Quote:
Originally Posted by tommac
Look I dont agree with your drawings at all. I was just correcting your error. so that your diagram matches what you were saying.
If AB grows faster than weA then from the vantage point of A ... B is moving faster away from A than WE is.
Here is your diagram from the point of view of A.
B--A--WE
B----A---WE
B----A
WE---A
So from the vantage point of A ... YOU are stating that even though they are equally as close B has moved away faster than A.
Please explain why you feel that objects act differently for A than they do for WE!!!!
This would seem to make even more spectacular conclusion that woud be deduced into WE is the center of the universe, which is very unlikely.
|
Okay, let's do some math then.
At instant 0:
We are here.
A is at 1 Mpc
B is at 2 Mpc.
distance We-A = 1 Mpc
distance A-B = 1 Mpc
The Hubble relation is v = 70 km/s/Mpc
1 Mpc = 3 10
22 m
At instant 1 year (= 3 10
7 sec):
We are still here
A is at 1 + year * v * 1 = 1 MPc + 2 10
9 km
B is at 2 + year * v * 2 = 2 Mpc + 4 10
9 km
distance We-A = 1 Mpc + 2 10
9 km
distance A-B = 1 MPc + 2 10
9 km
At instant 2 year
A is at 1 + 2 year * v * 1 = 1 MPc + 4 10
9 km
B is at 2 + 2 year * v * 2 = 2 Mpc + 8 10
9 km
distance We-A = 1 Mpc + 4 10
9 km
distance A-B = 1 MPc + 4 10
9 km
So indeed I was wrong, and it makes sense that I was wrong in the observation that We would be the centre of the universe otherwise. My Bad!!
However, as this happens in EVERY direction, you cannot have on point pulling on you to get this effect. That, at least still holds.