| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"BURT" |
| Date: |
01 Aug 2007 01:55:38 AM |
| Object: |
the age of the universe |
If the most distant object is measured to be 13 billion light years
away it is still older. It traveled slower than light to get that
distance.
The universe has gone on to age the amount of time it took light to
reach us since its emission there. Its a relative. What we see isn't
what IS now.
.
|
|
| User: "G. L. Bradford" |
|
| Title: Re: the age of the universe |
01 Aug 2007 05:33:01 AM |
|
|
"BURT" <macromitch@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1185951338.138389.67680@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
If the most distant object is measured to be 13 billion light years
away it is still older. It traveled slower than light to get that
distance.
The universe has gone on to age the amount of time it took light to
reach us since its emission there. Its a relative. What we see isn't
what IS now.
That light, and the remote picture it brings, didn't just happen to arrive
here just now so that the Hubble telscope could just happen to acquire it
now. Its an unchanging picture. The remote picture is a timeless picture
that has always been there, is there, and will always be there. It's near to
the horizon and that horizon is a universal constant of merger as base
foundation. Planck level.
Theorists keep on trying to merge the macroscopic universe with the
microscopic universe when they are already merged there at the remotest ends
of both -- effectively exactly the same remote end -- from the local, as
well as meeting and merging in the local (such as right here, right now).
That Merger, the Base Foundation, is the "flat" horizon of the Universe;
point, line, and universal surface or "flat", horizon. The local universe
always goes up and out to the non-local universe, from the local, and at the
same time always goes down and in to exactly that same non-local universe,
again from the local.
A base foundation is always the beginning of the building, the beginning
of the pyramid building. The essentially spaceless-timeless beginning of
space and time in this case. And it doesn't go away with the existence of
every level above it. Neither do the intervening levels just go away -- just
go out of existence -- with the existence of every next level up.
Let us go to the other end, the future. Recently physicist Lawrence Krause
casually predicted the most distant future universe to be a chaotic "cold
and dark universe." Well no one whosoever, and no instrumentation
whatsoever, can observe the futuristic [as it is right now] universe --
directly, that is. Indirectly, though, we certainly do observe it...as a
chaotic "dark" universe of "dark" matter and energy. We observe it, albeit
indirectly rather than directly, to exist right now, and it is the only
universe we [could possibly] observe to exist "right now" in time outside of
our own most immediate locality, and that, once more, only indirectly rather
than directly. Everything else we observe of the universe out there is
history going away from us and all those awesomely varying past histories
(-) have unobserved awesomely varying lines of future history (+) in
existence all the way up to the present (0) (culminating in "right now").
Unobserved "awesomely varying lines of future history (+) in existence"
spells Chaos with a capital 'C'. (Unobserved "directly, that is." Observable
peripherally or "indirectly".)
From a distant locality away, we [right here and right now] are integral
to exactly that same futuristic [as it is right now] "dark universe" of
"dark matter and energy". All they would observe directly is some point in
Sol's past history (-) before us -- to long before us, or some point in the
Milky Way's past history (-) if their locality is that far away.
So, from beginning to end, bottom up and top down, outside in and inside
out, the Universe always was, always is, and always will be right now (0).
As with the saying, "all politics are local," all change is local (time is
local.... "time is relative" -- from the theories of relativity).
GLB
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: the age of the universe |
01 Aug 2007 09:10:49 AM |
|
|
G. L. Bradford wrote:
That light, and the remote picture it brings, didn't just happen to arrive
here just now so that the Hubble telscope could just happen to acquire it
now. Its an unchanging picture. The remote picture is a timeless picture
that has always been there, is there, and will always be there. It's near to
the horizon and that horizon is a universal constant of merger as base
foundation. Planck level.
The CMB photons collected last year are a little warmer than the CMB photons
collected this year.
.
|
|
|
| User: "G. L. Bradford" |
|
| Title: Re: the age of the universe |
01 Aug 2007 02:07:28 PM |
|
|
"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:Jv0si.47911$Fc.29636@attbi_s21...
G. L. Bradford wrote:
That light, and the remote picture it brings, didn't just happen to
arrive here just now so that the Hubble telscope could just happen to
acquire it now. Its an unchanging picture. The remote picture is a
timeless picture that has always been there, is there, and will always be
there. It's near to the horizon and that horizon is a universal constant
of merger as base foundation. Planck level.
The CMB photons collected last year are a little warmer than the CMB
photons
collected this year.
So? I don't see it changing a thing. I was never a believer in a constancy
of microwave background radiation. But if true it may be useful someday.
GLB
.
|
|
|
| User: "G. L. Bradford" |
|
| Title: Re: the age of the universe |
01 Aug 2007 02:28:48 PM |
|
|
"G. L. Bradford" <glbrad01@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:4JydnaAgl-dURC3bnZ2dnUVZ_g2dnZ2d@insightbb.com...
"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:Jv0si.47911$Fc.29636@attbi_s21...
G. L. Bradford wrote:
That light, and the remote picture it brings, didn't just happen to
arrive here just now so that the Hubble telscope could just happen to
acquire it now. Its an unchanging picture. The remote picture is a
timeless picture that has always been there, is there, and will always
be there. It's near to the horizon and that horizon is a universal
constant of merger as base foundation. Planck level.
The CMB photons collected last year are a little warmer than the CMB
photons
collected this year.
So? I don't see it changing a thing. I was never a believer in a
constancy of microwave background radiation. But if true it may be useful
someday.
GLB
It's the same as Johnson kicking the rock to refute Berkeley's defense of
Newton. Meaningful but meaningless at the same time.
GLB
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "G=EMC^2 Glazier" |
|
| Title: Re: the age of the universe |
04 Aug 2007 09:27:52 AM |
|
|
Sam I was asked 55 years ago what age to give for the universe,and my
answer was 22 billion years. It was laughed at. Not any more. Now
I'm told that could be very conservative Go figure. bert
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: the age of the universe |
01 Aug 2007 03:10:46 AM |
|
|
On Jul 31, 10:55 pm, BURT <macromi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
If the most distant object is measured to be 13 billion light years
away it is still older. It traveled slower than light to get that
distance.
The universe has gone on to age the amount of time it took light to
reach us since its emission there. Its a relative. What we see isn't
what IS now.
Congratulations, you have comprehended the most trivial effect of
finite signal propagation speeds.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BURT" |
|
| Title: Re: the age of the universe |
01 Aug 2007 02:59:46 PM |
|
|
On Aug 1, 12:10 am, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jul 31, 10:55 pm, BURT <macromi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
If the most distant object is measured to be 13 billion light years
away it is still older. It traveled slower than light to get that
distance.
The universe has gone on to age the amount of time it took light to
reach us since its emission there. Its a relative. What we see isn't
what IS now.
Congratulations, you have comprehended the most trivial effect of
finite signal propagation speeds.
Expansion TIME is required.
BURT
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
