It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
That from that object to earth, the light rays have had a clear run and not encountered even as much as dust particles?
Photons you mean. If a photon hits something, it doesn't reach us. If it doesn't, it does. Doesn't really affect much other than making some distant galaxies harder to see than others.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: pauljs75
Since time doesn't pass at a uniform rate across a gravitational gradient, light isn't either. So the thing you're using to measure those distances may as well be about as fixed and steady as a block of jello.
The very theory which explains why time is relative, explains that the speed of light is not.
Like I said. In that case, we can't.
how are we able to see it if those photons encountered debris of some form, or other star light.
It is not an issue, unless you think that space has a lot more stuff that interacts with light than it does. It's mostly empty, you know.
I know you are better than this Phage, you are more rational than this to simply seek to explain away the issue in this way.
It is not an issue, unless you think that space has a lot more stuff that interacts with light than it does.
Somehow, that narrow beam of photons has travelled unimpeded for 13.5 billion years without encountering anything or by being curved by densities in space?
First, it is not a narrow beam, it is an ever expanding field of radiation (see the inverse squared law).
Second, it is not just "densities" which can refract light. Gravity does it too. A beautiful demonstration of that:
The further they travel past the earth to other regions of deep space, the cone of light of the beam of photons will actually thin down to nothing...to darkness.
Simply put, the space between things in the Universe is growing. On a local level (like the Solar System, or even the Galaxy) this is not detectable. But over very great distances it adds up. The result being that over very, very great distances, space is growing faster than light.
How is it possible for the observable universe to be 92 billion light-years wide while only being 13.7 billion years old?
So, you haven't looked into the standard model at all? No idea of the evidence?
How do you know that 'space' is expanding?
More mass? No, that wouldn't actually work. That would cause gravity to tend to pull everything together.
Could it not be that it is the content in space that is being continually added to rather than space itself?
I don't know, but it is a fundamental aspect of universal expansion.
What is it that is making more space. I would hope you do not say that it is a fundamental aspect of universal expansion.
Immaterial does not mean nothing. Nor is spacetime nothing.
How can something that is an absolute of immateriality be made to expand?
The evidence does not indicate that is what is occurring.
What if space itself is infinite, and that it is matter that is pushing ever outwards into that infinite space?
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: AlexandrosTheGreat
If you could eliminate local motions (us around the Sun, the Sun through the galaxy, etc.) and stopped everything from "moving", everything would still be getting further apart.