universal speed?

[rednet]

From what I can tell nothing is at absolute rest and every thing is relative. What is the approx. speed of the earth traveling through space relative to an imaginary fixed point in space? (taking into consideration all possible movement ie. solar system rotation around the Milky Way, the Milky Ways orbit with Andromeda, Local Universe orbit around.... etc.) Is this a universal speed at which all objects in the universe move at, all things being equal of course?

 

[nexium]

Your first sentence is approximately true.<br /> There are too many things moving to calulate the average speed; either vector or scaler, with present technology. If it could be done, my guess is the vector speed would yield a speed for Earth of a few tenths of c, which would change hourly (but slightly) as the Earth changes direction. A low value would indicate that we are near the center of the larger universe which includes portions more than 13.7 billion light years away.<br /> Your last clause "all things being equal" is not the present condition, not can I form a mental image even of most things being equal in some resects. Can you clarify? Neil

 

[rpmath]

<font color="yellow">What is the approx. speed of the earth traveling through space relative to an imaginary fixed point in space?<br /></font><br />If relativity is 100% true, there is no “fixed point in space”...<br />What is fixed for an observer is moving for others...<br /><br />But from earth the Cosmic Background Radiation looks most red-shifted in one direction than the opposite. That red-shift difference can be explaining by the Earth traveling at something near <b>600 Km/s</b> relative to the cosmic background (Earth speed around the sun is 30Km/s and rotation speed is less than 1/2 Km/s at the equator... so it changes a little during the year and day).<br /><br />I don't know what is the official explanation of this...

 

[rednet]

nexium: "all things being equal" relates to physics being the same at any given place in the universe. In other words, An assumption that if there is a universal average speed here on this part of the galaxy that it is the same 13.7 billion light years away, using newtonian law and universal expansion one can conclude that all objects got their start from the same origin. Of course gravity comes into play to slow things down but in the overall big picture there seems to be a velocity that everything would share. You say things are not equal, can you explain this I am having a hard time seeing things rather lop sided. Thanks.

 

[rednet]

RPMath: I find your reply very interesting. Consider for a moment the possibility that relativity is not 100% true in my scenario. <br /><br />Wow, I didn't expect the whole Cosmic Microwave Background to come into play but the whole concept is relative in your scenario, who is to say in which direction the earth is moving. What if the earth is moving upstream, what if it moving downstream? Results will vary as the CMB is also in motion. I find the CMB very disturbing.

 

[rpmath]

<font color="yellow">What if the earth is moving upstream, what if it moving downstream?<br /></font><br />It looks like we are moving downstream, falling toward Virgo cluster and the Great Attractor.<br />At http://www.aoc.nrao.edu/~smyers/courses/astro12/L26.html they have some images from COBE satellite, and they say:<br />“The upper panel shows a strong variation in the temperature (coded from blue to red, with blue cooler than the average and red hotter than the average) from one side of the sky to the other. This pattern is called a dipole and is simply due to the Doppler effect from our galaxy's (and thus the Earth's) velocity of around 570 km/s (caused by the gravitational pull of the Virgo cluster and the so-called "Great Attractor")”

 

[rednet]

Do you think that COBE or even WMAP results for that matter would differ outside the solar heliosphere?<br /><br />Again, my question is velocity vs. an "imaginary" fixed point in space. I have often posted questions outside the realm of relativity only to be brought back in. My question is theoretical in basis. What will happen if relativity is proven false? what then?<br /><br />Imagine for a moment:<br />The earth spinning on its axis.<br />The earth rotating around the sun.<br />The sun rotating around the milky way.<br />The milky way rotating with andromeda.<br />The local universe rotating around another.<br />so on and so forth until you can find no more rotation.<br /><br />NOW: focus on earth and only earth and imagine the direction and speed it has.... take out of the picture the sun, the milky way, andromeda, so on and so forth. What are you left with? Certainly not a straight line for that matter! Now IMAGINE all objects sharing this. Thats what I am after. Not the speed of earth vs. the CMB. <br /><br />(I think the recent test results of the CMB is comparitive to going into the ocean at one particular depth in one particular location and measuring temperature over time and finding an average current temperature and direction that is "anisotropic" in nature, then somehow formulating the origin of the sun from that particular data.)

 

[rpmath]

<font color="yellow">Do you think that COBE or even WMAP results for that matter would differ outside the solar heliosphere?<br /></font><br />I think it will not be affected too much by position but by speed (there is a gravity effect in redshift too but it is the same in all directions)<br />If you put a powerful nuclear Ion rocket to COBE or WMAP, and accelerate it to very a high speed, you will see the pattern changed and the point you are going to becoming more blue than the opposite.<br /><font color="yellow"><br />Again, my question is velocity vs. an "imaginary" fixed point in space. <br /></font><br />The point is how can you know if a point is “fixed”...<br />To say “a point is fixed relative to the space expansion if you see no dipole component of the CMB Radiation from it” is just a definition, but I don't know a better one.<br /><font color="yellow"><br />I have often posted questions outside the realm of relativity only to be brought back in. My question is theoretical in basis. What will happen if relativity is proven false? what then?<br /></font><br />Its equations will still work where they work now, but there will be no reason to the infamous “nothing can go faster than light” <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><font color="yellow"><br />Imagine for a moment:<br />The earth spinning on its axis.<br />The earth rotating around the sun.<br />The sun rotating around the milky way.<br />The milky way rotating with andromeda.<br />The local universe rotating around another.<br />so on and so forth until you can find no more rotation.<br /><br />NOW: focus on earth and only earth and imagine the direction and speed it has.... take out of the picture the sun, the milky way, andromeda, so on and so forth. What are you left with? Certainly not a straight line for that matter! Now IMAGINE all objects sharing this. Thats what I am after. Not the speed of earth vs. the CMB.<br /></font><br />I'm no sure what are you looking for...<b></b>

 

[rednet]

[I think it will not be affected too much by position but by speed (there is a gravity effect in redshift too but it is the same in all directions)]<br /><br />My point is that the results would probably be different and as such cannot be relied upon as an average or standard frame of reference. You said yourself that gravity effects redshift or "lensing" and as you are probably aware of the mass of the universe is not evenly distributed in a uniform pattern. There are places with more gravity than in others. The CMB tested by COBE or WMAP is only local and would more than likely differ at other places in the Universe. So if you traveled at a high rate of speed to measure your velocity against this it would not be accurate Unless you had a map of the CMB at all particular points in space. Furthermore, The CMB should not exist the same as it is slowly dissipating over time and distance. <br /> <br />[The point is how can you know if a point is "fixed"... <br />To say "a point is fixed relative to the space expansion if you see no dipole component of the CMB Radiation from it" is just a definition, but I don't know a better one.]<br /><br />That's why this is "imaginary" pick a point any point. Use Euclidean geometry even if you have to. And we are not talking about an expanding space. Expansion is equal to Compression in relativistic terms and cancel each other out in this non-relativistic view of the Universe. <br /><br /><br />[Its equations will still work where they work now, but there will be no reason to the infamous "nothing can go faster than light"]<br /><br />What's so hard about getting out of a relativistic mind frame for just a second? The nothing can go faster than light is probably true BUT light can be bent by gravity and a nonlinear path is longer and will take more time to travel had there not been any gravity to influence its direction. While light travels at c, it still travels slower the more distance and gravity there is between the observer and the source

 

[rpmath]

<font color="yellow">Next thing I know you will be telling me that the earth is geocentric.<br /></font><br />Earth being geocentric means that the center of earth is the center of earth?<br /><font color="yellow"><br />I'm not asking you to "imagine" what it would look like in a relativistic sense, again "imaginary fixed point" its not a hard concept, I know you can do it. <br /></font><br />ok, I can imagine a fixed point of space, and see earth moving straight away it in some arbitrary direction, with an arbitrary speed... (0 km/s, 570 km/s or whatever other speed you like)<br />now, what do you want to do with it?

 

[lunatio_gordin]

I think he means if you figured out the relative speed of Earth in relation to every other body in the universe...<br />would that speed be the same as if you tried to figure out the relative speed of Mars against every other body in the universe?

 

[rednet]

let me rephrase: geocentric relative to everything else i.e. universal focal point<br /><br />I have posted this thread in hopes of getting a response from scientific minds (as I am clearly not one) who I thought could put some perspective on a subject that I thought would reveal some sort of intellectual thinking process. All I get is "reference material" as learned in books. Boy, was I wrong to expect a little independent critical thinking. That clearly is outside the norm. Troubling as it may seem, main stream science and religion do share something in common and that is: Not open to any ideas not in the book.... GO AWAY!

 

[lunatio_gordin]

Obviously, no one can possibly complete that calculation, so the best they can do is show you hwo you would figure it out, if you could.

 

[rednet]

There you go, you hit the nail on the head... not a hard concept to think about. Hard for me to figure out yes, but I am not the Astronomer here.

 

[lunatio_gordin]

But since we clearly don't know the speed of every object in the entire universe, espescially since we can't even observe it all, it would be kinda difficult to come up with a net speed for earth among all hte other bodies, no?

 

[rpmath]

<font color="yellow">Troubling as it may seem, main stream science and religion do share something in common and that is: Not open to any ideas not in the book.... GO AWAY!<br /></font><br />I gave you what the book says: There is no absolute speed.<br /><br />And I show you some evidence (the only I know) that can be used in the opposite direction to get something we can interpret as an absolute speed.<br />I even gave you a number: 570 km/s<br /><br />Is there a third option?<br />Can you say what are those other ideas not in the book...<br />it's not I'm not open to them, it's just I don't know what are you talking about...

 

[nexium]

I'm also annoyed by experts who refuse to consider ideas outside mainstream, however no absolute speed/relativity works suprising well in astronomy. The 570 km/s is the best idea for an alternative view, I can think of. This is a very high speed, poorly adapted to the speed of the reciprocating pistons in my car motor, which are more conveniently described by considering the engine block stationary even while the car is doing 90 mph on a bumpy circular track. I hope this helps illustrate the folly of a universal speed to reference other speeds to. Neil

 

[newtonian]

RPMath - thank you for that link on our (Milky Way's)journey on a river in space towards the Great Attractor in the Virgo cluster with a velocity of 570 km/s.<br /><br />I intend to examine this interesting thread further.

 

[newtonian]

nexium - The 570 km/s is not the speed of the universe, of course.<br /><br />It is the speed of earth, and Milky Way, towards the Great Attractor.<br /><br />This applies no matter what you use as a fixed reference point, be it Milky Way, the Great Attractor, or some other reference point.<br /><br />There is an accelerating universal speed of expansion - but this may be independent of speed on the fabric of space - i.e. there is a speed of the fabric of space, and there are independent speeds of objects within the fabric of space.<br /><br />Not totally independent, though.<br /><br />The Great Attractor actually overcomes the cosmological constant, or dark energy - a very important point!<br /><br />BTW - have you studied RP Math's link?<br /><br />It is quite thorough, very interesting!

 

[rodrunner79]

You know I had a question similar to this. But mines is not as mind boggling as his, it's relatively simple. <br />How fast is our galaxy moving? And if it is, is everything in it being moved with it or do each object have it's own speed and move on their own? If so, why haven't we drifted away from our own galaxy?

 

[newtonian]

rodruner79 - Milky Way is moving 570 km/sec (kilometers per second) towards the Great Attractor in the Virgo Cluster.<br /><br />It all depends on what you use as your fixed point of reference to gauge speed, btw.<br /><br />Much of the Milky Way is gravitationally bound and so the whole galaxy is moving.<br /><br />Our sun and all stars are moving within the galaxy at various speeds - did you want me to post those speeds?<br /><br />We haven't drifted away from our galaxy because of beinmg gravitationally bound in orbit around the galactic center.

 

[Saiph]

You ask how fast is the galaxy moving. I ask, "relative to what?"<br /><br />Newtonian tells you how fast we're moving relative to an object labeled "The great attractor" which appears to be attracting many objects in the local group (our nearby neighbor galaxies).<br /><br />As for why we don't leave the galaxy, it's for the same reason our planet doesn't leave the solar system, or we don't leave the surface of the earth: Gravity! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#c0c0c0"><br /></font></p><p align="center"><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">----</font></em></font><font color="#666699">SaiphMOD@gmail.com </font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">-------------------</font></em></font></p><p><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">"This is my Timey Wimey Detector.  Goes "bing" when there's stuff.  It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually.  I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- </font></em></font><font size="1" color="#999999">The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>