Galaxies and Quasars

For everything one desagrees with, one can find a tale or a fable to illustrate his purpose! too easy!

More difficult is to expose a solid theory...

0 Replies

It is theorized that Stars have lifespans; the theory is that they coalesce from ambient matter, develop, evolve and finally expire.

The brightest, largest stars theoretically have the shortest lifespans... between 1 and 3 Billion years.
Our Sun (a "medium" star) is theoretically 5 billion years into a 10-billion year lifespan.
The smaller stars are theorized to have the longest lifespans- in the region of 50 Billion years or so.

Since it takes millions of years for the light from these stars to reach the Earth; we can only see what they WERE... not what they ARE.
Many of the stars seen may no longer exist.

(That's just one set of theories... Astrology buffs harbor an entirely different set.)

Incidentally, gun-g, your "Emperor's New Clothes" is an illuminative tale!
But it minds me of how our Administration rushed to invade Quag-dad, based upon "Faulty Intelligence".
No-one dared to point out the obvious holes in the "Faulty" information.. for fear of being labeled "Unsupportive" and/or "UnPatriotic".
!

0 Replies

Ros, i just dont feel comfortable with the BB. Its counter intuitive , membrane theory seems more something that i can grasp .

nonee of the theories has supportive data theere are enormous amounts of mass unaccounted for. The M theory guys say, these are the parallel universes.

iI cnnot compreehend the shape of the universe. Ive heard it a taurus, a compound ellipsoid, and some other shapes tthat appear as an amorphous blob.

0 Replies

Francis wrote:

For everything one desagrees with, one can find a tale or a fable to illustrate his purpose! too easy!

More difficult is to expose a solid theory...

Here's another way to view the problem...

Get yourself a ruler or a yardstick. What is it exactly that the thing is measuring? I mean, distances basically are metaphysical constructs like the numbers five and seven.

Try walking into your local CVS drugstore or WalMart and telling the store manager that you want to buy a five or a seven.

Now, if the person isn't laughing uncontrollably at this point, try telling him or her that you bought a five two weeks ago, but that the five just isn't enough for you and you want to change it to a seventeen, and you need to know how much it will cost to trade up.

There's no difference between that and the idea of having the foot or yard that your yardstick or tape measure measures "expand" into two or three feet or yards.

There's no difference between believing in things like that and walking down the street naked with your ass and your d*** showing to all the world and telling everybody you see that they're stupid for thinking you're naked.

0 Replies

How quickly the topic degenerates into "ass and ...dick" talk... when the dialogue is guided by a certain faction.
Professing to have their heads in the Stars... I observe the location of said heads to be elsewhere.

0 Replies

Coulda been a good thread...

Oh well, maybe next time Gunga...

0 Replies

Think I'm missing something or leaving something out?

If space can expand, then it can expand on all scales, not just the scale of the universe.

How does two feet expand into three feet? Surely if you believe in such a thing you can provide an explanation for it.

0 Replies

gungasnake wrote:

If space can expand, then it can expand on all scales, not just the scale of the universe.

Correct. It does expand on all levels. I realized this years ago and asked a guy I know at Cornel University Astronomy Department. He confirmed it. But he said that atomic forces overwhelm the expansion at micro scales so that subatomics retain their size. He said that Universal expansion at the atomic level comes into play when they are doing Zero Point Energy calculations.

0 Replies

rosborne979 wrote:

gungasnake wrote:
If space can expand, then it can expand on all scales, not just the scale of the universe.

Correct. It does expand on all levels. I realized this years ago and asked a guy I know at Cornel University Astronomy Department. He confirmed it. But he said that atomic forces overwhelm the expansion at micro scales so that subatomics retain their size. He said that Universal expansion at the atomic level comes into play when they are doing Zero Point Energy calculations.

That's still nonsensical. When you talk about space, you're just talking about distances, not atomic particles or anything like that.

The question is, how does space expand?

Again in case you might have missed it, I view the entire idea as bullshit.

0 Replies

Even I get this, and I'm merely a freshman, in HIGHSCHOOL. The entire idea is that as the universe expands, everything else expands with it. You'd think, and it seems you do, that this would be inconsequential as the means of measuring it would also expand, but as Rosborne explained, forces on the atomic level would keep the measuring tool as a constant as it is made of many atoms put together. The next question is why there's a difference between the expansion on a macro scale and the expansion on a micro scale. This is explained by the lack of matter in certain areas of the Universe. On the question of how to measure this expansion, I believe the measurement has to do with calculations using the idea of redshift and relating the degree of redshift to a certain speed.

I hope that made sense and that it wasn't completely full of "bullshit".

0 Replies

Here's some ideas on the expansion of space by scientists at NASA. http://www.allnewuniverse.com/article7.html

0 Replies

gungasnake wrote:

rosborne979 wrote:
gungasnake wrote:
If space can expand, then it can expand on all scales, not just the scale of the universe.

Correct. It does expand on all levels. I realized this years ago and asked a guy I know at Cornel University Astronomy Department. He confirmed it. But he said that atomic forces overwhelm the expansion at micro scales so that subatomics retain their size. He said that Universal expansion at the atomic level comes into play when they are doing Zero Point Energy calculations.

That's still nonsensical.

Maybe to you, but the fact remains that the theory makes detailed predictions, many of which have since been confirmed. If it's off the mark, it isn't off by far.

0 Replies

Vengoropatubus wrote:

Even I get this, and I'm merely a freshman, in HIGHSCHOOL. The entire idea is that as the universe expands, everything else expands with it. You'd think, and it seems you do, that this would be inconsequential as the means of measuring it would also expand, but as Rosborne explained, forces on the atomic level would keep the measuring tool as a constant as it is made of many atoms put together. The next question is why there's a difference between the expansion on a macro scale and the expansion on a micro scale. This is explained by the lack of matter in certain areas of the Universe. On the question of how to measure this expansion, I believe the measurement has to do with calculations using the idea of redshift and relating the degree of redshift to a certain speed.

I hope that made sense and that it wasn't completely full of "bullshit".

Hi Vengoro, welcome to A2K. Smile

It made a lot of sense, and it's nice to know that there are highschool kids with your level of scientific curiosity and interest.

Best Regards,

0 Replies

there is a hierarchy of forces gunga butt obviously you want to steer this some other way. As Adrian said, tthis coulda ben a neat thread, maybe someon withh curiosity and a desire to learn by listening and not preemptive opining may start one.

Sorry ros, Id like to discuss this seriously but the mendacity portrayed as scientific knowledge by our snake friend is gettin too deep.Anyway Im attending a lecture by my parakeet on geomagnetic and gravitational flux this afternoon

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

Sorry ros, Id like to discuss this seriously but the mendacity portrayed as scientific knowledge by our snake friend is gettin too deep.Anyway Im attending a lecture by my parakeet on geomagnetic and gravitational flux this afternoon

When I was a kid, I was listening to a similar lecture by my pet parakeet, when it was suddenly overcome by an irresistible urge to escape from its cage. After which it flew across the room, ran into a window, fell the ground and was promptly eaten by our persian cat. It's last squawk was, "unggg, must tell primate about quantum thermo...". That cat was not impressed.

0 Replies

Some of you guys may not have read the original article on this thread; you probably should. The idea of finding a quasar inside a near galaxy with substantially different redshift values pretty much collapses the idea of using redshift as an indication of distance and that kills the ideas of "expanding space" and the "big bang".

0 Replies

Re: Galaxies and Quasars

gungasnake wrote:

"If this quasar is close by, its redshift cannot be due to the expansion of the universe," he adds. "If this is the case, this discovery casts doubt on the whole idea that quasars are very far away and can be used to do cosmology."

Right. So the problem here is with Quasar theory, not cosmology theory.

0 Replies

Galaxies and Quasars

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know