James Webb Telescope Updates

Neogaia777 · Feb 8, 2023

While I don't think we might ever one day discover how to push or propel physical matter or material to speeds at or near the speed of light in any kind of right now known manner, etc, I do think we could maybe one day figure out or discover how to make or create some kind of tunnel or a wormhole or whatever, in some kind of other, that is only right now theoretical only right now, etc, space, etc. I think it's maybe possible that one day we might learn of or about something like that maybe, etc, that would allow us to very quickly transport ourselves, or a ship possibly, etc, from one very distant area to another maybe, etc, but as to what we would find or see when we got there, I think we'd get a much more recent picture when we got there, etc, and if you were to look back at earth, or our solar system, or our galaxy, or whatever, etc, from there, etc, I think you'd get a very much older picture until you actually went back to where you came from through the theoretical hole, or wormhole, or tunnel, or whatever, etc, again, etc, at which point you'd arrive back near the very same time or picture as when you left, plus the actual travel time and time spent in that other place before heading back of course, etc...

What do you think...?

Could we maybe say that, in a way then, that time is the same everywhere if this/these kinds of theories hold any water, or are in any way true, etc...?

If it is 13.7-8 billion years old here, then is it the same everywhere, etc...?

But then, any kind of theory like that, might also lead one to question whether maybe it was all at one time maybe 13.7-8 billion years young everywhere at one time maybe as well maybe, etc...?

But that very last part might maybe be rubbish maybe, etc...?

Anyway,

God Bless!

Neogaia777 · Feb 9, 2023

Neogaia777 said:
While I don't think we might ever one day discover how to push or propel physical matter or material to speeds at or near the speed of light in any kind of right now known manner, etc, I do think we could maybe one day figure out or discover how to make or create some kind of tunnel or a wormhole or whatever, in some kind of other, that is only right now theoretical only right now, etc, space, etc. I think it's maybe possible that one day we might learn of or about something like that maybe, etc, that would allow us to very quickly transport ourselves, or a ship possibly, etc, from one very distant area to another maybe, etc, but as to what we would find or see when we got there, I think we'd get a much more recent picture when we got there, etc, and if you were to look back at earth, or our solar system, or our galaxy, or whatever, etc, from there, etc, I think you'd get a very much older picture until you actually went back to where you came from through the theoretical hole, or wormhole, or tunnel, or whatever, etc, again, etc, at which point you'd arrive back near the very same time or picture as when you left, plus the actual travel time and time spent in that other place before heading back of course, etc...

What do you think...?

Could we maybe say that, in a way then, that time is the same everywhere if this/these kinds of theories hold any water, or are in any way true, etc...?

If it is 13.7-8 billion years old here, then is it the same everywhere, etc...?

But then, any kind of theory like that, might also lead one to question whether maybe it was all at one time maybe 13.7-8 billion years young everywhere at one time maybe as well maybe, etc...?

But that very last part might maybe be rubbish maybe, etc...?

Anyway,

God Bless!

About that very last part though...?

Is anyone familiar with Stephen Hawkings ball bearing experiment...?

Well, he took a vacant gym, and placed so many metal ball bearings (I can't remember how many) on the empty gym floor, all evenly and symmetrically spaced apart in a grid pattern in the middle, and they were completely static, or motionless, while they were in that state, etc, but then he removed just five of the ball bearings (because there were alot, etc) (one thousand, ten thousand, can't really remember, etc) (but it's besides the point, because as long as they were all evenly and symmetrically placed, etc, they did not move at all one bit, but were completely motionless, etc) anyway, he removed just five of the ball bearings from among them, and all of the sudden, they all began to move, and a kind of "dance" ensued, etc. Their magnetism was likened to gravity, etc, and they eventually all collected in the center, "eventually", etc, but if there had been another force acting, that was maybe pushing them all apart slightly maybe, or was expanding them all a bit slowly maybe, it could have been perpetual at that point, etc, if the two were balanced, etc, but and/or anyway, etc, he likened this to what the universe could maybe be like, or might have been like when it started, etc. I was shocked that he proposed it actually, but it can maybe offer some other theories, or alternative explanations maybe, etc...?

God Bless!

Halbhh · Feb 9, 2023

Neogaia777 said:
What do you think...?

Are you just asking to be polite, or do you truly wish to know what I think on these things in more detail? I'm not going to assume that you want to hear from me necessarily about worm holes, as you might for instance prefer to hear someone give encouraging support to the speculative theories about wormholes for example, which I would not offer.

You also said your speculation about what we would see if we were 13 bn ly away and looked towards where our solar system/Earth would be (at that time in the past, light from this area traveling for 13 bn years....), but one could not see an old version of Earth from 13 bn ly away, as it did not come into existence until about 4.55 bn years ago. See, you'd be able to observe from that location 13 bn ly away if you had enough of a telescope a very young version of the Milky Way though, and that would be truly interesting to see!

I'd love to see what our galaxy looked like at that very young age. It would be a fabulously and intensely interesting thing to see.

Halbhh · Feb 9, 2023

Neogaia777 said:
Stephen Hawkings ball bearing experiment [the one with removing 5]

I got curious about that, but all I could find re removing some on a floor (he did an actual experiment using ball bearings to test Stokes’s law, but that's not related to this idea) -- was this video, which does indeed have the simulation of removing some ball bearings about 4 minutes in, but I'd suggest to begin at the 3 minute mark to get more on it.

The ball bearing analogy starts about 3 minutes:

FrumiousBandersnatch · Feb 9, 2023

Halbhh said:
But, as a mental exercise, if one you could get from here to 13 bn ly away instantaneously, breaking the laws of physics, then what would they see?

I don't think that's a meaningful question. Light travels instantaneously from its own POV (although, strictly speaking, it doesn't have a POV), but still takes 13 billion years universe time to reach a destination 13 billion ly away, and so would find the universe 13 billion years older.

Halbhh said:
(I'm just saying highlighting a basic mainstream understanding in cosmology here about the general mostly uniformity of the Universe (even though we know there are areas that are more dense and areas that are less dense, etc., etc.) ;-) )

The universe isn't that uniform over time; another 13 billion years would make it double the current age, enough for a significant difference.

FrumiousBandersnatch · Feb 9, 2023

Neogaia777 said:
About that very last part though...?

Is anyone familiar with Stephen Hawkings ball bearing experiment...?

Well, he took a vacant gym, and placed so many metal ball bearings (I can't remember how many) on the empty gym floor, all evenly and symmetrically spaced apart in a grid pattern in the middle, and they were completely static, or motionless, while they were in that state, etc, but then he removed just five of the ball bearings (because there were alot, etc) (one thousand, ten thousand, can't really remember, etc) (but it's besides the point, because as long as they were all evenly and symmetrically placed, etc, they did not move at all one bit, but were completely motionless, etc) anyway, he removed just five of the ball bearings from among them, and all of the sudden, they all began to move, and a kind of "dance" ensued, etc. Their magnetism was likened to gravity, etc, and they eventually all collected in the center, "eventually", etc, but if there had been another force acting, that was maybe pushing them all apart slightly maybe, or was expanding them all a bit slowly maybe, it could have been perpetual at that point, etc, if the two were balanced, etc, but and/or anyway, etc, he likened this to what the universe could maybe be like, or might have been like when it started, etc. I was shocked that he proposed it actually, but it can maybe offer some other theories, or alternative explanations maybe, etc...?

The balls weren't real, there was no magnetism. It was a thought experiment analogy for the early universe, visualised with CGI. See this video:

Halbhh · Feb 9, 2023

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
I don't think that's a meaningful question. Light travels instantaneously from its own POV (although, strictly speaking, it doesn't have a POV), but still takes 13 billion years universe time to reach a destination 13 billion ly away, and so would find the universe 13 billion years older.

The universe isn't that uniform over time; another 13 billion years would make it double the current age, enough for a significant difference.

Here you should just notice I said: this is a fantasy scenario in which we break the laws of physics entirely, and instantaneously get magicked to a new location, then in this mental exercise, what will we see when we look around?

What would the Universe look like if we were located 13 bn ly away instantaneously and used telescopes to look around like we do here on Earth? The mainstream view is we would see a Universe that looks very very similar to what we see here at this location. Isotropic. The 'Cosmological Principle' or such. Here, Cosmological principle - Wikipedia

Now, if you read enough astronomy articles, you should become aware we have notice the Universe has large 'voids' in it of very low density vast regions (and the converse, some high density regions that are a bit too large to really constitute good homogeneity).

.

But...nevertheless, even if you landed in one of those dense or sparse regions, if you looked using telescopes, say like Hubble did in the 'deep field' -- looking into a large distance with magnification of a small area to see how the rest of the Universe looks from that place....then we would still expect you'd see a 'deep field' that would look much the same as Hubble saw -- and you'd see that from any/every location in the Universe. That's what I was trying to convey to those unaware of it.

But I like how you tried to imagine literally traveling 13 bn ly by using the time dilation of special relativity, and what kind of acceleration you'd need to do it in just 10 minutes in your own reference frame (rocket ship). Fun stuff.

That's why I wrote back 'lol', imagining being under that kind of acceleration.

Did you ever read The Forever War by Joe Haldeman? It's a very fun novel your acceleration thought exercise brings to mind.

Neogaia777 · Feb 9, 2023

Halbhh said:
Are you just asking to be polite, or do you truly wish to know what I think on these things in more detail? I'm not going to assume that you want to hear from me necessarily about worm holes, as you might for instance prefer to hear someone give encouraging support to the speculative theories about wormholes for example, which I would not offer.

You also said your speculation about what we would see if we were 13 bn ly away and looked towards where our solar system/Earth would be (at that time in the past, light from this area traveling for 13 bn years....), but one could not see an old version of Earth from 13 bn ly away, as it did not come into existence until about 4.55 bn years ago. See, you'd be able to observe from that location 13 bn ly away if you had enough of a telescope a very young version of the Milky Way though, and that would be truly interesting to see!

I'd love to see what our galaxy looked like at that very young age. It would be a fabulously and intensely interesting thing to see.

Right, you'd see this region or area of space as it was 13 billion years ago, but you'd be seeing it in the past, and not the constant present, which would be shown by traveling back to it, etc...

God Bless!

Neogaia777 · Feb 9, 2023

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
The balls weren't real, there was no magnetism. It was a thought experiment analogy for the early universe, visualised with CGI. See this video:

Do not all metal or steel objects (almost) have some form of weak magnetism...?

Regardless, ok, add a form of very weak magnetism, and then add a force that was also trying to weakly or slowly expand it equally everywhere as well then, etc...

And yes, I realize it is just a thought experiment, but it is also a very interesting one if you ask me, especially since it can give you a very simple visual of the whole situation, etc...

God Bless!

Neogaia777 · Feb 9, 2023

Neogaia777 said:
Do not all metal or steel objects (almost) have some form of weak magnetism...?

Regardless, ok, add a form of very weak magnetism, and then add a force that was also trying to weakly or slowly expand it equally everywhere as well then, etc...

And yes, I realize it is just a thought experiment, but it is also a very interesting one if you ask me, especially since it can give you a very simple visual of the whole situation, etc...

God Bless!

Except in our universes case, it is arranged in clusters and strings of gravitationally bound matter, consisting of a lot of galaxies and normal matter/energy, etc, and the expansion, or expanding areas, are coming from/being caused by, the areas where there is some very dark and supposedly empty voids, from among them/it, or all of them/it, or the whole universe, etc, at those scales, etc, and those are what is expanding, or is causing the expansion, while gravity is working on all of the other gravitationally bound matter among them/around them, etc...

And those voids stack, or add up, making it appear that things further away from us are moving away from us (as the center) much faster away from us than the things that are close to us, etc, but it is an illusion, because it is really all moving/growing/expanding equally, and at a constant or the same rate, equally everywhere...

God Bless!

rockytopva · Feb 10, 2023

James Webb Space Telescope... Zooming in only to find more galaxies!

FrumiousBandersnatch · Feb 10, 2023

Halbhh said:
Here you should just notice I said: this is a fantasy scenario in which we break the laws of physics entirely, and instantaneously get magicked to a new location, then in this mental exercise, what will we see when we look around?

What would the Universe look like if we were located 13 bn ly away instantaneously and used telescopes to look around like we do here on Earth? The mainstream view is we would see a Universe that looks very very similar to what we see here at this location. Isotropic. The 'Cosmological Principle' or such. Here, Cosmological principle - Wikipedia

Now, if you read enough astronomy articles, you should become aware we have notice the Universe has large 'voids' in it of very low density vast regions (and the converse, some high density regions that are a bit too large to really constitute good homogeneity). .

But...nevertheless, even if you landed in one of those dense or sparse regions, if you looked using telescopes, say like Hubble did in the 'deep field' -- looking into a large distance with magnification of a small area to see how the rest of the Universe looks from that place....then we would still expect you'd see a 'deep field' that would look much the same as Hubble saw -- and you'd see that from any/every location in the Universe. That's what I was trying to convey to those unaware of it.

But I like how you tried to imagine literally traveling 13 bn ly by using the time dilation of special relativity, and what kind of acceleration you'd need to do it in just 10 minutes in your own reference frame (rocket ship). Fun stuff. That's why I wrote back 'lol', imagining being under that kind of acceleration.

Did you ever read The Forever War by Joe Haldeman? It's a very fun novel your acceleration thought exercise brings to mind.

My point is that it's a fantasy scenario/mental exercise/thought experiment that can't tell you what would 'really' happen because 'instantaneous', when dealing with cosmological distances, is as meaningless as 'now' (which it implies).

You could trivially say that if you imagine yourself at a distant place in the universe at a time when the view from there looked much the same as the view we see from here, then the view from there would look much the same as the view we see from here... but that's clearly true by definition.

FrumiousBandersnatch · Feb 10, 2023

rockytopva said:
James Webb Space Telescope... Zooming in only to find more galaxies!

What, more galaxies? Aren't there enough already?

But, wow!

FrumiousBandersnatch · Feb 10, 2023

Neogaia777 said:
Do not all metal or steel objects (almost) have some form of weak magnetism...?

No. Gold, silver, titanium, tungsten, aluminium, copper, brass, and lead are not magnetic. Stainless steels type 304 and 904L are supposedly non-magnetic due to other elements in the alloys (chromium, nickel, molybdenum, etc).

Neogaia777 · Feb 10, 2023

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
No. Gold, silver, titanium, tungsten, aluminium, copper, brass, and lead are not magnetic. Stainless steels type 304 and 904L are supposedly non-magnetic due to other elements in the alloys (chromium, nickel, molybdenum, etc).

You know that really is besides the point, right...?

Care to address anything else I said...?

It was used as an example of gravity, unless you are now going to tell me that an attractive force called gravity in the universe doesn't exist, etc...?

Most ball bearings are also made of steel by the way also, etc, not stainless steel, but just steel, which does have some magnetism by the way, etc...

God Bless!

Halbhh · Feb 10, 2023

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
My point is that it's a fantasy scenario/mental exercise/thought experiment that can't tell you what would 'really' happen because 'instantaneous', when dealing with cosmological distances, is as meaningless as 'now' (which it implies).

You could trivially say that if you imagine yourself at a distant place in the universe at a time when the view from there looked much the same as the view we see from here, then the view from there would look much the same as the view we see from here... but that's clearly true by definition.

Sure, we could just dump the original question of 'what if you traveled to', and instead say a more typical wording you'd see in an explanation: An observer located anywhere in the observable to us Universe we'd expect would see from their own location an observable (to them) universe that looks pretty much just like what we see: galaxies receding in all directions, out to the limit of their own observable universe, by redshift and the age of the Universe limit, about ~ 13.6bn ly. In other words, if they also had a Hubble or JWST of their own, an observer 13bn ly away from us would also themselves see a deep field in any direction that would look like what we see.... That's non trivial to someone that doesn't already know it

FrumiousBandersnatch · Feb 11, 2023

Neogaia777 said:
You know that really is besides the point, right...?

Nope - I answered a question you specifically asked: "Do not all metal or steel objects (almost) have some form of weak magnetism...?". The answer is no.

Neogaia777 said:
Care to address anything else I said...?

I already did - see post #186.

Neogaia777 said:
It was used as an example of gravity, unless you are now going to tell me that an attractive force called gravity in the universe doesn't exist, etc...?

Yes, it was an example of gravity - and gravity isn't magnetism.

Neogaia777 said:
Most ball bearings are also made of steel by the way also, etc, not stainless steel, but just steel, which does have some magnetism by the way, etc...

Yes, that's right. But the video didn't say what they were made of (they weren't real); their purpose was simply to show the influence of gravity in the early universe.

FrumiousBandersnatch · Feb 11, 2023

Halbhh said:
Sure, we could just dump the original question of 'what if you traveled to', and instead say a more typical wording you'd see in an explanation: An observer located anywhere in the observable to us Universe we'd expect would see from their own location an observable (to them) universe that looks pretty much just like what we see: galaxies receding in all directions, out to the limit of their own observable universe, by redshift and the age of the Universe limit, about ~ 13.6bn ly. In other words, if they also had a Hubble or JWST of their own, an observer 13bn ly away from us would also themselves see a deep field in any direction that would look like what we see.... That's non trivial to someone that doesn't already know it

Yes, they would see roughly what we see if they were roughly 13.7 billion years from the big bang.

essentialsaltes · Apr 6, 2023

I guess it's too late, but maybe close your drapes.

NASA’s Webb Scores Another Stunning View With New Image of Uranus

Halbhh · Apr 6, 2023

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/stsci-01gwqdqcs9rf0dxmrvq49k4k3b.png

Nice

essentialsaltes said:
I guess it's too late, but maybe close your drapes.

NASA’s Webb Scores Another Stunning View With New Image of Uranus

James Webb Telescope Updates

Old Soul

Old Soul

Everything You say is Life to me

Everything You say is Life to me

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Everything You say is Life to me

Old Soul

Old Soul

Old Soul

Love to pray! :)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Old Soul

Everything You say is Life to me

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Stranger in a Strange Land

NASA’s Webb Scores Another Stunning View With New Image of Uranus​

Everything You say is Life to me

NASA’s Webb Scores Another Stunning View With New Image of Uranus​

Similar threads

NASA’s Webb Scores Another Stunning View With New Image of Uranus

NASA’s Webb Scores Another Stunning View With New Image of Uranus