posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 04:45 PM
Ok, I hope it doesn't sound too presumptuous of me to say this, but I have to say that everyone who has posted here besides myself has made some very
large mistakes of logic.
fixer - I am not interested in what you think you understand about time travel based on sci fi novels you have read by people who were incapable of
getting bachelor of science degrees in science, math or engineering and so went into writing. All I will agree with is that the way it really works is
probably stranger than you can imagine.
Omegalogos - you are by far the most intelligent poster so far so I will address what you said mostly. First of all, you have several mistaken ideas
about the consequences of a rotating universe. MOST IMPORTANTLY it is NOT rotating about ANY SINGLE POINT. Just as in an expanding universe, it
APPEARS that everything is receding directly away from you, wherever you are in the universe, and therefore you could naively conclude you were
somehow at the center, in a rotating universe, the universe will rotate about you wherever you are in it. And that sounds strange perhaps, but that's
the way it works. Secondly - it is not POSSIBLE to observe galaxies that are 13.7 billion light-years away if the universe rotates with a period of 10
billion years. LIGHT travels in great circles with CIRCUMFERENCE 10 billion light-years in such a universe - that is, if it is perpendicular to the
axis of rotation. It travels in straight lines, but its polarization is rotated if it travels in the axis of rotation, and it of course, does a mix of
the two, traveling in a helix if it is traveling neither perpendicular nor inline with the axis of rotation of the universe. THOUGHT EXPERIMENTS IN A
ROTATING UNIVERSE: Suppose you were in a rotating universe with no other matter except for yourself and a single star. Suppose you were very near the
star. The light from the star emitted perpendicular to the axis of rotation travels in great circles so it will actually RETURN to the star after one
rotational time period. In this case, 10 billion years. The light emitted in any other direction will not return to the star. So you look out into the
sky and what do you see? A very, very thin ring of light that appears to divide space up into two parts. The apparent thickness of the light from this
ring is the apparent diameter of the star, as seen from 10 billion light-years away. Very, very thin, in other words. The orientation of the ring also
shows you the direction of rotation. The ring is in line with the rotation.
You'd think that would be a dead giveaway - that we should see a telltale ring in the sky representing the light from the milky way galaxy returning
back to the milky way after 10 billion years, if the universe was indeed rotating at that rate. But now suppose there's some other matter in this
universe. Galaxies, other stars, black holes, who knows what. Now the light doesn't travel in perfect circles. Indeed just the tiniest perturbation
all but guarantees it will not return to the milky way. And there's a lot of gravity out there.
OK, so the distribution of galaxies. SURELY, you say, that would be seriously different, right? Afraid not. Extremely distant galaxies would look the
same in all directions - the catch is, that the ones that we see in the extreme distance in the direction of the axis of rotation really are far, far
away, but the ones we see perpendicular to it are actually quite likely much more nearby galaxies - but how they looked many billions of years ago.
The light simply got trapped, swirling around in this vicinity, for billions of years, maybe getting bent around and misdirected a bit by gravity, but
preserved to a certain extent as well, just as an optical lens will preserve the integrity of an image even if it moves it around or enlarges it or
reduces it. So we see galaxies spaced about the same in every direction because even though in that one special direction the galaxies really are that
distant but not in (cont)...