It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

92 billion light-years in diameter and only 13.7 billion years old????

page: 2
42
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Light years is a time measurement. Time doesn't exist. Time is just a mental construct to help us make sense of our environment.

Our 6 senses are much to primitive to see the BIG PICTURE.




posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Phatdamage

When boffins say 13.8 billion light years, that's in one direction and therefore the radius-therefore the diameter would be 27.6 Billion light years.

There is a simple experiment-put a pea into a balloon, draw dots on the balloon, then blow that balloon up. The pea (the milky way)will not move but some of the the dots (other galaxies) will move away from each other as the balloon expands.

It's hard to explain-All that has been proven is that the universe is still growing and that growth is accelerating and if it is growing well it had to start growing at some point.



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 10:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: Phatdamage

When boffins say 13.8 billion light years, that's in one direction and therefore the radius-therefore the diameter would be 27.6 Billion light years.

There is a simple experiment-put a pea into a balloon, draw dots on the balloon, then blow that balloon up. The pea (the milky way)will not move but some of the the dots (other galaxies) will move away from each other as the balloon expands.

It's hard to explain-All that has been proven is that the universe is still growing and that growth is accelerating and if it is growing well it had to start growing at some point.





SEE?

just a couple posts up i told u someone would come in with the displacement theory explanation.

ITS BOGUS. thats not the way space works or is expanding.


+2 more 
posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: John333



ITS BOGUS.


Maybe you should tell Brian Schmidt that- you know that guy who shared a Nobel prize for proving the universe is expanding. Or maybe you have the answer? These guys have introductions to their theories that are longer than your thread.



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: John333


ITS BOGUS. thats not the way space works or is expanding.

Well, go on then, tell us how it works. I can see you're dying to.



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: John333

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: Phatdamage

I believe you are referencing cosmic inflation which could explain both the rapid expansion as well as the relatively uniform distribution of matter in the universe.


redshift and field displacement. field displacement being the dodgiest suggestion of the 2. they believe that space itself is expanding.. like the universe is making "dark matter" in between galaxies and thats whats causing them to spread out.

im going to have to dig up the thread where we had this discussion. cuz eventually some science guy is gonna come in here and that's where the discussion is gonna go to. not that im not a science guy too. im just more balanced in my approach and unbiasness to other avenues of data collection and observation let's say.


Dark energy is the force that seems to push galaxies away from one another (at an accelerating pace) and dark matter appears to hold stars in galactic orbits.



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: John333



ITS BOGUS.


Maybe you should tell Brian Schmidt that- you know that guy who shared a Nobel prize for proving the universe is expanding. Or maybe you have the answer? These guys have introductions to their theories that are longer than your thread.



There are equally long opposing theses I expect.

Also, why is not possible that our universe is just a small explosion as one of an infinite number of other big bangs (explosions) of other universes at different points in time that burst forth like a star does, expand until the momentum of the explosion is exhausted, then cool? What if there is a process where prior to becoming a big bang (explosion) the embryonic universe sucks matter in from other dead universes like some giant black hole phenomenon in such heavy quantities that it causes some kind of huge explosion of matter because the density reaches a point of intolerance? Universes could be as common as stars are in ours. I think this is highly likely as nothing tell us our universe in unique and that the rest of space outside is a void empty of matter. That seems the more likely actually.




edit on 25-12-2015 by Revolution9 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: John333



ITS BOGUS.


Maybe you should tell Brian Schmidt that- you know that guy who shared a Nobel prize for proving the universe is expanding. Or maybe you have the answer? These guys have introductions to their theories that are longer than your thread.



dont worry in time all will be published from my end officially. displacement theory is just what it is.. and ironically.. an inflated concoction devised to uphold a biased theory.

i can provide u a plethroa of much more logical explanations that even you would have a hard time disagreeing with.

1. The universe is NOT expanding. but masses within the universe are moving at various velocities. this would account for the increase in distance without the need for displacement. it's basic.. one car is moving faster than the other car so the space between them is growing. NOT THE ACTUAL ROAD IS MANIFESTING MORE PITCH TO DRIVE ON MAKING ITSELF LONGER.. SHEESH

2. the universe appears to be expanding because the light from that distance has only now arrived here. thus the telescopes arent seeing the border of the universe.. ever! all they are seeing is the latest revelation relative to our position in space. what we consider the furthest now, another region may have seen 10billion years ago. meaning it was there 10billion years ago. it did not just now arrive at that location. only as it appears to us seeing it for the first time.

3. displacement works for light particle travel. NOT MATTER. sound, electrons protons can function on displacement. they are intangible.

4. the universe is not flat. only where we have been able to observe appears to be along a disc shapped organisation. but this does not stop the possibility of traveling or existing bodies north and south of the bodies we see inhabitting space all around us.

i could go on but there are ppl with multi billion dollar labs and funding that shouldve been able to complete it without me telling them. for all you know u are speaking to a future nobel laureate.

we are dealing with perception here. light and gravitation give birth to the illusion of time. as mentioned time does not really exist. outside of this universe it is non-existent. time is a mental creation to keep our sanity in a changing and decaying world. if you were immortal, never got sick, couldnt die, and could fly, didnt need to breathe to live then you wouldnt even wear a watch. its because we die and because things change and decay, we decided to keep track of them. thus we devised time. but it does not truly exist as an axis in our dimension. thus the 4th dimension totally abuses and exploits and conquers any time restraints. traveling 1light year will take the same time to travel 1billion light years... etc.
edit on 25-12-2015 by John333 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Theories and facts that seem to back them up.

No one really knows. Light traveled for billions of years before being measured. What could go wrong there...



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 10:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: Phatdamage
When boffins say 13.8 billion light years, that's in one direction and therefore the radius-therefore the diameter would be 27.6 Billion light years


In my maths 27.6 billion light years isn't 92 billion light years..... unless at some point, matter has traveled faster then the speed of light!

I genuinely get IT..... i just wish i knew what IT was

Peace!



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 10:51 AM
link   
not only is the actual universe far larger than your 92 billion light years big... it has a void/hollow spot near It's center...

just look at the popcorn kernel pic down where our signature item is located (which represents my best guess of the shape of our universe)

the big bang period of 'Inflation' was prior to when only the greater & faster 'energies' existed in abundance... only when these energies that were more forceful dissipated (and escaped the shell-of-our-universe)... and all that was left were photons that traveled at-the-speed-of-light and this dense matter & the table of Elements


at the instant of the big blow-off... Inflation period... hyper energy was the dominant composition of this observable universe ~ or~ you can think in terms that the remaining matter of slower energies/forces is the composition of the observable universe of today
~~~ that's when the current Laws of Physics came to being universal, prior to the dense universe, even iron atoms could go faster than light...
our present Cosmos is a burnt out match head compared to what it was at the big-bang instant

the universe came to be in the same fundamental manner that the Shroud-of-Turin has a mystical image on it from the resurrection instant of weird energies
edit on th31145106325725072015 by St Udio because: (no reason given)

edit on th31145106350925112015 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 10:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phatdamage

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: Phatdamage
When boffins say 13.8 billion light years, that's in one direction and therefore the radius-therefore the diameter would be 27.6 Billion light years


In my maths 27.6 billion light years isn't 92 billion light years..... unless at some point, matter has traveled faster then the speed of light!

I genuinely get IT..... i just wish i knew what IT was

Peace!


more than 3 times the speed of light to be exact.



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Phatdamage

The universe curves through the fourth dimension, so that points that appear separate in three dimensional space are very close in fourth dimensional time. If we look in one direction, we are seeing 13 billion years into the past because that is how long it took light to get here. If we look at the opposite direction, we are also seeing 13 billion years into the past. This means that we are in the middle of a sphere 26 billion light years across. Light from one side of the sphere has not had enough time to reach the opposite side of the sphere on a line passing through Earth's current position, but the points where the light was emitted are extremely close 13 billion years ago, in the fourth, temporal dimension. Time-space curves in on itself like a moebius strip or kline bottle in 4-D. It is very difficult to wrap your head around, but it does not make astrophysics a hoax.



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Phatdamage

This is a Fred Hoyle argument as to why there was no big bang as the maths dont make sense.
I heard this many years ago and he held the theory that the Universe was static and had always existed.

It will take a great mind to understand this conundrum.
Bearing in mind everything is a theory Steven Hawking has the most popular theory with the Big Bang but alas its a theory,he was not there to witness it firsthand if it ever actually took place but he theorizes very well.



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Phatdamage

Yawns



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 10:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: superluminal11
a reply to: Phatdamage

Yawns


Errrmmm,

Thanks. i think, not sure what that has to do with matter travelling faster then the speed of light



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Phatdamage


Thanks. i think, not sure what that has to do with matter travelling faster then the speed of light


It is not a question of matter traveling faster than light, it is a question of space itself expanding, taking light and matter with it. Matter cannot travel faster than light through empty space.



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: southbeach
a reply to: Phatdamage



It will take a great mind to understand this conundrum.



and then it still requires those he teaches to be able to understand what is being taught. they just might not be ready to digest that great mind's inclinations. so 100 years later, when hes dead, theyll understand and be like.. "man i wish nicola tesla were here so i can ask him some questions"



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 11:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Phatdamage


Thanks. i think, not sure what that has to do with matter travelling faster then the speed of light


It is not a question of matter traveling faster than light, it is a question of space itself expanding, taking light and matter with it. Matter cannot travel faster than light through empty space.


see?

so the matter moved at regular.. matter moving speeds. it only covered such large distances because darkmater is manifesting between solar systems and galaxies right?
BOLLOCKS. im sorry bro.. bollocks



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 11:13 AM
link   
Why would the expansion of the universe need to abide by the laws of physics within the universe?




top topics



 
42
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join