0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
This sphere is just one part in the entire Universe that should be bigger than that.
As you claim that you understand physics, why don't you use this formula to kick out the BBT? Why only Theory D?
It is quite clear to me by now that you are using terms/laws/formulas/theories/hypothesis... only to disqualify other theories.
Based on your current understanding about relativity, any galaxy in our Universe couldn't move faster than the speed of light.
However, our scientists claim that a galaxy at a distance of 13 BLY is actually moving away from us almost the speed of light. Due to the idea that the Universe is isotropic and homogenous, a galaxy at 26 BLY should move away at 2cWe know that our observable universe is 94 BLY. Therefore, a galaxy that is located at the edge in one side, is moving away from the galaxy at the other side at velocity of:94/13 c = 7.23 c.Our scientists claim that the entire Universe should be quite bigger than this 94 BYIf we just assume that the entire universe is 130 BLY, than a galaxy that is located at the edge in one side, is moving away from the galaxy at the other side at velocity of 10c.So, based on the current BBT theory you should know for sure that galaxies are already moving away from each other at a velocity which is much faster than the speed of light.
Therefore, I wonder how could you claim that: "the galaxies move faster than c so that would violate relativity." while you know for sure that based on the BBT galaxies are moving away from each other at least 7 times the speed of light?
I do not know that for sure! Please don't assume you know what I think.
our scientists claim that a galaxy at a distance of 13 BLY is actually moving away from us almost the speed of light. Due to the idea that the Universe is isotropic and homogenous, a galaxy at 26 BLY should move away at 2cWe know that our observable universe is 94 BLY. Therefore, a galaxy that is located at the edge in one side, is moving away from the galaxy at the other side at velocity of:94/13 c = 7.23 c.
Getting back to your hypothesis, I would like to know how it handles this apparent conflict with relativity. To my way of thinking there are 3(?) options:1. Relativity is wrong.2. There is some sort of mechanism in your hypothesis that allows superlumial velocities without violating relativity.3. The galaxy only appear to be moving faster than light.
a galaxy at a distance of 13 BLY is actually moving away from us almost the speed of light. Due to the idea that the Universe is isotropic and homogenous, a galaxy at 26 BLY should move away at 2c
Do you agree that the furthest galaxies at our observable universe are moving away from each other faster than the speed of light (7.23c?)?
Well, relativity is relatively.If you understand theory D, you would see that there is no contradiction.Let's look at the following example - Rocket over rocket over....rocket.We know from relativity that:"Maximum speed is finite: No physical object, message or field line can travel faster than the speed of light"So, the maximal velocity of a rocket must be finite and significantly less than the speed of light.However, this is relativity to its base.Therefore, let's assume that a rocket can travel at 0.01 c.I hope that you agree that there is no problem with that estimation.So, let's assume that we fire a rocket (rocket 1) from earth (let's ignore the gravity impact of the earth). This rocket cross the space at 0.01c.After one day a second rocket (rocket 2) is fired from that rocket 2 also at 0.01c and in the same direction as rocket 1.In this case, do you agree that the relative velocities are as follow?Erath to Rocket 1 = 0.01cRocket 1 to rocket 2 = 0.01cEarth to rocket 2 = 0.02c.Now, if we continue with this process every day than after 10 days:Earth to rocket 10 = 10 * 0.01 c = 0.1cWith regards to rocket 10.Let's assume that it can only see rocket 9. In this case, if we were riding on rocket 9 we could think that we are moving at only 0.01c with regards to the space. as rocket 9 is the only relative reference that we have.If we continue than after 100 days:Earth to Rocket 100 = 1cHowever, againIf rocket 100 can only see rocket 99 it might think that its relative velocity is just 0.01cIf we continue more and more than after 1000 days:Earth to Rocket 1000 = 10cAlso in this case, rocket 1000 that only see rocket 999 might think that its velocity is only 0.1cSo, Rocket 1000 considers that it is only crossing the space at 0.01 c while relatively to earth it is moving away at 10c.Do you see any violation in the relativity?
Yes, that is a clear violation of the theory of relativity. According to relativity no mass can travel at the speed of light let alone exceed it. If laser pulses were sent from earth along side the series of rockets, in this scenario, after rocket 100 the subsequent rockets would pass the laser pulses since they exceed c relative to earth where the laser light is coming from.So it sounds like choice 1? If you agree that choice 1 is correct we can move on, if not we can continue with the relativity discussion.
In this case, do you agree that the relative velocities are as follow?Erath to Rocket 1 = 0.01cRocket 1 to rocket 2 = 0.01cEarth to rocket 2 = 0.02c.
So, if each rocket can only see a nearby rocket, than each one of them could think that its velocity is only 0.01c while as I have proved, the rocket 1000 is moving away from earth at 10c.
Why not?
In the following article it is stated:https://hypertextbook.com/facts/1999/PatriciaKong.shtml"Due to relativity, the speed of the Milky Way varies when compared with different objects in space."So, we can estimate our velocity only by observing different objects in space.
Do we see any fixed reference in the space?
If we can't see any object around us, how could we know our real velocity in space?
So it is still looking like number 1 is your answer.
I don't think he feels that relativity is wrong.I just don't think he understands what it means.Anyway, if he's going to say that relativity is wrong, he's going to struggle.It's probably the best tested idea in the whole of science.It may be that's why he won't say he disagrees with it.But the problem is, if it's correct (or even close), then his idea of an infinitely old universe fails.
As I pointed out, a laser from earth pointed parallel to the rockets would go slower than the all the rockets after rocket 100. Do you disagree with that?
Correct velocity is relative. There is no absolute frame of reference.
QuoteQuote from: Dave Lev on Today at 15:46:08If we can't see any object around us, how could we know our real velocity in space?You cannot, it is not even worth asking what is our 'real' velocity.
Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 15:46:08If we can't see any object around us, how could we know our real velocity in space?
What about the laser light that is moving along side the train of rockets? The rockets will exceed the speed of that laser light! That violates relativity.
QuoteQuote from: Bobolink on Today at 05:27:20However, our scientists claim that a galaxy at a distance of 13 BLY is actually moving away from us almost the speed of light. Due to the idea that the Universe is isotropic and homogenous, a galaxy at 26 BLY should move away at 2cWe know that our observable universe is 94 BLY. Therefore, a galaxy that is located at the edge in one side is moving away from the galaxy at the other side at velocity of:94/13 c = 7.23 c.Our scientists claim that the entire Universe should be quite bigger than this 94 BYIf we just assume that the entire universe is 130 BLY, than a galaxy that is located at the edge in one side, is moving away from the galaxy at the other side at velocity of 10c.So, based on the current BBT theory you should know for sure that galaxies are already moving away from each other at a velocity which is much faster than the speed of light.I wanted to talk about your idea not the BBT. As you have said the BBT is wrong so there is no reason to bring it into the conversation.
Quote from: Bobolink on Today at 05:27:20However, our scientists claim that a galaxy at a distance of 13 BLY is actually moving away from us almost the speed of light. Due to the idea that the Universe is isotropic and homogenous, a galaxy at 26 BLY should move away at 2cWe know that our observable universe is 94 BLY. Therefore, a galaxy that is located at the edge in one side is moving away from the galaxy at the other side at velocity of:94/13 c = 7.23 c.Our scientists claim that the entire Universe should be quite bigger than this 94 BYIf we just assume that the entire universe is 130 BLY, than a galaxy that is located at the edge in one side, is moving away from the galaxy at the other side at velocity of 10c.So, based on the current BBT theory you should know for sure that galaxies are already moving away from each other at a velocity which is much faster than the speed of light.
BBT explains it by saying that space expands.You say space does not expand.That's the difference.Did you not realise that?
What about the laser light that is moving along side the train of rockets? The rockets will exceed the speed of that laser light! That violates relativity. We can see billions of light years away so we could see all of the rockets from earth anyway (if the telescope was powerful enough).So it is still looking like number 1 is your answer.
Therefore, as Bored chemist had accepted the idea of galaxies that are moving faster than the speed of light due to the expansion, he also should accept the idea of moving faster than a speed of light due to the Rocket over rocket mechanism.As the expansion doesn't violate the relativity, then also rocket over rocket doesn't violate.
That's just not true.And, no matter how many times you say it, it with still not be true.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 22/04/2020 18:34:53That's just not true.And, no matter how many times you say it, it with still not be true.Simple questionDo you agree that in our current observable universe there are galaxies that are moving away from each other faster than the speed of light?Please - yes or no
No. It doesn't.We currently see that activity in our real Universe.I have already offered an example for that.
For the sake of discussion we can forego the issue of "from whose point of view".Yes, I think there are.And they were got to that speed by an expansion of space time.https://www.universetoday.com/13808/how-can-galaxies-recede-faster-than-the-speed-of-light/
OK. How about this, your hypothesis agrees with the theory of relativity and in addition states that galaxies can move through space a superluminal speeds. Correct?
We have got a confirmation for galaxies that are moving faster than the speed of light.
Our scientists claim that this activity doesn't violate relativity due to the expansion.
So do you agree that now we need to discuss why rocket over rocket has the same impact as the expansion?
The universe is also expanding. That means that galaxies that are far apart are moving away from each other due the expansion, this is called recession velocity. Since this movement is not through space it is not limited to the speed of light.
Your idea of rockets shooting rockets means they move through space therefore no matter how many rockets you have you cannot travel at c.