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.
Originally posted by CLPrime
Nope, no paradox. Read this post of mine... the first half of it. The universe is free to expand as fast as it wants without violating any speed limits.
Originally posted by KrzYma
I don't believe "them", is the Universe expanding or not.
I don't believe Einstein or others who push and stretch a theory to keep it alive.
I don't believe Light Speed is constant course it changes with mass.
I don't believe in Black Matter or Black Energy or whatever they need to keep RT alive
time for corrections!
Originally posted by CLPrime
reply to post by Clavicula
It's not relative motion, it's apparent motion (relative motion is still subject to Relativity). But, that's semantics. And, of course, galaxies do have some level of motion relative to the Earth, so, as you say, we have to differentiate between the proper motion of stars/galaxies and their apparent motion caused by the expansion of the universe. Here's the deal...
Apparent and proper/relative motion is found by measuring how much the light has been redshifted:
Doppler redshift is caused by an object physically moving away from us (if the object is moving towards us, this produces a blueshift).
Cosmological redshift is caused by the light being stretched out as space expands.
They are differentiated by measuring the rate of change in the object's redshift with respect to the "standard" set by the Cosmic Microwave Background. Anything beyond that standard is Doppler.edit on 22-5-2011 by CLPrime because: (no reason given)
What does it mean to say that the Universe is expanding? If EVERY thing in the universe is expanding, or getting bigger, then that means we're all getting bigger. We wouldn't notice that we were getting bigger because everything around us is also getting bigger and at the same rate. Know what I mean? It's crazy to think about.
Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by Clavicula
Such "tired light" models have indeed been proposed. But there are certain problems with such explanations compared to metric expansion model:
en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 23/5/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Clavicula
The critisisms are not completely detrimental to the idea.
Originally posted by CLPrime
reply to post by FOXMULDER147
Space isn't "supposedly" expanding into anything. If we consider the Big Bang to be the creation of space and time, then space and time don't exist beyond the "edge" of the universe it created.
Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
Originally posted by CLPrime
reply to post by FOXMULDER147
Space isn't "supposedly" expanding into anything. If we consider the Big Bang to be the creation of space and time, then space and time don't exist beyond the "edge" of the universe it created.
I don't consider the Big Bang to be the creation of space.
The Big Bang had to happen in space. A pre-existing space.