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.

 

Hubble breaks cosmic distance record: Sees universe soon after Big Bang

page: 3
14
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Tiamat384




Look back in time? How? Simulation?

Every time you look at the stars in the night sky you are looking back in time yourself , the further the light from stars and Galaxies has to travel the further back in time you are looking because of the time taken for the light to reach your eyes or the lens of a telescope.




posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 01:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: Sassanid
a reply to: 3danimator2014

You do know that a ton of the original NASA scientists were NAZIS right? With a legacy like that is it so hard to fathom that top secret knowledge is withheld from the public and that NASA has a DUTY to lie about certain things? If you can't get that then you have to be very naive.

Interesting side note: The man Warner Vaun Braun dubbed "The father of modern rocketry" was a learned occultist and head of the Agape lodge of Crowley and Reuss' sex magick order the O.T.O and self taught in rocket propulsion and explosives AND basically the inventor of solid rocket fuel. NASA has some sinister origins, but Jack Parsons was actually a really good guy. And co-founder of Cal-tech's JPL, sometimes called Jack Parsons Laboratory.


What the hell has some of the original rocket men being nazis have to do with nasa lying to the public?


If NASA is willing to openly work with die-hard NAZI's then lying to the public is nothing. If you can't get that then I don't know what to tell you.



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 01:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: Sassanid
a reply to: gortex

So...the Hubble telescope can see back in time and determine when a galaxy was formed? Sounds too fantastic to me. I don't even believe that the big bang hypothesis (I won't even call it a theory, as theories are now being taken for and taught as fact, which they aren't) is very scientific. It's pure speculation, like the age of the earth and the universe (which is infinite and actually has no beginning, time and space-wise). But 14 billion years (which is an ironic unit of measurement that only applies to earth, so measuring in years before earth existed is ridiculous) is a long time and claiming to observe events that happened that long ago is preposterous. Science is observation of phenomena in our universe, and you can't "back in time " so I don't understand what the hell the point of the big bang hypothesis is other than to provide ANY answer that both science and religion can agree on. Catholicism LOVES the big bang hypothesis because it can fit with creationism. Scientists love it because it can't be proven wrong because it "happened" so long ago, and it stops the non-religious from asking how the world started without actually answering questions. Big bang hypothesis is junk science.


So how do you account for the observed fact that the universe is expanding or the observed background radiation? Both of which point to a big bang. As for theory. ..sigh...stop being ignorant and know that the word theory means something else in science.


The universe can't expand because it is infinite, what is theoretically happening is individual galaxies are moving further and further away from each other which is not a big deal as space is a vacuum.

The universe expansion theory is poorly named. Infinity can't expand, space is not expanding, they just think... what I said above.

That's not really big-bang related,space is a vvacuum is the reason it's happening not because of the big bang hypothesis.



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 01:43 PM
link   
a reply to: AngryCymraeg


I do not believe in old light, stars exist in real time.



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: eriktheawfulalright you obviously know more about this stuff than me. I can buy the star light being old when we finally see it because of the vastnest of space (infinte).

I just don't buy the big bang hypothesis, I think it's the theoretical equivalent of throwing spaghetti against the wall.



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Sassanid




The universe can't expand because it is infinite

Unless it isn't then it can , there is much evidence to show the Universe is expanding and none that I am aware of to show it is infinite , infinity is a cop out in astronomy I think.
If the Universe is infinite where are all the Galaxies going and an accelerated rate , where did all the stuff in an infinite Universe come from ?

edit on 9-3-2016 by gortex because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Sassanid

Since it is a hypothesis, and not a fact, no one is forcing you to believe in it if you do not desire to.

However, so far it's the best hypothesis that fits all the observable data.

There is absolutely nothing stopping you or anyone else from coming up with a different hypothesis. Just keep in mind that your hypothesis has to include and fit the observable data that is out there, in order for it to be taken seriously (IE you can't just make stuff up and ignore what is out there or what has been observed....or you can if you want, but most will not even consider what you put forth).



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: AngryCymraeg
I understand that concept, but you can't see the beginning of the Universe because wouldn't that mean that it's occurring at this moment in our perspective?



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 02:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sassanid

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: Sassanid
a reply to: 3danimator2014

You do know that a ton of the original NASA scientists were NAZIS right? With a legacy like that is it so hard to fathom that top secret knowledge is withheld from the public and that NASA has a DUTY to lie about certain things? If you can't get that then you have to be very naive.

Interesting side note: The man Warner Vaun Braun dubbed "The father of modern rocketry" was a learned occultist and head of the Agape lodge of Crowley and Reuss' sex magick order the O.T.O and self taught in rocket propulsion and explosives AND basically the inventor of solid rocket fuel. NASA has some sinister origins, but Jack Parsons was actually a really good guy. And co-founder of Cal-tech's JPL, sometimes called Jack Parsons Laboratory.


What the hell has some of the original rocket men being nazis have to do with nasa lying to the public?


If NASA is willing to openly work with die-hard NAZI's then lying to the public is nothing. If you can't get that then I don't know what to tell you.


But one has nothing to do with the other.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join