 of 308 (97315)
04-02-2004 8:44 PM
Reply to: Message 237 by simple
04-02-2004 8:39 PM


Re: light that's yet to be
But that would require fundamental changes in what the stars are made out of (most likely 'inventing' new types of atoms).
Saying that "It magically changes to whatever we need." is not an useful model in any way. If you want us to take you serious, you'll need to actually provide something well thought over which actually says something specific. Otherwise you're just coming up with stuff as you go along.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 237 by simple, posted 04-02-2004 8:39 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by simple, posted 04-02-2004 8:58 PM Melchior has replied

simple 
Inactive Member


Message 242 of 308 (97317)
04-02-2004 8:54 PM
Reply to: Message 236 by RAZD
04-02-2004 8:36 PM


dear abby
quote:
you still have the problem of light from stars nearer than 6200 light-years being full source light and light from further further stars being watered ....
Light in our physical universe would be the same. The reason we see it even from far away, would be because, it was already on the way here as it was slowed. If it wasn't simple slowing to present speed, then some process from the seperation which resulted in our physical light. The process left us seeing the far away light still, but light was changed, for our plane, so it was slow now.
PS If you do reply please try to be clear you are not playing games, if you expect any real answer from me. I try to give you the benefit of the doubt, as you seem to know a lot about cosmology. But at the same time the general flavor of your posts strikes me as sarcastic, and a sort of junior high type of fogginess, and tounge in cheek -would be cleverness, written more for a giggling friend than who it is posted for.
By the way I'm closing the thread very soon, from my point anyhow, so if anyone can really shoot the concept down, fine. If not, thanks for the imput.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 8:36 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 253 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 9:52 PM simple has replied
 Message 254 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 9:55 PM simple has replied
 Message 255 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 9:57 PM simple has not replied
 Message 256 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 9:59 PM simple has not replied
 Message 260 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 11:12 PM simple has not replied
 Message 261 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 11:22 PM simple has not replied
 Message 262 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 11:45 PM simple has not replied
 Message 263 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 11:47 PM simple has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 243 of 308 (97318)
04-02-2004 8:55 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by Melchior
04-02-2004 5:00 PM


a matter of some gravity
the formula is
F = G*m*M/d/d where
  • F is the force (here of gravitational attraction)
  • G is a constant
  • m is the mass of the attracted body (boy)
  • M is the mass of the attractive body (girl)
  • d is the distance between the center of mass of m to the center of mass of M (thus a man in a deep mine is still pulled towards the center of the earth)
On the surface of the earth this defaults to the more familiar f=g*m where g = ~10 m/s/s = G*M/d/d (where d = the average radius of the earth)
So yes, the closer the boy and girl get, the stronger the force, and as they collapse on the floor, the closer they can get ...

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by Melchior, posted 04-02-2004 5:00 PM Melchior has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 245 by simple, posted 04-02-2004 9:00 PM RAZD has replied
 Message 246 by Melchior, posted 04-02-2004 9:08 PM RAZD has replied

simple 
Inactive Member


Message 244 of 308 (97322)
04-02-2004 8:58 PM
Reply to: Message 241 by Melchior
04-02-2004 8:44 PM


Re: light that's yet to be
I don't know what you mean. All I've said is it split off, and became what we have now. The process was such that it was a more or less uninterupted flow, now, at a slow physical plane speed. So yes, before the split it was fudamentally very different.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 241 by Melchior, posted 04-02-2004 8:44 PM Melchior has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 247 by Melchior, posted 04-02-2004 9:10 PM simple has replied

simple 
Inactive Member


Message 245 of 308 (97324)
04-02-2004 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 243 by RAZD
04-02-2004 8:55 PM


Re: a matter of some gravity
quote:
On the surface of the earth this defaults to the more familiar f=g*m where g = ~10 m/s/s = G*M/d/d (where d = the average radius of the earth)
So yes, the closer the boy and girl get, the stronger the force, and as they collapse on the floor, the closer they can get ...
Happy hunting

This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 8:55 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 252 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 9:44 PM simple has not replied

Melchior
Inactive Member


Message 246 of 308 (97326)
04-02-2004 9:08 PM
Reply to: Message 243 by RAZD
04-02-2004 8:55 PM


Re: a matter of some gravity
Oh, I am very familiar with that formula. What I was suprised by was that you claim that the internal distances in a black hole isn't changed from it's non-hole state.
To which I responded to say that the only way for something to have a higher centralized deformation due to gravity was if it occupied less space (as per the formula).
So is or is not a black hole denser than the star it was 'made' from?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 8:55 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 248 by simple, posted 04-02-2004 9:12 PM Melchior has not replied
 Message 251 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 9:43 PM Melchior has not replied

Melchior
Inactive Member


Message 247 of 308 (97328)
04-02-2004 9:10 PM
Reply to: Message 244 by simple
04-02-2004 8:58 PM


Re: light that's yet to be
Just short checkup here... Are you at least slightly familiar with all of the following concepts?
- Frequency
- Wavelenght
- Spectra from stars (based upon the elements within it)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by simple, posted 04-02-2004 8:58 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by simple, posted 04-02-2004 9:16 PM Melchior has not replied

simple 
Inactive Member


Message 248 of 308 (97329)
04-02-2004 9:12 PM
Reply to: Message 246 by Melchior
04-02-2004 9:08 PM


Re: a matter of some gravity
Whoops, sorry, Abby I mistook the post as an answer to another post.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 246 by Melchior, posted 04-02-2004 9:08 PM Melchior has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 250 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 9:28 PM simple has not replied

simple 
Inactive Member


Message 249 of 308 (97335)
04-02-2004 9:16 PM
Reply to: Message 247 by Melchior
04-02-2004 9:10 PM


Re: light that's yet to be
Slightly is a good word. Why would the wavelength, or spectrum, indicate that light does not jive with the two planes splitting?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 247 by Melchior, posted 04-02-2004 9:10 PM Melchior has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 250 of 308 (97343)
04-02-2004 9:28 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by simple
04-02-2004 9:12 PM


Re: a matter of some gravity
s'okay

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by simple, posted 04-02-2004 9:12 PM simple has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 251 of 308 (97352)
04-02-2004 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 246 by Melchior
04-02-2004 9:08 PM


Re: a matter of some gravity
not quite what I said -- perceived from inside the black hole the distances would appear unchanged, but view from outside they would be reduced in size -- it is the relativity space warped thing.
the gravity force of the star as measured from far enough away before and after the collapse would be the same -- nothing has been added or taken from the equation to change that significantly.
this usually takes a super-nova to produce - lesser nova produce "neutron stars" that are super dense but still allow light to escape - and the outer material gets blown off while the inner material gets blown in, compacted. {{if you measure the gravity from inside the blown away shell ... it should be less?}}
If the force is great enough it will be compressed inside the "event horizon" for its mass and become a black hole.
In theory any amount of mass could be compacted into a black hole, but the forces needed are cosmic in scale so it won't happen even for something the size of our sun.
QAD nutshell explanation.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 246 by Melchior, posted 04-02-2004 9:08 PM Melchior has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 252 of 308 (97353)
04-02-2004 9:44 PM
Reply to: Message 245 by simple
04-02-2004 9:00 PM


Re: a matter of some gravity
ahahahahahaaa
happy in deed

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by simple, posted 04-02-2004 9:00 PM simple has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 253 of 308 (97355)
04-02-2004 9:52 PM
Reply to: Message 242 by simple
04-02-2004 8:54 PM


signed lights on who's home?
The reason we see it even from far away, would be because, it was already on the way here as it was slowed.
light from before already arrived, light slowed in ((now 12 day) "process") affected by that stretching to be very significantly different from 'normal' light and thus will be noticeably different for stars inside the "age horizon" from those outside the "horizon" by a factor of 2 million.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by simple, posted 04-02-2004 8:54 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 257 by simple, posted 04-02-2004 10:09 PM RAZD has replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 254 of 308 (97358)
04-02-2004 9:55 PM
Reply to: Message 242 by simple
04-02-2004 8:54 PM


some process still undefined
If it wasn't simple slowing to present speed, then some process from the seperation which resulted in our physical light.
shouldn't affect our weight. any word on the biblical justification on the 12 days?
(the Hindu model rules)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by simple, posted 04-02-2004 8:54 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 258 by simple, posted 04-02-2004 10:11 PM RAZD has replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 255 of 308 (97359)
04-02-2004 9:57 PM
Reply to: Message 242 by simple
04-02-2004 8:54 PM


Re: dear abby
If it wasn't simple slowing to present speed, then some process from the seperation which resulted in our physical light. The process left us seeing the far away light still, but light was changed, for our plane, so it was slow now.
and the change from one to the other was by a factor of 2 million. I think most people would notice ... maybe not all but most.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by simple, posted 04-02-2004 8:54 PM simple 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