Quote:
Originally Posted by tommac
... you are saying that there is a plane that is tangential to the gravitational source where we would see distant galaxies not moving away from us
|
If, that is, your idea were true that we were being attracted to some far distant point source.
[
My first point was that you'd see objects getting closer as they neared the point source.
You said you wouldn't, as the point source is too far away.
The counter to that, then, is that we'd then see expansion in only only direction.
Either way: if the expansion of the Universe were due to being attracted to a point source ("near" or "far"), we'd see evidence of that in the motion of the objects being attracted.
]
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommac
However because of the limitation of the speed of light this plane would make this plane difficult to determine. Now I think we would have also moved away from it if you take the angle of light that was shown from that galaxy.
If there was no speed of light latency ... then you would probably be right ... but the fact is that we would be pulling towards the gravitational source thus pulling away from where the light that is hitting us now but released way in the past.
|
Surely, though, we could take this (latency) into account when observing far away objects, when we determine their location (then and now) and their directions of motion (with regards to the apparent expansion of the Universe)?
Do you think the scientists who study the expansion of the Universe don't or wouldn't include this kind of detail?