Space, Time, The Expanding Universe, and the Speed of Light

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mythx

Guest
OK, I've recently been studying (just for fun, I have no professor to turn to) Einstein's theory of relativity and am trying to get a question answered. In our expanding universe, what happens to time, as space expands? Also, what I believe is the flip side to that question, what happens to the speed of light? Does c change as the universe expands?
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
Simply, time moves forward at a "constant" rate, and the speed of light (and other electromagnetic radiation) in a vacuum is fixed and does not change.
 
M

mythx

Guest
MeteorWayne":2u1y2cua said:
Simply, time moves forward at a "constant" rate, and the speed of light (and other electromagnetic radiation) in a vacuum is fixed and does not change.
We already know that time doesn't move forward at a constant rate. We know it speeds up when you're in a gravity well. The speed of light is considered a constant, but is that constant based on anything that may one day change? My question is does the expanding (or maybe one day contracting) of the universe affect the speed of light, or the speed at which time passes. Time I'm guessing would be the more difficult to measure since any change would likely be uniform throughout the universe, and we'd therefore not be in a position to measure it. Just looking for thoughts.
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
As far as we have been able to demonstrate. the speed of light is fixed. For the moving observer, the passage of time does not change; it only changes when observed by someone at a different rate of speed. For the person or object moving at any speed, time for them (or it) passes at the same rate.
 
D

derekmcd

Guest
mythx":3uzq4ol7 said:
OK, I've recently been studying (just for fun, I have no professor to turn to) Einstein's theory of relativity and am trying to get a question answered. In our expanding universe, what happens to time, as space expands? Also, what I believe is the flip side to that question, what happens to the speed of light? Does c change as the universe expands?
In the context of an expanding universe, you are dealing with a 'global' reference frame. In this case, time is, indeed, a constant. Only at the 'local' level, at which point you may choose several difference reference frames, does time slow down or speed up depending on your choice.

The expansion of the universe happens over time. As the distances increase, they are moving in a timelike direction. As such, it makes no sense to talk about time expanding or speeding up.

As for the speed of light, special relativity tells us that it remains a constant no matter your choice of reference frames. To date, this is one of the most rock solid postulations made in physics.
 
B

Boilermaker

Guest
mythx":1cw1u01s said:
OK, I've recently been studying (just for fun, I have no professor to turn to) Einstein's theory of relativity and am trying to get a question answered. In our expanding universe, what happens to time, as space expands? Also, what I believe is the flip side to that question, what happens to the speed of light? Does c change as the universe expands?
You know, I've been here at these threads for about a month and a half, I asked a couple of questions and made a couple of comments, which got no response. But what does happen is you guys simply read my posts and regurgitate them as your own.....sure you've been studying with no professor to turn to, sure you have......

this is the second thread I've gone to today which has just taken my question and then added their own "name" to it..not only do people plagiarize answers they plagiarize questions for pete's sakes, have you no shame?
 
M

mythx

Guest
Boilermaker":18al0dlt said:
You know, I've been here at these threads for about a month and a half, I asked a couple of questions and made a couple of comments, which got no response. But what does happen is you guys simply read my posts and regurgitate them as your own.....sure you've been studying with no professor to turn to, sure you have......

this is the second thread I've gone to today which has just taken my question and then added their own "name" to it..not only do people plagiarize answers they plagiarize questions for pete's sakes, have you no shame?
Boilermaker: Get over yourself! We all have questions, some of us are bound to have similar ones.
 
B

Boilermaker

Guest
nah, I don't have to get over myself, I asked this question for years, what is time? I said I believe time is the expansion of space, I said it here over a month ago, look how many posts have asked my question within that month.....oh, I just got this idea and since I don't have a professor or Einstein to talk to.....

why didn't you just engage me?

I remember as a kid, around 1960, I was hearing about atoms and being told about the Solar system and I said, what if the Solar system is an atom in someone else's universe....I heard that same thing said a hundred times by a hundred different people over the years, know why? Because it's an obvious question.

on the other hand, I have asked about Time all the same years and heard many answers but none equating time with the expansion, none saying it IS the expansion, none saying what I just said a month and a half ago here but ten years ago elsewhere on the net...........then you come along on the same site within a month and....coincidence!

I'm looking for answers from educated people that might be great, even if it's an explanation for how wrong I am, that could be good too, save me wasting my time, but around here instead of answers I see others rephrasing my question and trying to pretend...gee, I just had this thought..........maybe the Solar system is just an atom.....have you posted that thought around here as your own too?
 
  • Like
Reactions: michael45
M

mythx

Guest
Boilermaker":29fqnptt said:
nah, I don't have to get over myself, I asked this question for years, what is time? I said I believe time is the expansion of space, I said it here over a month ago, look how many posts have asked my question within that month.....oh, I just got this idea and since I don't have a professor or Einstein to talk to.....

why didn't you just engage me?

I remember as a kid, around 1960, I was hearing about atoms and being told about the Solar system and I said, what if the Solar system is an atom in someone else's universe....I heard that same thing said a hundred times by a hundred different people over the years, know why? Because it's an obvious question.

on the other hand, I have asked about Time all the same years and heard many answers but none equating time with the expansion, none saying it IS the expansion, none saying what I just said a month and a half ago here but ten years ago elsewhere on the net...........then you come along on the same site within a month and....coincidence!

I'm looking for answers from educated people that might be great, even if it's an explanation for how wrong I am, that could be good too, save me wasting my time, but around here instead of answers I see others rephrasing my question and trying to pretend...gee, I just had this thought..........maybe the Solar system is just an atom.....have you posted that thought around here as your own too?
Well, I've been reading these forums for about 2 days now, and I haven't seen your original question. This one came to me after reading about the theory of relativity, which I'm still trying to understand. I'm willing to bet there's more people with this question than you think.

I've thought of the solar system as an atom thing before too, but never really gave it much weight. I think the resemblance is merely coincidence.
 
B

Boilermaker

Guest
Well, I've been reading these forums for about 2 days now, and I haven't seen your original question. This one came to me after reading about the theory of relativity, which I'm still trying to understand. I'm willing to bet there's more people with this question than you think.

I've thought of the solar system as an atom thing before too, but never really gave it much weight. I think the resemblance is merely coincidence.
no, you've been around these threads longer than that my friend, Since November 2008,

you only started posting a couple of days ago, but you've been a member much longer....it's obvious, you read my posts a couple of days ago, thought about them and regurgitated them as if they were a product of yourself. Where were your questions since November last year? We now know one thing about you for certain, you said something which could be called a lie right there, you made out as if you have only been here for a couple of days but your profile said you've been here for 6months


What books have you been reading which raised this question in your mind exactly and what page and paragraph specifically?

my point was that Everyone found the comparison between the drawing of an atom and the drawing of the solar system to be Obvious, but no one I've read about in the last forty five years I've been reading has found obvious what I just asked here and which you just repeated.


please give me an example of your reading materials, what led you to your thoughts?

I read "The Arrow of Time" and "The God Particle" and "Black Holes and Baby Universes" and " a Brief History of Time" and that is just a few I read looking for the answer to the Question I already had which no one was answering, "what is time"?

I have read many other books, I found I had to go the library to get books to explain theories in books I was reading, looking for answers to MY question.

When I was a child in Catholic school and I asked when God was born, I might as well have turned red, grown horns and sprouted a tail, because "Catholic Faith is believing without Question" and I was the Boy with the problem and I was called that and introduced to my teachers when they changed with the years as that, the boy with the problem which was........."I ask too many questions" which equated with "I have no faith at all" and was the source of much animosity for me and it all started with MY QUESTION what is time?

I know others have had that question, but nothing close to an answer, over the years it has made the News when someone scientific posed any sort of theory on it, any potential answer, I recall seeing a show on Amercan News that was about a theory on the nature of time posed by some English Post Office worker, comparing him to Einstein the Patent Clerk, He proposed that time was like a series of photographs, zillions of them and this made the National News shows............because no one had a theory on what time actually was.

in relativity it is shown to be relative to the observer but not explained ,How?

so, coincidentally while you've been around here for ages actually, a couple of weeks after I post MY QUESTION here, you suddenly decide to post and what do you post? MY QUESTION......I don't think it's a cojncidence and you weren't the only one, someone else posted it too....a little rehash maybe and as I was pointing out, its' obvious once it has been pointed out to you.........like an atom and the solar system.....but you don't have that thought till someone shows you the pictures.....till someone leads you to it.
 
D

derekmcd

Guest
mythx":129pl1rg said:
I'm willing to bet there's more people with this question than you think.

We do get frequent question about Special Relativity and General Relativity and their relationship to time here. There have been occasions where two simultaneous threads are going on.

I don't know the particular circumstance, but not all threads get answered. Sometimes there may be a flurry of activity and the thread just gets bumped to the bottom and may not be recognized.

I've thought of the solar system as an atom thing before too, but never really gave it much weight. I think the resemblance is merely coincidence.
A bit off topic, but there is, actually, no resemblance. The electron does not have a particular orbit around the nucleus. It exists as a state of probabilities and is depicted as sort of a symmetrical cloud around the nucleus.
 
B

Boilermaker

Guest
hello derekmcd,

I realize that the atom doesn't look like the solar system, it was just an example of many minds having a single thought, not really coincidentally either, no one owned that idea, I think the first person to say that " maybe our solar system is an atom in someone else's universe" would have been the first person to see the old drawings of atoms, which were drawn to look just like the drawings of the solar system, so anyone seeing those drawings would have been led to the thought, how similar they appear...........

but of course, the electron is more like a fuzz ball, it's called the "electron shell" and the electron cannot share it's shell with another electron, if another electron with the same energy were added to the atom then one would either have to emit a photon and drop to a smaller radius shell or else absorb a photon and jump to a higher radius shell and maybe radius isn't the correct term but I think you get what I mean and if my friend with the same question I have is reading then maybe he can tell me from his Book on Einstein's theory if that wasn't the Photo-electric effect which won Einstein the Nobel Prize when he discovered it?

to anyone interested in these questions I would suggest doing a google video search for The Electric Universe and Thunderbolts of the Gods, I will leave a link right here http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4773590301316220374&ei=fcD3SbfrNKi6-gHC67D9Cg&q=the+electric+universe&hl=en&dur=3, they are very interesting videos which offer a different view completely and they might make more sense of things than current theories do. Another interesting video to look up is the Expanding Earth, this is really cool with good clips explaining the science and it's a real eye opener check out this http://www.nealadams.com/nmu.html web site.

just a point to ponder, if the Expansion of Space IS time, then the way we judge the age of the Universe is perhaps not exactly accurate. Because, if there was a Big Bang and then an inflationary period during which the Universe grew at many times the speed of light and if it grew at various rates as it is now apparently doing by speeding up, which is a surprise since you would expect the expansion to be slowing down over time, then how can we look at the visible expanse and judge it's age by it's apparent size?

If it grew lets say at the speed of light and we can see fourteen billion light years of space, then we can estimate an age of the visible universe of about fourteen billion years......but if it was at one point expanding at a hundred times the speed of light for any amount of time then what? If I have a ruler which grows at an inch a day and I see it is twelve inches long I can estimate that it is twelve days old but if I discover somehow that at one point it grew at a rate of four inches a day and slowed down to one inch a day then how am I to truly know the age of it?

another thought, if Space is expanding and if Space is a field of Strings and it exists and expands in some void, not a field of strings, not expanding and not space/time and if we called this the void, then in the Void there could be an existence and there could be events going on which are not dependent on or related to Space and Time. If you were in this void you would be outside of time and space and you could view the Universe expanding and you could see the past, the present and the future of the Universe as it unfolds in front of you. You would be able to enter the Universe anywhere and at any point in space and time you chose to and for you it would always simply be NOW. You would not age as age is an effect of time or the expansion of space which would only effect you while you were immersed in space and time.

maybe there are other beings, not of our expanding space time Universe which never age and which can visit us from their exterior dimension?
 
M

mythx

Guest
Boilermaker,
You didn't catch me in a lie, just caught me being imprecise. I've been reading space.com for a couple years now, signed up so I could comment on articles a few months ago. Stumbled upon the community (forum) section a few days ago and well, now here I am arguing with you about the originality of my question. It's a rather pointless argument one of which I really don't intend to continue. I just looked through the thread, others have had similar questions. I'm willing to bet other sites will show people asking similar questions. The fact that I opened my question up in a manner similar to yours shows....well, nothing conclusive. Perhaps we think alike. Perhaps we have similar experiences. Maybe it's just a coincidence. Take your pick. BTW, I still haven't located your post, I'm just taking you at your word.
 
M

mythx

Guest
derekmcd":2etsbqwj said:
A bit off topic, but there is, actually, no resemblance. The electron does not have a particular orbit around the nucleus. It exists as a state of probabilities and is depicted as sort of a symmetrical cloud around the nucleus.
I suppose I should be more precise here as well. The popular view of an atom depicts the electrons orbiting the nucleus. Early on in chemistry studies (at least mine was), I was actually taught that the electron orbits the nucleus. I didn't learn of the shell until I got to college. Anyone who doesn't take time to study these fields probably goes their entire life imagining an atom to look like a 3 dimensional planetary system. With imagery like that how can one not make the comparison?
 
B

Boilermaker

Guest
mythx":1nt3o6v3 said:
Boilermaker,
You didn't catch me in a lie, just caught me being imprecise. I've been reading space.com for a couple years now, signed up so I could comment on articles a few months ago. Stumbled upon the community (forum) section a few days ago and well, now here I am arguing with you about the originality of my question. It's a rather pointless argument one of which I really don't intend to continue. I just looked through the thread, others have had similar questions. I'm willing to bet other sites will show people asking similar questions. The fact that I opened my question up in a manner similar to yours shows....well, nothing conclusive. Perhaps we think alike. Perhaps we have similar experiences. Maybe it's just a coincidence. Take your pick. BTW, I still haven't located your post, I'm just taking you at your word.
Dear mythx,

I am very sorry and do apologize for that, I did the same thing and accept that I am mistaken and that we simply shared a single question at approximately the same time and posted it here for all to see and hopefully appraise. I had posted and come around to see if anyone had given me an answer or a suggestion or anything, but there was none. I realize this happens here too, many people must come and only read one or two posts and leave without comment. I was like you though, I came here precisely to comment and I read the actual published articles at Space.com for pure reading interests alone.

I was very disappointed that no one answered my questions, there were posts after the couple I made which just continued on without so much as mentioning my questions or thoughts here. Then I look at the forum topics and see your posts which ask the same question and say the same thing I did and viola, answers, dialogue. I think it may be that calling myself Boilermaker brings automatic dismissal of what I may think about Science. Maybe not though, maybe my questions were incomprehensible the way I worded them or perhaps my way with words is just too vague for most people. Either way, it's not your fault and I am sorry I took offense and then felt insulted by you, who I am sure meant no insult to me.

In one of my abrasive posts I quoted a few lines from my own previous posts and highlighted my own words to show the similarity of my questions to yours and someone else's too....someone else made a very similar post to mine also, which also drew responses, while mine never, so that is proof that it is my own fault if my questions went unanswered.

I have been searching for answers to a couple of questions for a very long time and now I think I may have actually stumbled on one or two myself but I want them appraised by smarter better educated people than me, maybe they are pure rubbish and I'm embarrassing myself by asking them and am just too ignorant to know, that is highly likely.

regardless, again I apologize and ask you to please accept this and forgive me and keep asking your questions, I do wish you more luck than I ever had in finding an answer.....somehow it all has to make sense in the end doesn't it?

I know, there is no reason to expect it all to appeal to "common sense" as our questions aren't anything which our common experiences would have led us to ask and our common sense evolved through experiences....I think?

so, that's it, I am sorry.
 
M

mythx

Guest
Boilermaker":15xf1333 said:
regardless, again I apologize and ask you to please accept this and forgive me and keep asking your questions, I do wish you more luck than I ever had in finding an answer.....somehow it all has to make sense in the end doesn't it?
Boilermaker, think nothing more of it. Let's get on with science
 
B

Boilermaker

Guest
Okay, thank you, now then let me try and say something about this question you have asked.

As the Universe expands it obviously contains more Space and since space is a measurement of time as the age of the Universe is judged by the expanse of the Space given in light years of distance, it also apparently contains more Time.

when I was a child I asked my physics teacher what time was and the answer he gave me was that time is movement, any vibration of an atomic particle would give us time, he said. I didn't get any satisfaction from that explanation but that doesn't mean it was wrong, far from it because who am I? But that said, I came to what feels like an epiphany on this subject which told me, time is the expansion of space. So, if "movement" means expansion of space then I do get satisfaction from that answer, the expansion is a change, time as a feature of Space is a change of Space which brings about change on everything in Space.

I think that Space has a structure, I think that structure is what causes energy to travel as a wave and not just a point or some other form. I imagine space to be made of strings which curl into balls or hoops to conduct energy like cogs would, one turns and it turns its neighbors in the opposite directions and so on, as cogs do.....for imaginary purposes I am describing it the best way I can, not saying this is fact, just for mental illustration purposes.

I think that for some reason the fastest speed that these strings can conduct energy through Space is the speed of light or C. A photon traveling through space travels from A to B at a maximum velocity of C but if you add more energy to that photon while it cannot possibly go faster than C it does Shorten in Wavelength and rise in Frequency which is equivalent to traveling more distance between A and B than a straight line....if you can picture this.

imagine a less energetic photon as a man walking a mile in a straight line down a street and it always takes him and every photon/man five minutes to walk that mile, it has never been done faster and cannot be done faster by any photon/man. Imagine that what happens as you add energy to the photon/man as he heads off to start this mile journey is that at the first intersection he runs a block to his north and back again then continues down the street to the next intersection where he runs a block south and back again and he does this at every intersection for the whole mile but at the finish line it has taken him exactly five minutes, the exact same time as the first man with less energy walking straight down the street for the entire mile. This seems to me to be how energy behaves in space, why? I do not know.

Now, suppose you add far more energy to your photon/man, and send him down the mile long street, as he zips back and forth on his way from A to B he is pushing so much resistance from the bow pressure, even though the air is exceedingly thin that for him the air actually becomes equivalent to a solid mass, like a solid wall directly in front of him and as he gains even more energy he smashes through this wall which now sticks to him and becomes one with him and slows him to a stop, now all he can do is vibrate he has changed state to become a mixture of space/time/energy, he has become a particle of matter and since he is a solid which represents this mixture which is denser as a combination of these, he has mass which neither space nor energy does and he does not expand in time so he has become a dense energy particle standing like a dead head in a flowing stream that he was once part of. He does have energy but he is heavy and cannot zip along as before, so he spins, if he spins clockwise this will represent a negative charge, when he meets another like himself but with an anticlockwise spin which we can call positive charge then they will find themselves being drawn toward each other in the stream like two............magnets?

that's what I think.....what do you think?
 
M

mythx

Guest
Boilermaker":2ruq3v50 said:
Okay, thank you, now then let me try and say something about this question you have asked.

As the Universe expands it obviously contains more Space and since space is a measurement of time as the age of the Universe is judged by the expanse of the Space given in light years of distance, it also apparently contains more Time.

when I was a child I asked my physics teacher what time was and the answer he gave me was that time is movement, any vibration of an atomic particle would give us time, he said. I didn't get any satisfaction from that explanation but that doesn't mean it was wrong, far from it because who am I? But that said, I came to what feels like an epiphany on this subject which told me, time is the expansion of space. So, if "movement" means expansion of space then I do get satisfaction from that answer, the expansion is a change, time as a feature of Space is a change of Space which brings about change on everything in Space.

I think that Space has a structure, I think that structure is what causes energy to travel as a wave and not just a point or some other form. I imagine space to be made of strings which curl into balls or hoops to conduct energy like cogs would, one turns and it turns its neighbors in the opposite directions and so on, as cogs do.....for imaginary purposes I am describing it the best way I can, not saying this is fact, just for mental illustration purposes.

I think that for some reason the fastest speed that these strings can conduct energy through Space is the speed of light or C. A photon traveling through space travels from A to B at a maximum velocity of C but if you add more energy to that photon while it cannot possibly go faster than C it does Shorten in Wavelength and rise in Frequency which is equivalent to traveling more distance between A and B than a straight line....if you can picture this.

imagine a less energetic photon as a man walking a mile in a straight line down a street and it always takes him and every photon/man five minutes to walk that mile, it has never been done faster and cannot be done faster by any photon/man. Imagine that what happens as you add energy to the photon/man as he heads off to start this mile journey is that at the first intersection he runs a block to his north and back again then continues down the street to the next intersection where he runs a block south and back again and he does this at every intersection for the whole mile but at the finish line it has taken him exactly five minutes, the exact same time as the first man with less energy walking straight down the street for the entire mile. This seems to me to be how energy behaves in space, why? I do not know.

Now, suppose you add far more energy to your photon/man, and send him down the mile long street, as he zips back and forth on his way from A to B he is pushing so much resistance from the bow pressure, even though the air is exceedingly thin that for him the air actually becomes equivalent to a solid mass, like a solid wall directly in front of him and as he gains even more energy he smashes through this wall which now sticks to him and becomes one with him and slows him to a stop, now all he can do is vibrate he has changed state to become a mixture of space/time/energy, he has become a particle of matter and since he is a solid which represents this mixture which is denser as a combination of these, he has mass which neither space nor energy does and he does not expand in time so he has become a dense energy particle standing like a dead head in a flowing stream that he was once part of. He does have energy but he is heavy and cannot zip along as before, so he spins, if he spins clockwise this will represent a negative charge, when he meets another like himself but with an anticlockwise spin which we can call positive charge then they will find themselves being drawn toward each other in the stream like two............magnets?

that's what I think.....what do you think?
I think I understand your analogy, though in the end, I think it was getting as complicated as what you were trying to describe. I only have a rudimentary understanding of the Theory of Relativity, and even less of an understanding of particle physics/quantum mechanics, which I believe is what you're getting into. I am curious about the relationship between space and time with respect to the expanding universe.

How is the space-time coordinate system described? I understand 3 dimensional coordinates (x,y,z), but when you at time to the system, is there a good visual analogy to help describe that?
 
B

Boilermaker

Guest
sorry about that, I might be getting a bit extravagant with trying to describe my thoughts as picture stories, I really am an artist and think a little differently sometimes.

the coordinates in space work like this for me: I say that I will meet you at the intersection of this street and that street on the seventh floor of the Jabba the Hutt building there. You now know where we will be meeting but we need to add When we will be meeting so our arrival there coincides with each other and we actually do meet there.

if I say I will meet you there on the 5th of May 2009 at 1:00pm sharp then we have the time coordinates to add to the space coordinates and now we can be sure to meet.

now here's the mystery of time.........if one of us goes off into space between now and then and rockets away close to the speed of light for the intervening amount of days between now and the 5th of May 2009 and then returns when our calendar watch says that date has arrived and we head off to meet the other at our agreed upon date and time, that one will discover that he has arrived many many days too late for the meeting.................how does this happen?

because if time is the Expansion of space and one of us is going along through space at a thousand times the rate the other one is then that one will experience a thousand times less expansion and time from when he left on his speedy trip than the one left behind to experience time zipping quickly past him while he is unawares................because space is expanding quickly and he is moving through it slowly, so he experiences more space expansion and time because the slower he moves the faster it sweeps past him.............while the fast flying one approaches the rate at which he is keeping pace with the expansion to the point he is experiencing lots of space but practically no time.

I bet time passage is inversely proportional to velocity through space as it relates to the hubble constant (parameter?) and equally to gravity as it relates to velocity, if Gravity slows the expansion of space locally and I think it must.

I am beginning to confuse myself now.
 
D

derekmcd

Guest
Boilermaker":24olgpjh said:
to anyone interested in these questions I would suggest doing a google video search for The Electric Universe and Thunderbolts of the Gods, I will leave a link right here http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4773590301316220374&ei=fcD3SbfrNKi6-gHC67D9Cg&q=the+electric+universe&hl=en&dur=3, they are very interesting videos which offer a different view completely and they might make more sense of things than current theories do. Another interesting video to look up is the Expanding Earth, this is really cool with good clips explaining the science and it's a real eye opener check out this http://www.nealadams.com/nmu.html web site.
I'd highly recommend getting your science education from different sources. Both the electric universe and expanding earth have been debated here. Let's just say, it made for some good comedy.

If videos are your preference for gaining some insights, I'd recommend our Lectures and Documentaries thread that is stickied in the Space Science and Astronomy forum.
 
B

Boilermaker

Guest
Hello derekmcd,

you said:
"I'd highly recommend getting your science education from different sources. Both the electric universe and expanding earth have been debated here. Let's just say, it made for some good comedy.

If videos are your preference for gaining some insights, I'd recommend our Lectures and Documentaries thread that is stickied in the Space Science and Astronomy forum
."

that was the point of linking the video's derekmcd, those are some of the many different sources I have checked. I need to compare sources, consider different views and ideas and try and comprehend reality, that's all we're really trying to do, not invent anything just comprehend where we are and the nature of our surroundings.

it stands to reason that if Space is expanding so is everything in it, and I wouldn't be too quick to laugh, not if I were really trying to appear scientifically minded because in the last few years alone we have had observations which contradicted our accepted beliefs, we have found stars to be older than the Universe, that's not possible but I read it, it was a genuine mystery for a time there, and just yesterday at Space.com I read about young Spiral Galaxies........when you see these stories, they almost always say that the current theories will have to be reappraised or tossed out completely...........not always and not all theories, but enough of them and often enough that if I were a scientist of the Cosmologist or Quantum Physicist branches of study, I would almost never laugh at other people's theories............he who laughs last....

did you not watch the videos on the Expanding planets? you can clearly see that they do expand, it's obvious and definite by the proofs the guy is offering.

about the videos, I've been looking at the odd video on science on the Ineternet, my favourite site for this is Ted.com if you don't know it, you should check it out..........my favourite subjest for video is General artificial Intelligence and if you do a google search for Asimo learns and check out that video, it might blow your mind.........Aubrey Degrey is very interesting and if you check out novamente with a google search you might just find yourself enjoying some video science............there are the google lectures also on science by scientists...........I have had a couple of ongoing email conversations with some of the scientists at those sites too, it's all good.........in my opinion.

I am starting to think that the whole thing is an illusion and we don't really exist, we're living in the matrix....it wouldn't surprise me......

I know there are no stars older than the Universe, I was just making a point that even our most accepted wisdom is often on shaky ground................but then we learn and move on..........I cant make up my mind between m branes and p branes, what do you think?

what about you, do you have any links for me?
 
D

DrRocket

Guest
Boilermaker":s5c22uda said:
Hello derekmcd,

you said:
"I'd highly recommend getting your science education from different sources. Both the electric universe and expanding earth have been debated here. Let's just say, it made for some good comedy.

If videos are your preference for gaining some insights, I'd recommend our Lectures and Documentaries thread that is stickied in the Space Science and Astronomy forum
."

that was the point of linking the video's derekmcd, those are some of the many different sources I have checked. I need to compare sources, consider different views and ideas and try and comprehend reality, that's all we're really trying to do, not invent anything just comprehend where we are and the nature of our surroundings.

it stands to reason that if Space is expanding so is everything in it, and I wouldn't be too quick to laugh, not if I were really trying to appear scientifically minded because in the last few years alone we have had observations which contradicted our accepted beliefs, we have found stars to be older than the Universe, that's not possible but I read it, it was a genuine mystery for a time there, and just yesterday at Space.com I read about young Spiral Galaxies........when you see these stories, they almost always say that the current theories will have to be reappraised or tossed out completely...........not always and not all theories, but enough of them and often enough that if I were a scientist of the Cosmologist or Quantum Physicist branches of study, I would almost never laugh at other people's theories............he who laughs last....

did you not watch the videos on the Expanding planets? you can clearly see that they do expand, it's obvious and definite by the proofs the guy is offering.

about the videos, I've been looking at the odd video on science on the Ineternet, my favourite site for this is Ted.com if you don't know it, you should check it out..........my favourite subjest for video is General artificial Intelligence and if you do a google search for Asimo learns and check out that video, it might blow your mind.........Aubrey Degrey is very interesting and if you check out novamente with a google search you might just find yourself enjoying some video science............there are the google lectures also on science by scientists...........I have had a couple of ongoing email conversations with some of the scientists at those sites too, it's all good.........in my opinion.

I am starting to think that the whole thing is an illusion and we don't really exist, we're living in the matrix....it wouldn't surprise me......

I know there are no stars older than the Universe, I was just making a point that even our most accepted wisdom is often on shaky ground................but then we learn and move on..........I cant make up my mind between m branes and p branes, what do you think?

what about you, do you have any links for me?
derekmcd provided you a valid reference to materials in a thread in the SS&A forum. You would be well advised to listen to his counsel and take advantage of that material.

You are quite wrong in assuming that if the universe is expanding then so is everything else. It just doesn't work that way, and if it did, then there would be NO meassurable effect from the expansion since measurements are relative in any case. The expansion is in fact countered by the other forces of physics.

But that it a nit. The real potential tragedy is that you seem be enamored by some pseudoscientific New Age crap. If you pursue that line, you will gain no benefit and potentially do youself quite a bit of harm. Go learn some real science before looking at the products of the lunatic fringe. You need a solid base in order to make reasoned judgments.

There are way too many nut cases advocating nonsense. You first need to learn the basics and learn what rigorous science is all about. It is not easy, but it is worth the effort. The easy path leads nowhere, and from your comments you are going nowhere in a big hurry. It is not too late to get back on track, but it soon will be.

Pay attention to the book list, and read some things written by real scientists. There is way too much garbage on the internet.
 
B

Boilermaker

Guest
DrRocket,

hello, I think I will check out the suggested threads here, but I have no idea why you would say all that about a lunatic fringe..........because I have seen something on the Internet does not mean anything. I have been saying all along that I understand that my thoughts are not led by education and I understand that I am most likely wrong.

on the other hand, it has been apparent to me for a very long time that there are many people who are educated far beyond the level of their intelligence and I have learned to take nothing for granted in that area. I have been around scientists and worked with them, I have taken ice cores in the Arctic, water Samples from the Beaufort Sea, done wild life observations there too, I have held the skull of a Mammoth dredged up from the bottom of the Arctic Ocean while on a Dutch Ship taking Sand from a "borrow point" which was being analyzed by Geologists whom I lived with while I was there, nine years I was there. I mixed with Russians. Germans, Canadians and Americans as well as Dutch. It was extremely interesting to me and there were Chemical Engineers and Meteorologists among my company every day all day.

I have had many friends and relatives who taught in University, while I am not educated my close relatives are all Judges, Lawyers, Doctors and Medical Researchers in various fields........................all I'm saying is, I am not surrounded by dummies reading comics...and I am not reading comics.


If you look back through the posts I made, you might notice that I listed a few of the many books I have read by Real Scientists..............I never said I was learning anything from the Internet, did I? maybe I did and I forget about it now, but I can assure you, if I am, it;s very little, the Internet is my source of entertainment, this is me entertaining myself, what are you doing?

My day so far, I just came home from my job which is in a Nuclear Power Plant, I have been tested and trained on every system they have. Right now I am square eyed from staring at a Monitor all day while marking check points on the I.T.P. for replacing the fuel Channels of the Calandria...........the first time in History a Nuke Plant has been retubed with the replacement of the Steam Generators and Steam Drums..........I have been involved in every single step from isolation of the Units we are working on to the removal and replacement of all components and now I have been trained in Q.C./Q.A. and FME which I work at now in a managing capacity.

so, I have many Nuclear Physicists for company as well as Engineers of all sorts and Chemists and.........the list goes on, I actually have Scientists to talk to, if I want to.

maybe you should read more before you jump to conclusions such as where I get my information. I am here having fun with a question of my own and now I'm talking with others and it seems we are enjoying the chat.........its fun to imagine and ask questions. Do you think the Speakers at Ted.com or google tech talks are quacks or frauds or fringe elements?

I urge you to check out what I pointed to..........but you know what? you could allow yourself to have a little fun with your imagination too.

thanks again for the post and advice and I will check out the threads here, when I have a little more time, lately I work seven days a week, sometimes nights too, so I might be here at odd times.
 
K

KurtVonFritz

Guest
Fellows,
there is a proof thaT time is indeed speeding up, I read it all in a psychology experiment - people were asked to judge the years before they turned 18, and the remaining years, whatever the number, as two related objects, and define which one looked "greater" when taking a retrospective view of an entire human life.
Results-people above 60 stated that their first 18 years looked to them just like the rest of their lives, and i suspect this is not a psychological brain-agintg complication but real-time judgement, after all most humans are not some average chumps that cannot judge the time passing by...
I dont remember more details, however I think everyone here should think of something more practical, like adjusting to the speed of expansion(for the sole purpose of 'stopping' time this waY) without the need for travelling distances on the extreme, any ideas?
 
B

Boilermaker

Guest
KurtVonFritz":mnca2jzb said:
Fellows,
there is a proof thaT time is indeed speeding up, I read it all in a psychology experiment - people were asked to judge the years before they turned 18, and the remaining years, whatever the number, as two related objects, and define which one looked "greater" when taking a retrospective view of an entire human life.
Results-people above 60 stated that their first 18 years looked to them just like the rest of their lives, and i suspect this is not a psychological brain-agintg complication but real-time judgement, after all most humans are not some average chumps that cannot judge the time passing by...
I dont remember more details, however I think everyone here should think of something more practical, like adjusting to the speed of expansion(for the sole purpose of 'stopping' time this waY) without the need for travelling distances on the extreme, any ideas?
Well.............

suppose we could slow time so that I could then travel as far in a second as I previously could in a year? I would not have to travel faster than light to go to the Stars, I might still travel at the same speed as I do now but instead of taking a billion years to travel a light year I take a couple of hours, it would be some kind of time distortion.

I think time is the expansion of space and that gravity as well as velocity and mass affect the expansion.........well suppose we could look at the space between Earth and some place a thousand light years away and suppose we could fold up space in front of us as if we were crumpling up a long length of cloth and when we take a step we have only taken a normal sized step for us but we have covered a mile of cloth with one step, what if we could do that with space time? we wouldn't be taking a mile long step, just covering a mile with one step, don't change our capabilities just change the track from here to there so that we can do it in a thousand steps instead of a million billion, by folding or contracting space/time in front of us and expanding it behind us..........

if Gravity can distort space, so can we somehow.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY