Astronomy News

[Kylie]

Fun in the fishbowl with cameras is fine. Now try to get some connection here to deep space and what wavelengths are like there?

For example
"Electromagnetic waves always travel at the same speed (299,792 km per second). This is one of their defining characteristics."
How are frequency and wavelength related?

If time did not exist as it does here on earth out in deep space, then any waves there would not be taking one second to move 299,792 km. That is how much time it takes here in our space and time.

So you think that the laws of nature out there are so different that the fundamental constants that we have here are different? Okay, let's keep that in mind...

Correct. In the fishbowl light exists a certain way and will always look a certain way! Now if we were way out in space, we might ask what else may be at work that may shift light!? If time itself and space were not the same I suspect some recalculation might be needed.

And now you say time and space could be different out there too!

I tend to agree. But so what? Hydrogen exists out there, big deal. Other things may also exist that we can't see. One thing that exists out there that we can see from the fishbowl is hydrogen.

So you claim there is hydrogen out there. In deep space where time, space and the fundamental constants of the universe are different, you think that the forces that govern atoms are the same?

So, make up your mind. Is it similar or different? You are demanding two mutually exclusive things. You can have one, but you can't have both.

You seem to be confused about what my claim is.

You seem to be confused about what the science is.

If time were not the same we would still have hydrogen out there.
"The emission spectrum of a chemical element or chemical compound is the spectrum of frequencies of electromagnetic radiation emitted due to an atom or molecule making a transition from a high energy state to a lower energy state."
Emission spectrum - Wikipedia

Frequency has to do with time, obviously. Also, since we ONLY see the light here, we might ask if anything could make a transition from energy states out in deep space besides what we are familiar with here.

Okay, I want you to do a little thought experiment for me.

Imagine a deep space where everything is the same as it is here, except time goes at a different speed. How would that appear to be different, from our point of view here on Earth, to a deep space where everything was the same as it was here on Earth. Show me one single difference.

As mentioned, who cares if there is hydrogen and some other elements out there also? That is fine.How would that help you?

Is that your attempt to avoid the issue? Say that no one cares about it, as though that means you don't have to address it?

Since I never said that hydrogen never existed out there no, I am not wrong, and you are wrong saying that I am wrong.

Of course, you never mentioned how hydrogen could exist out there in a part of the universe where the laws are so incredibly different to what we have here, yet also so remarkably similar that things look exactly as we'd expect them to...

 

[dad]

So you think that the laws of nature out there are so different that the fundamental constants that we have here are different? Okay, let's keep that in mind...

No. Not really. But who really knows? I assume that if time were different that 'out there' could be light days away though! That is the key issue.

And now you say time and space could be different out there too!

Science does not know. All distances to, and sizes of stars in science models depend on uniform space and time.

So you claim there is hydrogen out there. In deep space where time, space and the fundamental constants of the universe are different, you think that the forces that govern atoms are the same?

I do not know about laws out there. Nor do I know what else is out there, such as spiritual realities, as well as physical realities. The bible does make a spiritual connection with space and stars. But the only atoms we have ever seen are here! The only time and space we have seen them IN is here.

So, make up your mind. Is it similar or different? You are demanding two mutually exclusive things. You can have one, but you can't have both.

I doubt time is the same, but we do not know. You see if time is different, that means that nothing can take billions of our years!

You seem to be confused about what the science is.

Good thing you are here to articulate what it is....(waiting)

Okay, I want you to do a little thought experiment for me.

Imagine a deep space where everything is the same as it is here, except time goes at a different speed. How would that appear to be different, from our point of view here on Earth, to a deep space where everything was the same as it was here on Earth. Show me one single difference.

The difference would not be on earth. Here we have time. Now if there was no time persay out there, as we know it here, then no light from anything could take millions of years to get here.

Is that your attempt to avoid the issue? Say that no one cares about it, as though that means you don't have to address it?

If you can give us a reason to be concerned about what laws are like a few light days away, go for it. You see, nothing in the universe is as big or far away as you claim unless time exists uniformly.

Of course, you never mentioned how hydrogen could exist out there in a part of the universe where the laws are so incredibly different to what we have here, yet also so remarkably similar that things look exactly as we'd expect them to...

That is because we do not know laws are different or not. Why should I hazard a guess? Now if there was hydrogen, and time was not the same, well, any time involved in decay if there was any there would not equal what we know here!

Example: one of the isotopes of hydrogen 3H has a half-life of 12.32 years.

 

[Kylie]

No. Not really. But who really knows? I assume that if time were different that 'out there' could be light days away though! That is the key issue.

I used to wonder why you refused to actually be specific about any of this. Then I realised that the instant you were specific, your position would crumble. You have to keep it vague and untestable.

Science does not know. All distances to, and sizes of stars in science models depend on uniform space and time.

And you've given nothing to cast doubt on that.

I do not know about laws out there. Nor do I know what else is out there, such as spiritual realities, as well as physical realities. The bible does make a spiritual connection with space and stars. But the only atoms we have ever seen are here! The only time and space we have seen them IN is here.

So do you think there are hydrogen atoms out there or not? Once again, you seem to flip flop back and forth.

I doubt time is the same, but we do not know. You see if time is different, that means that nothing can take billions of our years!

If all you have is assumption, then you shouldn't be surprised when you aren't taken seriously.

Good thing you are here to articulate what it is....(waiting)

Have done. Many times. You have always ignored it. So I see no reason to waste my time with you anymore.

The difference would not be on earth. Here we have time. Now if there was no time persay out there, as we know it here, then no light from anything could take millions of years to get here.

So how is it that we could look out into two completely different environments and get results that were indistinguishable?

If you can give us a reason to be concerned about what laws are like a few light days away, go for it. You see, nothing in the universe is as big or far away as you claim unless time exists uniformly.

And you do it again.

That is because we do not know laws are different or not. Why should I hazard a guess? Now if there was hydrogen, and time was not the same, well, any time involved in decay if there was any there would not equal what we know here!

If you do not want to hazard a guess, why do you spend so much time arguing that the laws are different?

 

[dad]

I used to wonder why you refused to actually be specific about any of this. Then I realised that the instant you were specific, your position would crumble. You have to keep it vague and untestable.

You seem to be admitting that science does not know what time is like way out there, and cannot test it.

And you've given nothing to cast doubt on that.

Once it is admitted that science does not know what time is like in deep space, all is lost for the claims of sizes, origins, and distances, and time involved in light reaching earth. One no more needs to cast doubt on further claims any more than one needs to try and rekindle a pile of ashes after a fire.

So do you think there are hydrogen atoms out there or not? Once again, you seem to flip flop back and forth.

I would think so. However, not sure why that would matter in origin issues.

So how is it that we could look out into two completely different environments and get results that were indistinguishable?

How is it that every slide in a Disney viewer looks somewhat similar? How is it that a view from a fishbowl in a little room would appear the same each day? Why would people who need strong eye correction would see things fuzzy when not wearing glasses? The answers all lie somewhere beyond the internal perspectives of those in limiting situations. Of course, all things here will unfold in our time.

If you do not want to hazard a guess, why do you spend so much time arguing that the laws are different?

This thread has to do with deep space. Not earth. The laws are not really an issue for me in space. The issue is space and time itself.

 

[Kylie]

You seem to be admitting that science does not know what time is like way out there, and cannot test it.

You seem to be incapable of understanding basic English, because I wasn't talking about science at all. I was talking about your technique of never saying anything specific.

Once it is admitted that science does not know what time is like in deep space, all is lost for the claims of sizes, origins, and distances, and time involved in light reaching earth. One no more needs to cast doubt on further claims any more than one needs to try and rekindle a pile of ashes after a fire.

You've never been able to show that science has no way of telling what deep space is like, and I have provided explanations many times to show that science has a very good idea what it is like.

I would think so. However, not sure why that would matter in origin issues.

Once again we have the "It doesn't matter so we shouldn't try to find out about it" argument.

How is it that every slide in a Disney viewer looks somewhat similar? How is it that a view from a fishbowl in a little room would appear the same each day? Why would people who need strong eye correction would see things fuzzy when not wearing glasses? The answers all lie somewhere beyond the internal perspectives of those in limiting situations. Of course, all things here will unfold in our time.

This does not actually answer the question at all.

This thread has to do with deep space. Not earth. The laws are not really an issue for me in space. The issue is space and time itself.

Again, this is not actually addressing the question.

 

[dad]

I have supported my position. You are the one posting childishly. One word answers, refusing to produce supporting evidence, insults...

In astronomy, the issue was whether time existed out there as here. Otherwise, all distances and sizes of anything out there are down the drain. Obviously you have not even addressed the issue, let alone supported one.

 

[SelfSim]

In astronomy, the issue was whether time existed out there as here.

.. and if it didn't, then what would follow, would be a completely useless explanation.

Otherwise, all distances and sizes of anything out there are down the drain.

Exactly.
Thank you for finally admitting why your notion leads to complete and utter meaninglessness.

Obviously you have not even addressed the issue, let alone supported one.

Case closed by your own admission (as per the above).

 

[dad]

.. and if it didn't, then what would follow, would be a completely useless explanation.

No. I find it very useful to realize that all the claims that Genesis is wrong due to stars being millions of light-years away are based solely on a belief time is the same out there!

 

[Kylie]

In astronomy, the issue was whether time existed out there as here. Otherwise, all distances and sizes of anything out there are down the drain. Obviously you have not even addressed the issue, let alone supported one.

Everything we see out there matches very well with the models we have developed using the laws we have here on Earth. If the laws way out there were different, this would not be the case.

 

[dad]

Still waiting for you to provide a shred of evidence for your position.

My position is that science does not know that time is the same in all the universe. That should be self-evident. I think you admitted as much, no?

 

[dad]

Everything we see out there matches very well with the models we have developed using the laws we have here on Earth. If the laws way out there were different, this would not be the case.

Nothing to do with time though, and what it is or is not like out there.

 

[Kylie]

My position is that science does not know that time is the same in all the universe. That should be self-evident. I think you admitted as much, no?

Your position is that the fundamental laws of nature are different in distant parts of space and in the past. You have never explained why they should be different, nor how they are different, nor what caused them to change.

You just repeatedly make the claim loudly.

 

[Kylie]

Nothing to do with time though, and what it is or is not like out there.

You're wrong.

 

[SelfSim]

.. and if it didn't, then what would follow, would be a completely useless explanation.

No. I find it very useful to realize that all the claims that Genesis is wrong due to stars being millions of light-years away are based solely on a belief time is the same out there!

From: The suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN)

The suprachiasmatic nucleus of the hypothalamus is the principal circadian pacemaker in the mammalian brain. It generates circadian rhythms in rest and activity, core body temperature, neuroendocrine function, autonomic function, memory and psychomotor performance, and a host of other behavioral and physiological processes. The SCN is the central player in an important neural system, the circadian timing system (CTS).

Our sense of time is directly linked with brain stem activity. Ever had a general anaesthetic and woken up wondering when the anaesthetic is going to kick in? That because anaesthesia shuts down the brain-stem 'clock' (the SCN) and there is no 'time'.
What this shows is that the time we perceive anywhere comes from the SCN center of the brain.
That is, time is the same whenever we perceive something, regardless of what we might convince ourselves is that something's location (local or remote).

(I now predict outright denial of the hard evidence for this .. along with loads of similar evidence).

 

[dad]

Your position is that the fundamental laws of nature are different in distant parts of space and in the past.

No. I do not know about laws in deep space. Perhaps they are the same in many ways. Who knows? As stated several times, the issue for faraway space is time. You require time to be the same for distances in cosmology to be valid, and the time you claim light travels from there to earth.

 

[dad]

You're wrong.

Why?

 

[SelfSim]

No. I do not know about laws in deep space.

Then learn .. look at the evidence.

Perhaps they are the same in many ways. Who knows?

Be careful you don't look to find out .. you may not like what you see, and why you see that.
This is a thread about Astronomy for goodness sake .. go find some other thread to discuss your problem!

As stated several times, the issue for faraway space is time.

No ... There is no issue for science. You have this issue .. (and no-one else, evidently).

You require time to be the same for distances in cosmology to be valid, and the time you claim light travels from there to earth.

So do you .. except you reject being a human being!

 

[dad]

If you don't know what they are, why do you go on so much about them being different?

I don't. You seem to be conflating earth with the distant universe. On earth, the record informs us that nature could not have been the same. In space, no one really knows.

 

[SelfSim]

Observations all from one observation point...right here. That does not tell us that time is like in deep space in any way.

When it comes to making use of the time dimension (involved in all observations) its even more tightly constrained than that .. it comes down to a single human brain (of which type we all have in common).
Did you even bother to read this post?

So when astronomy claims great time is involved we know it is flailing in the dark.

No .. its only you who are flailing in the dark.

You are welcome to define time as such.

Who said anything about how I define time? That's completely irrelevant. Science defines time operationally (go look it up).

However people get old over time, and that has nothing to do with what astronomers carry anywhere.

And that also has nothing to do with anything I've said.
This conversation is pointless .. I'm left wondering whether or not you were this way prior to acquiring your deep-seated religious faith .. or whether it occurred after you acquired it(?)

 

[dad]

When it comes to making use of the time dimension (involved in all observations) its even more tightly constrained than that .. it comes down to a single human brain (of which type we all have in common).
Did you even bother to read this post?

I just looked at it and it seems to be about man's brain and perceptions of time on earth. Is there some point? Surely you are not trying to suggest time in in our heads.

No .. its only you who are flailing in the dark.
Who said anything about how I define time? That's completely irrelevant. Science defines time operationally (go look it up).

That has nothing to do with what time is. If we need to operationalize time in a way we can fit it into some dumb equation or something, that has no effect on what time itself is.