How Does Earth Move Through Space?

[johnw]

Feb 9, 2019 8:09:25 GMT -5 Kai said:

Feb 9, 2019 0:14:14 GMT -5 johnw said:

given time is infinite and the event as we theorize it took place at a point in time.

That is not necessarily true. Scientists are still quarreling A LOT about that one.
It could have taken a place at a point in time, or it could have been the beginning of time itself, meaning: there could have been something before the Big bang, or there was no "before" to be anything in there. Nobody really knows.

Kai   Your comment needs to be tweaked a bit to acknowledge time is infinite. There is no such thing as the beginning of time, it has always been. Now, over at The Big Crazy's Pastry Shop we tell youngsters a story about the Universe and we start our story by saying "Once upon a Time" one of the many black holes that exist in the Universe imploded on itself and expelled matter in every direction and we are part of all that matter and this rock we live on is called the Earth. When  asked what is a black hole is we tell them they are like a big vacuum that sucks everything into themselves until it cannot take anymore and then it implodes upon itself and scatters all the matter everywhere and we have what is called a galaxy, and, if you look up into the sky you can see many, many galaxies that are generally swirling around a black hole and it will eventually suck them up and spit them out again.  And so it has been and always will be. Cute story, but if you dissect the basic elements it makes infinite sense.  A steady state of continuous evolution.

The part that is decidedly hard to grasp is how did it all start and since we have not yet developed physics to support that answer, we must, are you ready, take it on faith as being so........... Cheers, johnw

[Kai]

...and precisely because we have not yet developed physics enough to answer this question in either one or the other way, you cannot claim with 100% certainty that time has always been. It might have not. We don't know that. We may believe it, but we can't know.

[parfive]

Coming soon* to a telescope near you . . .The Milky Andromeda.

www.nytimes.com/2019/02/08/science/andromeda-milky-way-galaxy-collision.html



* just not as soon as first advertised.

[johnw]

Feb 9, 2019 15:22:59 GMT -5 Kai said:

...and precisely because we have not yet developed physics enough to answer this question in either one or the other way, you cannot claim with 100% certainty that time has always been. It might have not. We don't know that. We may believe it, but we can't know.

Kai  Look at it another way...........time is something we are living with in a Universe that is infinite. Time cannot be stopped because it is. One second before the Big Bang there was time. It is illogical to say, oops, we just had a big bang so we are now going to start recording time. Our Big Bang started 13.8 billion years ago and we see with awe what resulted. Thru out the infinite Universe, Big Bang's aka Black Holes spew out planets and stars in that area of the Universe and the process continues and never ends. It is know as a steady state of constant evolution and cannot be refuted.  Anyone want to challenge this? Cheers, johnw

[gemfeller]

Feb 9, 2019 18:29:45 GMT -5 johnw said:

Feb 9, 2019 15:22:59 GMT -5 Kai said:

...and precisely because we have not yet developed physics enough to answer this question in either one or the other way, you cannot claim with 100% certainty that time has always been. It might have not. We don't know that. We may believe it, but we can't know.

Kai  Look at it another way...........time is something we are living with in a Universe that is infinite. Time cannot be stopped because it is. One second before the Big Bang there was time. It is illogical to say, oops, we just had a big bang so we are now going to start recording time. Our Big Bang started 13.8 billion years ago and we see with awe what resulted. Thru out the infinite Universe, Big Bang's aka Black Holes spew out planets and stars in that area of the Universe and the process continues and never ends. It is know as a steady state of constant evolution and cannot be refuted.  Anyone want to challenge this? Cheers, johnw

I won't challenge it but I think if you can prove the above thesis mathematically you'll win a Nobel Prize -- maybe two or three. I'll be waiting to see you on stage in Oslo.

[johnw]

Feb 9, 2019 15:45:45 GMT -5 parfive said:

Coming soon* to a telescope near you . . .The Milky Andromeda.

www.nytimes.com/2019/02/08/science/andromeda-milky-way-galaxy-collision.html



* just not as soon as first advertised.

parfive Profound, thanks for sharing and now brought to you as a vision of the singularity event that will occur when the galaxies collide and trigger the black hole reaction that is at the center of the Milky Way,  here they be: “The Singularity Visual, one-millionth of a second before collapse”.  


All the  planets, suns and stars from the Milky Way and Andomeda Galaxy being compressed in a Black Hole exaactly one millionth of a second
before the Big Bang. Awesome.......Cheers, johnw

[johnw]

Feb 9, 2019 18:53:38 GMT -5 gemfeller said:

Feb 9, 2019 18:29:45 GMT -5 johnw said:

Kai  Look at it another way...........time is something we are living with in a Universe that is infinite. Time cannot be stopped because it is. One second before the Big Bang there was time. It is illogical to say, oops, we just had a big bang so we are now going to start recording time. Our Big Bang started 13.8 billion years ago and we see with awe what resulted. Thru out the infinite Universe, Big Bang's aka Black Holes spew out planets and stars in that area of the Universe and the process continues and never ends. It is know as a steady state of constant evolution and cannot be refuted.  Anyone want to challenge this? Cheers, johnw

I won't challenge it but I think if you can prove the above thesis mathematically you'll win a Nobel Prize -- maybe two or three. I'll be waiting to see you on stage in Oslo.

gemfeller I welcome you to join me. Cheers, johnw

[1dave]

Feb 9, 2019 8:09:25 GMT -5 Kai said:

Feb 9, 2019 0:14:14 GMT -5 johnw said:

given time is infinite and the event as we theorize it took place at a point in time.

That is not necessarily true. Scientists are still quarreling A LOT about that one.
It could have taken a place at a point in time, or it could have been the beginning of time itself, meaning: there could have been something before the Big bang, or there was no "before" to be anything in there. Nobody really knows.

But we have OPINIONS which are far more important than mere facts.

[1dave]

johnw - sorry, I have been to a funeral the last couple of days.

It looks to me like we have gone as far as we can with this subject.

What is time? How can anything be without beginning or end? Here everything has a beginning and an end.

[parfive]

Frizzy-headed triple play.

www.nytimes.com/2019/02/05/books/review/einsteins-shadow-seth-fletcher-albert-einstein.html

[Pat]

How?
It obeys gravitational forces.

[johnw]

1dave  Hi Dave, this has been an interesting discussion and we have had some fine conversations to support  opinions on this basic of all questions  being "how did it all start." I have made my opinion on this subject known since it is what I can believe and make infinite sense of and "see" how it could be. Other people have  concepts and beliefs and so they should since each have their own path to follow. We could go on as long as we need, but since you started this thread and now want to end it. I believe it fitting that it end like so. 




                       Α Ω

[1dave]

johnw as always this thread will continue as long as any RTHer wants it to.

50 years ago when the possibility of black holes first came up they were described as "singularities," the same terminology previously used to describe the big bang.

That is when I first started "preaching" about us being inside a black hole.

[gemfeller]

Since the subject of galactic collisions has been featured in this thread, I thought I'd remind you folks that we'll all have time for a second cup of coffee before that cataclysmic event. While he Milky Way's on a direct collision course with Andromeda, the Large Magellanic Cloud is a bigger threat. But it won't happen for a while so I think we can relax for the moment.  What's most interesting to me is the new data collected by Gaia. 

www.space.com/43267-milky-way-andromeda-collision-later.html

[mohs]

i got the pot on

[1dave]

The COW Explosion

www.space.com/42973-mysterious-cow-space-explosion-black-hole-birth.html?jwsource=cl

[1dave]

Something Is Not Quite Right In the Universe

www.space.com/43277-hubble-constant-measured-precisely-with-quasars.html

To explain how the universe went from a tiny, hot, dense speck of soupy plasma to the vast expanse we see today, scientists have proposed what's known as the Lambda Cold Dark Matter (LCDM) model. The model puts constraints on the properties of dark matter, a kind of matter that exerts gravitational pull but emits no light, and dark energy, which seems to oppose gravity. LCDM can successfully reproduce the structure of galaxies and the cosmic microwave background — the universe's first light — as well as the amount of hydrogen and helium in the universe. But it can't explain why the universe is expanding faster now than it did early on.

That means that either the LCDM model is wrong or the measurements of expansion rate are.

The new method aims to finally settle the expansion-rate debate,Simon Birrer, a researcher at the University of California, Los Angeles, and lead author on the new study, told Live Science.So far, the new, independent measurements confirm the discrepancy, suggesting new physics may be needed.

To nail down Hubble's Constant, scientists had previously used several different methods. Some used supernovas in the local universe (the nearby part of the universe), and others have relied on Cepheids, or types of stars that pulsate and regularly flicker in brightness. Still others have studied the cosmic background radiation.

The new research used a technique that involves light from quasars — extremely bright galaxies powered by massive black holes — in an effort to break the tie.

"No matter how careful an experiment is, there can always be some effect that is built into the kinds of tools that they're using to make that measurement. So when a group comes along like this and uses a completely different set of tools… and gets the same answer, then you can pretty quickly conclude that that answer is not a result of some serious effect in the techniques," said Adam Riess, a Nobel laureate and researcher at the Space Telescope Science Institute and at Johns Hopkins University. "I think that our confidence is growing that there's something really interesting going on," Riess, who was not involved in the study, told Live Science.

Seeing double

Here's how the technique worked: When light from a quasar passes an intervening galaxy, gravity from the galaxy causes that light to "gravitationally bend" before hitting Earth. The galaxy acted like a lens to distort the quasar's light into multiple copies — most commonly two or four depending on the alignment of the quasars in relation to the galaxy. Each of those copies traveled a slightly different path around the galaxy.

Quasars don't usually shine steadily like many stars. On account of material falling into their central black holes, they change in brightness on scales of hours to millions of years. Thus, when a quasar's image is lensed into multiple copies with unequal light paths, any change in the brightness of the quasar will result in a subtle flickering between the copies, as light from certain copies takes a touch longer to reach Earth.

From this discrepancy, scientists could precisely determine how far we are from both the quasar and the intermediary galaxy. To calculate the Hubble Constant, astronomers then compared that distance to the object's redshift, or the shift in wavelengths of light toward the red end of the spectrum (which shows how much the object's light has stretched as the universe expands).

Studying light from systems that create four images, or copies, of a quasar has been done in the past. But, in the new paper, Birrer and his collaborators successfully demonstrated that it is possible to measure the Hubble Constant from systems that create just a double image of the quasar. This dramatically increases the number of systems that can be studied, which ultimately will allow the Hubble Constant to be measured more precisely.

"Images of quasars that appear four times are very rare — there are maybe only 50 to 100 across the whole sky, and not all are bright enough to be measured," Birrer told Live Science. "Doubly- lensed systems, however, are more frequent by about a factor of five."

The new results from a doubly-lensed system, combined with three other previously measured quadruple-lensed systems, put the value for the Hubble Constant at 72.5 kilometers per second per megaparsec; that's in agreement with other local universe measurements, but still around 8 percent higher than measurements from the distant universe (the older, or early, universe). As the new technique is applied to more systems, researchers will be able to home in on the exact difference between distant (or early) universe and local (more recent) universe measurements.

"The key is to go from a point where we're saying, yeah, these things don't agree, to having a very precise measure of the level to which they don't agree, because ultimately that will be the clue that allows theory to say what is going on," Riess told Live Science.

Accurately measuring the Hubble Constant helps scientists understand more than just how fast the universe is flying apart. The value is imperative in determining the age of the universe and the physical size of distant galaxies. It also gives astronomers clues as to the amount of dark matter, and dark energy, out there.

As for explaining what possibly exotic physics might explain their mismatch in expansion-rate measurements, that's way down the line.

Originally published on Live Science.

[gemfeller]

If Planck's Quantum Theory is right (and it seems to work in a practical way), interstellar space may not even exist. Einstein rejected what he called "spooky action at a distance" (Quantum Entanglement), but it has now been experimentally proven. It pressents some very interesting potential consequences.

Check out Nova's segment "Einstein's Quantum Dillema" at this link: www.pbs.org/show/nova/

[RWA3006]

Feb 10, 2019 1:45:06 GMT -5 johnw said:

1dave  Hi Dave, this has been an interesting discussion and we have had some fine conversations to support  opinions on this basic of all questions  being "how did it all start." I have made my opinion on this subject known since it is what I can believe and make infinite sense of and "see" how it could be. Other people have  concepts and beliefs and so they should since each have their own path to follow. We could go on as long as we need, but since you started this thread and now want to end it. I believe it fitting that it end like so. 




                       Α Ω

I look at the date of this post and with poignant feelings wonder if our friend found answers to questions this thread asked? I suppose when we step from time into eternity we might learn a thing or two.

[mohs]

well rw
That's a fuzzy wuzzy question

Being that we have mostly
figured out the physical universe
(which is quite an accomplishment)

What i mean... is the gross physicalness of it

Yet knowing the H2O formula
Doesn’t much help a drowning mankind ha

Philosophy as been that study of preparing for the end
At least that what many classics teach
What else can we do ?

Being that I’m seeing the end speeding up fast
I sort of hope for instant illumination



and if its just lights out ?
then I'm prepared for that to
ithink

m stly

Of course the more interesting question is:
What did I do between the 2 eternities?
Even more important …
How as certain metaphysical beliefs condition behavior?
Free will and all that...

I want to believe my hearts intention is pretty good
Yet some of this over thinking can really be frustrating
I try not to let any of it petrify into a dogma
Maybe that where I'm wrong?
Guess I’ll find out on the other side ///
___________________________________________________

I think I might need to add little more clarification
To my gross physicality statement

I think it great that science as laid out so much
the shape of the earth, plate tectonic,
strong origin of the universe, the rise of life,
unbelievable pictures of the cosmos,
quantum mechanic ectt/

that all awesome
mind blowing
and adds to the sense of wonder
and special ness of consciousness

Nonetheless ya kind would hope for something more
O I don’t know,,,maybe some huge crystal pyramid
Out in the middle of endless space
With symbols embossed on its that says:

Your getting hot
Keep on searching

Just some sign
of higher destiny design


Yet HomoFaber
Is deathly good at technology!

Without a doubt -consciousness of some sort
Is going to outlast the death of the universe

Who knows?
We may be the perfect crystal; pyramids builders
symbolically speaking...