Chatroom
 

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum > Space and Astronomy > Astronomy
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

   

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 13-September-2006, 04:15 AM
justinv3 justinv3 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Houston, Tx.
Posts: 14
Send a message via AIM to justinv3 Send a message via MSN to justinv3 Send a message via Yahoo to justinv3
Default Staying Still?

So we know that we are all in motion in the universe. And I know that, since we are moving, and everything around us is moving, we have to take that fact into consideration when we do any kind of calculation and observation. I think general relativity comes in handy here.

But...

Could we not measure how fast we are moving? and maybe launch a spaceship in the opposite direction enough so that we will come to a stand still in the universe? If that could happen, would everything become easy to measure? The expansion of the universe for example or the rate at which it expands? maybe?
__________________
May the schwartz be with you!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 13-September-2006, 06:47 AM
hhEb09'1's Avatar
hhEb09'1 hhEb09'1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NC USA
Posts: 8,224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by justinv3 View Post
But...

Could we not measure how fast we are moving?
The ultimate question is, relative to what? Answer that, and the measurement is usually fairly easy.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 13-September-2006, 07:56 AM
Jens's Avatar
Jens Jens is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 1,955
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by justinv3 View Post
Could we not measure how fast we are moving? and maybe launch a spaceship in the opposite direction enough so that we will come to a stand still in the universe? If that could happen, would everything become easy to measure? The expansion of the universe for example or the rate at which it expands? maybe?
First, we can't measure "how fast we are moving," since there is no absolute reference frame. People used to believe there was an "ether", but it was shown not to exist. So motion cannot be measured in the way you imagine.

So that invalidates the second question.

Then, for the third and fourth question, if one accepts the "cosmological principle", the expansion of the universe would be the same wherever you measure it from.
__________________
As above, so below
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 13-September-2006, 03:58 PM
antoniseb's Avatar
antoniseb antoniseb is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Marlborough, MA
Posts: 14,979
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jens View Post
First, we can't measure "how fast we are moving," since there is no absolute reference frame.
Actually, we can measure how fast we are moving, and what direction relative to the frame in which the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation does not have a bipolar temperature distribution.

We do not (currently) have the capability of building a rocket that could get a probe going nearly that fast.
__________________
Forming opinions as we speak
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 13-September-2006, 04:23 PM
hhEb09'1's Avatar
hhEb09'1 hhEb09'1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NC USA
Posts: 8,224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by antoniseb View Post
Actually, we can measure how fast we are moving, and what direction relative to the frame in which the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation does not have a bipolar temperature distribution.

We do not (currently) have the capability of building a rocket that could get a probe going nearly that fast.
Actually? That is still not assured to be an absolute reference frame.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 13-September-2006, 06:20 PM
antoniseb's Avatar
antoniseb antoniseb is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Marlborough, MA
Posts: 14,979
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hhEb09'1 View Post
That is still not assured to be an absolute reference frame.
I didn't claim it to be absolute, and the OP didn't say they were looking for absolute. The OP was about looking for a reference frame that required less work subtracting the effects of ou peculiar movement. I specifically named a frame of reference in which the probe would not be considered to be moving.
__________________
Forming opinions as we speak
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 13-September-2006, 10:20 PM
Squink Squink is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 540
Default

Here's A lovely Image of the Cosmic Microwave Background Dipole
Our local group of galaxies is moving at about 600 kilometers per second relative to the CMB.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 14-September-2006, 02:11 AM
hhEb09'1's Avatar
hhEb09'1 hhEb09'1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NC USA
Posts: 8,224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by antoniseb View Post
I didn't claim it to be absolute, and the OP didn't say they were looking for absolute.
Sorry, I thought you were responding to Jens's post.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 14-September-2006, 01:31 PM
antoniseb's Avatar
antoniseb antoniseb is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Marlborough, MA
Posts: 14,979
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hhEb09'1 View Post
Sorry, I thought you were responding to Jens's post.
I was, but if you read my brief post entirely you'd have seen the phrase:
Quote:
...relative to the frame in which...
I didn't read Jens as using the phrase absolute reference frame either. Those were your words needlessly injected into Jens request.
__________________
Forming opinions as we speak
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 14-September-2006, 02:30 PM
hhEb09'1's Avatar
hhEb09'1 hhEb09'1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NC USA
Posts: 8,224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by antoniseb View Post
I didn't read Jens as using the phrase absolute reference frame either. Those were your words needlessly injected into Jens request.
I was confused by this response at first, until I noticed that Jens did not make a request. Are you confusing Jens with the OP justinv3?

Jens did use the phrase, in their only post to this thread.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 14-September-2006, 02:41 PM
antoniseb's Avatar
antoniseb antoniseb is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Marlborough, MA
Posts: 14,979
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hhEb09'1 View Post
Are you confusing Jens with the OP justinv3?
Yes, that is correct.
__________________
Forming opinions as we speak
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 06-October-2006, 07:32 PM
publiusr publiusr is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,292
Default

This is a good idea for a sci-fi story.

Sir--we nulled out our planets rotation around the sun, stopped outside the galaxy--and now we've dropped out of the universe altogether.

Huh?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 06:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.0.0
©  2006 Bad Astronomy and Universe Today