0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Could the cosmic background radiation only be the result of many outbursts of energy local to our present observable region? The mechanism for this release of energy might be something of a lesser scale than the purposed Big Bang. Something like a limit being reached for the size of massive bodies, where the definition of a Black Hole may not exactly fit the circumstances.
The analysis of dwarf irregulars was revised and improved when an extensive 21-cm redshift survey of dwarf galaxies was published by J. Richard Fisher and R. Brent Tully. Once the velocity of the solar system was accounted for, the irregulars in the Fisher-Tully Catalogue displayed an extraordinary clumping of redshifts. Instead of spreading smoothly over a range of values, the redshifts appeared to fall into discrete bins separated by intervals of 24 km per second, just 1/3 of the original 72 km per second interval. The Fisher-Tully redshifts are accurate to about 5 km per second. At this small level of uncertainty the likelihood that such clumping would randomly occur is just a few parts in 100,000.
Since it is dark you can deduce that either there's something very odd about our bit of the universe (ie it's the only bit in an infinite space that happens to have stars) or that the universe is finite in time, space or both.This was figured out centuries ago, but I can't remember to whom the deduction is usually attributed.
If the star along a particular line of sight has burned out then it doesn't matter- we will see the light from an older star behind it.
Please provide some evidence for the assertion that "Empty space converts energy to matter."
Good point, an infinitely old universe would have reached thermodynamic equilibrium by now. Ours isn't at equilibrium therefore it's not infinitely old.
I know there's a theory that everything must eventually reach equilibrium. I'm not sure that applies to the universe.But with my run of wrong thinking lately, I don't feel too confident about anything right now
I think though that Olbers paradox can be disposed of. The amount of energy per unit of spacial area doesn't increase because the same amount of energy departs as arrives. There is not an infinite amount of energy available.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 26/04/2009 11:51:17If the star along a particular line of sight has burned out then it doesn't matter- we will see the light from an older star behind it.If in the infinite life of our universe an infinite number of burned out stars exist, brown dwarfs, neutron, ect...., how can we see stars beyond them? Wouldn't an infinite number of burned out stars block out this light?