Believe it or not, I used to speak Anglo-Saxon to a tourist level. I bought a book about it. I wanted to read King Aelfred in the original. No, I don't know why, either! 😡
It's derived from Germanic Old High Gothic. The nearest Modern equivalent is Norwegian "Landsmal" or Old Norse which is close to Icelandic.
Thus King Harold was known as Harald Godwinson.
I still mistrust this "Earendel" business. I think it is a modern Tolkienesque fantasy. To be taken no more seriously than "Conversational Klingon".
More pressingly, I asked my friend Sophie (A Greek word meaning Wisdom) if she has any tips for the forthcoming "Grand National" Horse Race. Quick as a Flash she said "Number 27"
Why? Because it is her Birthday. Makes sense to me.😀
You heard it here first.
It's derived from Germanic Old High Gothic. The nearest Modern equivalent is Norwegian "Landsmal" or Old Norse which is close to Icelandic.
Thus King Harold was known as Harald Godwinson.
I still mistrust this "Earendel" business. I think it is a modern Tolkienesque fantasy. To be taken no more seriously than "Conversational Klingon".
More pressingly, I asked my friend Sophie (A Greek word meaning Wisdom) if she has any tips for the forthcoming "Grand National" Horse Race. Quick as a Flash she said "Number 27"
Why? Because it is her Birthday. Makes sense to me.😀
You heard it here first.
Yes, Bonsai, and those black holes began to swallow matter and became 'mini-quasars' which grew and merged to become the huge black holes now found at the centres of nearly all massive galaxies.
My reference source here and in my earlier post is the NASA/Webb Early Universe site - well worth a visit.
My reference source here and in my earlier post is the NASA/Webb Early Universe site - well worth a visit.
And I'm a trouble maker? "Not Fully engaged"? How many of your posts do not have off topic comments?
not to mention the pseudo comedian complaining about my fabulously over the top jokes!
WE are not amused!
Any time in the next 1 million hrs from what I’ve read. When it pops, it will be a sight to behold. It will be as least as bright as a full moon for the first month and will be clearly visible during the day. It will take about 6 months to fade, but remain a large splodge in the night sky for a year or two.
Like WOW! But I read we could actually expect it to happen even now? Also that it could have a seriously negative effect on us.
Could happen now, yes.
It is 600 LY away so we are ok. Studies have been done on the axial alignment of Betelgeuse and the poles are not facing our way, so if there is a gamma ray burst （GRB), we will not be in its path.
It is 600 LY away so we are ok. Studies have been done on the axial alignment of Betelgeuse and the poles are not facing our way, so if there is a gamma ray burst （GRB), we will not be in its path.
I'm waiting for my "true mirror" to arrive from Amazon. Supposed to come this evening. They broke the first one so I had to order it again. Can't wait to see how "other" people see me. 🙃
it's very scientific!
and expensive.
it's very scientific!
and expensive.
On the original subject, I had a thought based on something Michio Kaku said.
Trying to get my head around string theory. Well, what is vibrating? Space-time? If that is so, then in one respect the old idea of space being filled with "ether" was actually on it, the ether being space-time. Now, on to expanding. How is this: Space exists. It just is. But our universe exists in space-time. OUR space-time. The expansion is of time. There is nothing relevant to us until time expands and forms the space-time of our universe. This allows other space-time in the same space as it is a different time, i.e. reality, i.e. universe.
I can almost visualize how particle collisions can produce variable results if we think of virtual particles of variable frequency and amplitudes in the space-time field. Depending on the energy and possible angular momentum, the particles reforming in a multitude of ways. Likely probabilistic as the quantum world favors it over the definitive. The old "God does play dice and he is not very good at it" which I think was one of the most insightful comebacks of all time.
I know there are big arguments against entropy and in favor of dark energy, but my above WAG, totally uninformed by and mathematics, would support it as the driving force. Time wants to spread out. That much we think we know. Time wants to expand into space and make our universe space-time. Time is unidirectional because of entropy. My theory.
I still can't get my head around the speed of light. If space-time is expanding and speed is distance per time, how can that be a constant if distance is a variable?
I have watched about every Y-tube on gravity I can find. I am slowly coming back to Einstein's concept or warpage of space-time and not a force, so no gravitons. A gravity wave being just another disruption of the space-time field.
Nature seems to prefer to take the easy way out, I suspect when it is too complicated, we don't see the underlying simple rules.
I also notice nature likes to reuse laws.
Lastly, I accept the sage advice from Feynman. Even if we don't understand it, Mother Nature does not care. It is what it is. Something to that effect.
Maybe my mind is just making up things to do while I lie there treating my bad back. If I was mobile more of the day, I would not have time to think about this.
Trying to get my head around string theory. Well, what is vibrating? Space-time? If that is so, then in one respect the old idea of space being filled with "ether" was actually on it, the ether being space-time. Now, on to expanding. How is this: Space exists. It just is. But our universe exists in space-time. OUR space-time. The expansion is of time. There is nothing relevant to us until time expands and forms the space-time of our universe. This allows other space-time in the same space as it is a different time, i.e. reality, i.e. universe.
I can almost visualize how particle collisions can produce variable results if we think of virtual particles of variable frequency and amplitudes in the space-time field. Depending on the energy and possible angular momentum, the particles reforming in a multitude of ways. Likely probabilistic as the quantum world favors it over the definitive. The old "God does play dice and he is not very good at it" which I think was one of the most insightful comebacks of all time.
I know there are big arguments against entropy and in favor of dark energy, but my above WAG, totally uninformed by and mathematics, would support it as the driving force. Time wants to spread out. That much we think we know. Time wants to expand into space and make our universe space-time. Time is unidirectional because of entropy. My theory.
I still can't get my head around the speed of light. If space-time is expanding and speed is distance per time, how can that be a constant if distance is a variable?
I have watched about every Y-tube on gravity I can find. I am slowly coming back to Einstein's concept or warpage of space-time and not a force, so no gravitons. A gravity wave being just another disruption of the space-time field.
Nature seems to prefer to take the easy way out, I suspect when it is too complicated, we don't see the underlying simple rules.
I also notice nature likes to reuse laws.
Lastly, I accept the sage advice from Feynman. Even if we don't understand it, Mother Nature does not care. It is what it is. Something to that effect.
Maybe my mind is just making up things to do while I lie there treating my bad back. If I was mobile more of the day, I would not have time to think about this.
Maybe it was the cause of their bad luck for the NY facility to vote as they did?
Okay, now, earlier today I read an article, and this came to mind:
And dare I say it, that Michio guy seems just like the type to take advantage of any possible misunderstanding to say something that seems outrageous.
https://aeon.co/ideas/what-i-learned-as-a-hired-consultant-for-autodidact-physicists
Spectral observations of distant quasars have revealed that the 'fine structure constant' (which is associated with the light emission and absorption properties of atoms) has not changed in time.
The 'fine structure constant' is a combination of four other fundamental constants: the speed of light, the charge on the electron, Planck’s constant, and the permittivity of free space.
Provided we continue to find that the 'fine structure constant' remains unchanged throughout the universe, we can be sure that the speed of light remains constant in an expanding spacetime.
Attachments
But if space is expanding, then even h has to be expanding with time to remain a constant relative to that space-time. What am I missing?
To be more confusing, if our universe started as a singularity, then expansion is not uniform as the outer edge has to be expanding faster than closer to the center or it would be shredded, as in the inflation period.
It is interesting that you think there is an "outer edge" to the universe's expansion.
The expansion of the universe is not to be compared to an explosion where material expands outwards from a central point.
The Big Bang occurred everywhere at once and not just at a single point.
The evidence lies in the presence of the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR).
The initial flash of light created by the Big Bang in our region of space is still spreading out into distant space. By the same token, light that was created by the Big Bang in distant regions of space is currently travelling towards us. Due to the expansion of the universe this light reaches us, not as visible light, but stretched out in wavelength to become microwave radiation - the CMBR.
So, in whatever direction we look, we see the remnants of the light from the Big Bang. This is evidence that the Big Bang took place everywhere at the same time and not just at a single point in space.
The expansion of the universe is not to be compared to an explosion where material expands outwards from a central point.
The Big Bang occurred everywhere at once and not just at a single point.
The evidence lies in the presence of the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR).
The initial flash of light created by the Big Bang in our region of space is still spreading out into distant space. By the same token, light that was created by the Big Bang in distant regions of space is currently travelling towards us. Due to the expansion of the universe this light reaches us, not as visible light, but stretched out in wavelength to become microwave radiation - the CMBR.
So, in whatever direction we look, we see the remnants of the light from the Big Bang. This is evidence that the Big Bang took place everywhere at the same time and not just at a single point in space.
I sure, know about this, but I am enable to figure it. My brain cannot visualize such an expansion, it is only abstract, mathematics.
I think you are confusing inflation with the current accelerating expansion. And yes, it is currently the major belief it started from a singularity.
If you read my posts, I have hypothesized that space existed, but not time. Our universe time started with the big bag. The edge of the ( our) universe, not the observable one, is the limit of time as referenced to the big bank. Only time and light are the horizon of our universe. Matter followed much slower.
But my question is, if space is expanding, and time increasing, then any "constant" to distance per time, i.e. the definition of speed, is only relevant to a given spot in space-time as measured from the point of singularity. An edge of a bubble, which may or may not be very spherical. Even more confusing, as one approaches the singularity, more time has passed. At the edge of expansion, time is very new.
If you read my posts, I have hypothesized that space existed, but not time. Our universe time started with the big bag. The edge of the ( our) universe, not the observable one, is the limit of time as referenced to the big bank. Only time and light are the horizon of our universe. Matter followed much slower.
But my question is, if space is expanding, and time increasing, then any "constant" to distance per time, i.e. the definition of speed, is only relevant to a given spot in space-time as measured from the point of singularity. An edge of a bubble, which may or may not be very spherical. Even more confusing, as one approaches the singularity, more time has passed. At the edge of expansion, time is very new.
Very true. Hard to visualize. We only visualize in three dimensions as that is our point of reference. We do not visualize a 4 dimensional field, which by current best guess, is where we exist. As an example, the warpage of space-time by mass is usually displayed as a 2 dimensional plane with a mass deforming it, your in our guess, it is the same is viewed from any direction. If instead of drawing lines on a plane and showing them curve, replace the lines with translucent color and think of a volume where the color changes with respect to mass in three dimensions. Think of an object orbiting that mass as a fuzzy point, it too slightly shaded, following a path through the same color, not around a grid line.
I think not.
Cosmic inflation should not be confused with the metric expansion of space.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.