# The Naked Scientists Forum

### Author Topic: Why doesn't the quasars show any time dilation?  (Read 11418 times)

#### yor_on

• Naked Science Forum GOD!
• Posts: 11651
• (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
##### Re: Why doesn't the quasars show any time dilation?
« Reply #25 on: 03/11/2014 18:00:34 »
Ah yes :) forgot to say that this is not what we se, apparently. What we see is not what we would expect from a vacuum 'expanding', although we still define some of the redshift we observe to it. the point is though, that if you want to assume a time dilation in this case you will need to construct a logical proof of how a vacuum moves. It doesn't move as far as I can imagine it.

#### yor_on

• Naked Science Forum GOD!
• Posts: 11651
• (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
##### Re: Why doesn't the quasars show any time dilation?
« Reply #26 on: 03/11/2014 18:07:30 »
Think of it as waves, ignore the 'spaces' between signals. They are expected to redshift, do you agree?  Would you now define that as light climbing? Out of a gravitational well?  What about the redshift we see between two objects leaving each other?

#### yor_on

• Naked Science Forum GOD!
• Posts: 11651
• (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
##### Re: Why doesn't the quasars show any time dilation?
« Reply #27 on: 03/11/2014 18:12:05 »
Another argument is whether you the want to define this expansion to a whole universe, or just the 'empty' parts of it, without matter. To me it's a whole universe that has to 'expand' if so, gravity acting as buoys. It might be possible to argue that 'micro gravity' then either keeps this 'time dilation' inside bounds in rest mass, or that, as the expansion is supposed to be in all points of a universe, it is equivalently 'time dilated'.

#### yor_on

• Naked Science Forum GOD!
• Posts: 11651
• (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
##### Re: Why doesn't the quasars show any time dilation?
« Reply #28 on: 03/11/2014 18:23:36 »
also, it is about what makes a arrow. There I define it as a property. One might argue that it is 'propagating light' that defines it, but I don't think that is solely correct. Propagating light is indeed a clock, observer defined, but it's not the arrow, the arrow is a property existing everywhere to me. I'm questioning the vacuum, still wondering what it is, I'm also questioning our definitions of dimensions, 'preexisting' as some 'container universe'.

#### yor_on

• Naked Science Forum GOD!
• Posts: 11651
• (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
##### Re: Why doesn't the quasars show any time dilation?
« Reply #29 on: 04/11/2014 11:28:38 »
Please don't read this as I think inflation, and a subsequent accelerating expansion is wrong. I think it is a very likely description of our universe. But those arguments above, and more, is what I go out from, trying to guess how it could be. I simplify it by getting rid of the 'container', treating it locally, doing so 'propagation of light in a vacuum' becomes something different to me. The ways to think about it is like mirrors to each other, you can get change without a propagation, and I think you can get a distance defined too. Instead of using the assumptions we built constants from, I prefer to puzzle :) from the assumption of constants being what create a universe, observer dependently.

#### The Naked Scientists Forum

##### Re: Why doesn't the quasars show any time dilation?
« Reply #29 on: 04/11/2014 11:28:38 »

Login
Login with username, password and session length