Question for Astrononerds

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Peeple

Similarly, if you looked downwards close enough, could you see your appendix from the inside?

Asking for 'a friend'...

Oooh, careful now!

Overshoot and you'll see yer poop.

a reply to: chr0naut

Sure, if you got a knife.

Sorry if off topic, I just had a random question pop into my head:

If I had a really really long, rigid stick, that went all the way to a planet 2 light years away, and I moved the stick forward or backwards, how long would it take for the movement to be detected at the other end?

a reply to: homerJ

I had the same thought reading this thread yesterday lol.

It could be tested on a smaller scale, technically it should be instant but the material used would have to be perfect.

Super light weight
Unable to be damaged by compression or stretching
Capable of handling the extreme force to move it

a reply to: TDDAgain

I like that idea, another thought I had on "the stick" idea above is the potential for measuring pressure differences within the bubble. If gravity can be faster than the speed of light then I'd imagine there's ways to peer into the future and predict what will be seen.

What if the pressure release is instant, from our position it's all relative but what if it that's an illusion and our part of the system is catching up?

Wouldn't there be a way to "predict the future" relatively speaking?

Trying to simplify my layman's terms lol...
Instead of us building 2D/3D sticks I'm suggesting there's a way to understand the 4D sticks that are everywhere and interconnected with everything.

Ha! Not a flat earther….just curious.

Redshift and blueshift explains what happens if the stars are either moving directly away from earth or directly towards earth.

What about the stars that are moving sideways….why don’t they show in the sky as streaks?

When something moves too fast for the eye to track it disappears (it does not look like a pinpoint). This clip from “Lucy” (go to 1:12 mark) illustrates what happens when something is moving too fast for the eye to track. youtu.be...

Earth is orbiting around the sun….being pulled by the sun as it flies through the galaxy….yet with all that insane combined movement every single star that we observe in the night sky is seen a pinpoint of light?

It just never really made sense to me….the stars are continuously emitting light….the light is continuously moving through the universe…why are we only seeing what looks like a snapshot?


a reply to: Akragon

a reply to: Buvvy

I suggest you try using a camera with a long exposure time.

a reply to: homerJ

Impossible to create a practical experiment but yes technically if you had a “stick” long enough, movement at one end would be instantaneous at the other. Add in some lines on the stick at regular intervals separating some letters and you have a stick based faster than light communication method. From point A (one end of the stick) you couldn’t view the stick move at point B (the other end) without waiting 2 years, tho a stationary observer at point B would see his end of the stick move two years before he sees you push it from point A.

I think.

I like this post to be fair, was a good little thought experiment. Although I doubt the galaxy will ever be a mesh of wooden sticks. Relative motion destroys any possibility of maintaining two stationary points at a great distance connecting uninterrupted physical matter.

a reply to: Peeple

That's what I can't wrap my head around: there's never anything absolute in the universe. I thought a little further about and got a brain cramp trying to imagine what a reference point outside the universe would look like.

I think we make huge assumptions in asserting that there even is an inside and outside of "The Universe".

The religious will say that God exits outside of the universe.
Spiritualists will say that God IS the universe.

If God exists outside of the Universe, then there is an "outside/inside", then Zero is Nothing, and Nothing is the opposite of Something, AKA The Universe. Then one can assert that Consciousness is something that's inserted into The Universe from outside The Universe. The Universe is finite and ultimately, knowable.

If God IS The Universe, then Zero is the whole of everything, and there is no such thing as Nothing, and there is no inside/outside paradigm. Consciousness and self-introspection is an organic function of the Universe. The Universe is infinitely big and infinitely small.


As for time travel, Physicists will tell you there are probably an infinite number of universes. If so, then there are likely identical universes that exist in a continuous, never-ending timeline. If we can access memory, convey experience through the communication of data to others, then it seems possible to me that, in theory, there is a way to access an identical neighboring universe from any time in the past or future.

I suggest that by unlocking the secrets to the speed of light and the absolutes of density and temperature we would inevitably find ourselves in the lobby of a universal apartment building, in front of an elevator to all the other universal floors and apartment units.

a reply to: Peeple

No.

It moved from its former position within the same "envelope" of the observer at the same rate.

It will always take 25,640 years to view Sagittarius A. No matter what you do. You are always 25k light years from the center of the galaxy. There's no increasing red shift for distance to even give the observational illusion of moving away faster.

If your spot in the universe was reduced to a spot on a eternally expanding balloon try thinking of a way to see that spot in a difference position.

All you get is to be stuck static to that spot on the balloon as the "observer point". The other dots furthest away will red shift out of sight though.

a reply to: Peeple
Maybe light echoes could one day give us that answer?

Light can be absorbed, reflected, and re-emitted by gas and dust, giving us a second look.

Physorg

a reply to: Buvvy

You would see those streaks if your eyes would function as a photo camera. But your eyes are devices that catch pictures like they are at the moment and send them to your brain via electric signals.

You would need something like film paper to make long exposure shots. And guess what?

Here is what you are looking for:

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Just a few things, cosmology deals with the universe as a whole, not astrophysics.

The concept of God being within the universe and part of everything would be Pantheism, if God also extends beyond his creation while still being everywhere within it, then that's Panentheism.

Just a heads up in case you want to research the differences between the terms.

a reply to: 0bserver1

But what light which one ? I've been thinking on this some lights are old some are contained some are new how do we determine that light to evaluate . For this matter I do not believe light has a consistent speed they all differ from the source .

a reply to: Grenade

The concept of God being within the universe and part of everything would be Pantheism, if God also extends beyond his creation while still being everywhere within it, then that's Panentheism.

Bravo! ...That's an excellent example of infinitely small rabbit holes of self-introspection.

The question I'm posing isn't about a belief in "God" or its definition, though. It's about the assumption that the universe has a inside and an outside, the paradigm of "Nothing" vs "Something", and the value and symbolism of "Zero"

Basically, everyone is hypothesizing on perspectives within the universe, while imagining themselves as being "outside" of the universe. Or, in other words, imagining themselves in "God's" omniscious realm and trying to make sense of the view.

I contend there is no "outside". There is only a universe that is both infinitely big and infinitely small.

I also contend that when we break the code of the speed of light and absolutes like temperature and density, we may discover time travel through access to neighboring /dimensions'/universes' and their infinite timelines.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

I don’t think anyone else mentioned God. Hence I went down the theological terminology route.

I’ve already said you can’t invoke variables from realms outside of the known universe, either measure or observe anything, so on that we agree.

As for other dimensions, universes and timelines. I don’t see why not, our current theories leave a lot of room for the unknown.

a reply to: Grenade

I don’t think anyone else mentioned God.

So? No one else asserted that there is nothing outside of the universe either. Nor has anyone else suggested that imagining projecting oneself outside of the universe to understand time travel is futile.

Hence I went down the theological terminology route.

Why?

I’ve already said you can’t invoke variables from realms outside of the known universe, either measure or observe anything, so on that we agree.

You agree there is nothing outside of the universe, therefore there is no "inside/outside" paradigm?

As for other dimensions, universes and timelines. I don’t see why not, our current theories leave a lot of room for the unknown.

The only way time travel is possible is by cracking the "speed of light" code and other related absolutes, like density and temperature. Then most certainly, just as we can remember stuff and we can convey sensory experience through the transfer of data from one point in time and space to another point in time and space now, we will be able to access time travel through newly revealed neighboring dimensions, from different points in time and space.

As above, so below. That's a fractal!

a reply to: Sookiechacha

You misunderstand.

When bringing God into the conversation as you did, it enters the realms of theology. It’s entirely possible to be an outside observer of our universe without being the creator. As you invoked God then we enter into a theological conversation and so must deviate from cosmology or physics.

I agree there’s no evidence for anything outside of the universe, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Time travel is not possible, “cracking the speed of light” as you put it would invalidate our core understanding of the fundamental laws which we assume govern our reality and define our physical laws.

Your argument is paradoxical, you say there’s nothing outside of the universe while at the same time state that you believe there’s neighbouring dimensions and other universes. There’s no assurances that exceeding light speed is possible, nor is there any absolutes when it comes to that hypothesis.

a reply to: Grenade

When bringing God into the conversation as you did, it enters the realms of theology.

I did not bring God into the conversation as a justification for a theological discussion any more than Einstein invoked God when he claimed "God doesn't play dice" as a theological argument to justify his theories.

I used two ancient arguments of God's existence to illustrate my point that the question of a universe with an inside/outside paradigm is not a given, not in cosmology, astrophysics, theology or philosophy.

At any rate, there must be an observer for any measurement in time and space. Obviously, I wasn't successful in suggesting that the religious with attribute consciousness, the observer, self-awareness, as an injected into the universe from outside the universe, from God's realm, while the spiritual will tell you the universe is God, the observer, consciousness and self-awareness arise from the universe organically.

Your argument is paradoxical, you say there’s nothing outside of the universe while at the same time state that you believe there’s neighbouring dimensions and other universes.

Yes, there is one universe that contains an infinite number of versions of itself.

Time travel is not possible, “cracking the speed of light” as you put it would invalidate our core understanding of the fundamental laws which we assume govern our reality and define our physical laws.

Oh noes! We can't invalidate our "core understanding of the fundamental laws"!

Oh well, there so many core understandings that we don't understand and fundamental laws that we have yet to test. Let's touch base on this again when science reveals its mind-blowing breakthrough defining consciousness and pinpoints its origin.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

IF science has a breakthrough which totally refutes everything it previously theorised I’ll be reluctant to believe the new paradigm, just as I question the current one.

a reply to: Grenade

What new paradigm?

I mean, there are people today who hypothesize that from a place outside of the universe, in "God's realm", time travel is possible...anything is possible.

Imagining being able to find a platform from which the code of the speed of light, density and temperature could be cracked/manipulated/harnessed, that is within the universe shouldn't be that far of a leap.