Oh howdy Sargon.

If you are not a sock puppet, welcome to BAUT.

__________________
"The beauty of that discussion of averages is that you don't have to be an expert in Apollo or in photography in order to see where this time study "analysis" breaks down. You just have to be, well...not an idiot." -JayUtah

If there parts of the Universe that we can't see which are not
expanding along with everything we can see, we aren't ever going
to know about it because those parts will forever be unobservable.
We know the age of the Universe because everything we can see is
moving apart. Tracing that motion back in time, it was all crammed
together 13.7 billion years ago. Whatever got that expansion started
is called the Big Bang. If there have been greater or lesser Bangs
elsewhere in the Cosmos beyond the Universe we can see, we will
never be able to know of them, so all we can talk about is the Universe
which began in the Big Bang. And that is what we are talking about.

We have no idea how large the Universe is, except that it is larger
than what we can see. We have a pretty good idea how far we can
see, but distance measurements are less precise than age.

Why? I don't think it is even a teeny tiny bit hubrissy.

We can see more, we have better measurements, we have better
mathematical tools, and we've thought about the questions more.
Our theories are built on the theories of previous generations. Our
theories could not exist without them, and those theories of previous
generations could not have existed without the theories of generations
which preceeded them.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

__________________
http://www.FreeMars.org/jeff/

"The other planets?
Well, they just happen to be there, but the point of rockets is to explore them!"
-- Kai Yeves

I realize that my introductory post is a bit awkward and would tend to drift off topic. My comment about hubris is more of a generalization about treating theory as fact. I have observed a tendency historically for scientists to do this. Of course, it is through the debate of opposing viewpoints that we often grow nearer the truth. By following some of the threads here, and occasionally interjecting, I hope to learn some new things. I have a few screwy ideas of my own and like to get feedback. I've come to grudgingly accept that I won't get all the answers I want in my lifetime, but I keep hoping.

Someone around here has the sig line, "Do you think you have the right to go through life unoffended?"

Welcome to BAUT Sargon. I hope that in posting here, you also see the difference between a scientist standing by the Theories- and a Hardhead refusing to let go of one.
There is a very big difference, yet many scientists get accused of being hardheads. Usually by other hardheads.

So I wouldn't sweat whether or not you offended anyone- because we don't have the right to go through life unoffended But you might consider looking very hard at just how scientists support their theories with confidence.

I see him every time my TV is tuned to a dead channel...

speedfreak,

When I first read your post #22, I was thinking about asking you to edit it
to change the singular "photon" in the first two paragraphs to the plural
"photons". I'm a perfectionist.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

__________________
http://www.FreeMars.org/jeff/

"The other planets?
Well, they just happen to be there, but the point of rockets is to explore them!"
-- Kai Yeves

Yes, Grant. Spacetime is an idea, and a concept. Gravity is a concept, but without
a concept of antigravity, falls apart. Null spacetime is where gravity and antigravity
meet, and a cancellation occurs.
Peter

When I edited this post, somehow I managed to reproduce it two posts below, so I am removing this double post. Sorry for any inconvenience!

I think it would be fair to characterize that as a significant divergence from mainstream thinking.
So perhaps you could keep it out of the Q&A section?

Grant Hutchison

Actually, I gave that some consideration when I wrote it, but decided (perhaps erroneously) that it got the message across better, the way I put it.

I don't want to edit that post now, as it will confuse the subsequent comments, but I will clarify the point here instead and clarify it a little further.

The observable universe is defined by the distance that the oldest photons we have detected have travelled. The way you measure this distance depends on if you are interested in where the photons were to begin with, interested in where the place they were to begin with is now, or interested in how far the photons themselves have travelled.

Actually, Mr. Grant there is no reason to get testy.

Nokton, your statement about antigravity is pure mental fluff. Any hint of real antigravity negates so much of proven relativity as to make the phrase "anti-gravity" a nonsense statement. I believe you will learn alot by hanging out here. Heck, I'm a brain damaged furniture mover and I learned that here. It was Mr. Hillman or Mr. Mendenhall who mentioned that I believe.

__________________
"The beauty of that discussion of averages is that you don't have to be an expert in Apollo or in photography in order to see where this time study "analysis" breaks down. You just have to be, well...not an idiot." -JayUtah

Are you talkin' to ME?
Seriously: Read my post in a tone of weariness, rather than testiness.

I'd maintain that any declarative statement of the form "The universe is expanding into <something or other>", such as nokton made, has no place in Q&A. Nokton doesn't know, because no-one knows, and it's difficult to imagine how anyone could know. But I just thought I'd check whether "null spacetime" wasn't some sort of curious jargon for "I don't know". (As in, "I'm sorry, but that topic is complete null spacetime to me.")

Grant Hutchison

Mr. Hutchson!

Peace!

All I meant was maybe Nokton is simply young and ignorant.

Both of those can be cured by time! A hostile greeting might push him in with the bad crowd. I've seen it happen.

Mr. Hutchenson I know your not a knukclehead! Look at my post count, I damn near live here! I know what you're about, rock on, but get some rest!

__________________
"The beauty of that discussion of averages is that you don't have to be an expert in Apollo or in photography in order to see where this time study "analysis" breaks down. You just have to be, well...not an idiot." -JayUtah

Don, I took no offence: likewise, I know what you're about.

But nokton is an old hand here, although he's been gone for a year and a half. Check out his joining date, and look back at some of his previous posts.

Grant Hutchison

I think John Mendenhall's rubber band can bridge the two concepts.

Providing there's an ant on it.

__________________
I am Mugs, of the Alien clan of Usa, Nordamerica, a Terran, of Sol.

Perception isn't reality. It's merely an abstraction thereof, and quite often not a very good one at that.

I am human. Fully human.

Well, if post counts mean anything, Mr. Hutchenson does live here, I live here and like it, and Neverfly was born here and refuses to leave, Chrissy was his mother, Antoniseb was his father, and ToSeek is the supreme creator.

But hey, that's just post counts, which we all know merely reflect how much time we waste (er..., "invest") here, rather than actual familial relationships.

__________________
I am Mugs, of the Alien clan of Usa, Nordamerica, a Terran, of Sol.

Perception isn't reality. It's merely an abstraction thereof, and quite often not a very good one at that.

I am human. Fully human.

Don,

Grant may be vicious, but he's never testy.

Dark energy.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

__________________
http://www.FreeMars.org/jeff/

"The other planets?
Well, they just happen to be there, but the point of rockets is to explore them!"
-- Kai Yeves

From the Oxford English Dictionary:
Grant Hutchison

Is that the definition of 'Grant' or of 'vicious'?

__________________
I've become used to the taste of crow.