What is the Universe expanding into..

Do you think there was anything before the big bang?

  • I don't think there was anything before the Big Bang

    Votes: 56 12.5%
  • I think something existed before the Big Bang

    Votes: 200 44.7%
  • I don't think the big bang happened

    Votes: 54 12.1%
  • I think the universe is part of a mutiverse

    Votes: 201 45.0%

  • Total voters
    447
Status
Not open for further replies.
Are you sure there's no elves or spirits involved? As long as we're saying wildly wrong things, may as well say wildly wrong things that are more interesting.
Do you have prove for the opposite? For as I already wrote, measurements indicated that for the distant observer lightspeed appears to be influenced by gravitational density, while for the observer under the same conditions as the light passed through, that light passes at lightspeed.
 
www.hifisonix.com
Joined 2003
Paid Member
Do you have prove for the opposite? For as I already wrote, measurements indicated that for the distant observer lightspeed appears to be influenced by gravitational density, while for the observer under the same conditions as the light passed through, that light passes at lightspeed.

This is not correct.

That's one of the paradoxes of relativity. Time and mass change as a body's velocity increase, but c is absolutely constant.

In a black hole, light cannot escape, but that's not because it's slowed down, but because space time is so warped, it cannot get out.
 
Bonsai said:
That's one of the paradoxes of relativity. Time and mass change as a body's velocity increase, but c is absolutely constant.

The speed of light is always relative to the observer. Measurements indicate that the speed of light is definitely influenced by the density of gravity (distant observer). It is slowed down... But for an observer within that dense gravity field, light passes at lightspeed.

This is one of the problems with Einstein... he never took the effort of properly defining were the "observer" was. That lack of accuracy is confusing.

Tip: read Rob Roodenburg's Repairing Relativity... You don't have to agree to his theory, but at least he took the effort of properly defining his "observers".

How is the red shift of light passing heavy objects else to be explained, than by the influence of the gravitational field? If C was to be absolutely constant, there would be no red shift. And why should light (EM radiation of a certain wavelength) answer to different rules than other forms of energy?

As I stated before, Einstein messed up with the location of his observatory. That mistake caused a lot of confusion ....
 
Last edited:
But does the universe also include impenetrable dark dimensions where light is not allowed to penetrate?

What is a black hole? Does it have an entrance and an exit? ...And when inside is there another universe within?
Anyone here who has ever been in one and back? ;)

...All very very fascinating, including your link.
A "black hole" is not actually a hole.
It's just a mass so concentrated that not even light of energy can escape it..
It has ofter been said that mass as we know it on eath is manly an illusion and consists of mostly empty space between the atoms..
 
I believe Darwin found what Einstein was looking for: A theory of everything.
In the final analysis, EVERYTHING is subject to selection pressures in the sense that, if it 'works', it stays, if not, it disappears. We have erroneously thought that it only goes for living creatures.

Jan

It might also be pure tautology - if it survives it's a survivor.
 
How is the red shift of light passing heavy objects else to be explained, than by the influence of the gravitational field? If C was to be absolutely constant, there would be no red shift. And why should light (EM radiation of a certain wavelength) answer to different rules than other forms of energy?

As I stated before, Einstein messed up with the location of his observatory. That mistake caused a lot of confusion ....

The frequency of light is different from c, which equals wavelength x frequency.
Einstein did not have an observatory. He was a theoretical physicist, and worked with paper and pencil.
 
Nobel winner declares boycott of top science journals:
Science Journals
"Leading academic journals are distorting the scientific process and represent a "tyranny" that must be broken, according to a Nobel prize winner who has declared a boycott on the publications."
http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Communications-Miscellaneous/Download/5547

Science in Turmoil - Are we Funding Fraud?
by Dr. Jeremy Dunning-Davies
Science in Turmoil - Are we Funding Fraud?

Interesting stuff; thx for sharing. :cool:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.