Notices
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 101 to 117 of 117
Like Tree7Likes

Thread: Is the age of the universe the same in all frames?

  1. #101  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdW View Post
    ALL they CAN hold against me, is that I ASKED if the measuring of the age of the universe COULD have any consequenses for the Theory of Relativity!
    sigurdW, no one is holding anything against you. We are merely pointing out to you where your ideas are in contradiction to currently accepted physics.

    Im very sorry if I disprove the theory,
    You cannot disprove relativity with a thought experiment, let alone one that is built on mere assumptions. You will need hard, empirical evidence for that - so you have any ?

    IF an sWclock is possible THEN the Principle of Equivalence is violated!
    Yes of course - but in order to show this you will have to ACTUALLY construct one, and it must work exactly the way you claim it would.
    That's just the first step - after that then you will need to explain why pretty much all physics that relies on relativity ( QED, celestial mechanics, cosmology, quantum field theory,... ) gives the correct results even though the basis it is built on is wrong !

    Let me see a complete and not forged quote showing that I do so.
    Or else, Mr, I will insist that you are a forger!
    Are you accusing SpeedFreek of forgery ? If so you are treading on very thin ice, because the phrase he quoted is in fact one of yours.

    Are you making a statement of Scientific Fact, or do you express an opinion of yours?
    He is making a statement based on currently accepted laws of physics. Relativity is understood to be a valid, verifiable model of physics within its domain of applicability - it is empirically well supported, and no experiment has ever shown any violation of the equivalence principle.
    Thus it is perfectly acceptable for us to claim that, based on current understanding of physics, such a clock cannot be constructed. If you are unhappy with this you will need to present empirical evidence that it IS indeed possible to build such a device, and that it functions as you say it will.

    You have no legitimate reason for believing this rat to give good advice, assuming he means well then remember that you proved long ago that 1+1= 1 only if you dont understand what you speak about!
    Ok, my opinion is : you are going too far now.
     

  2. #102  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    493
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdW View Post
    ALL they CAN hold against me, is that I ASKED if the measuring of the age of the universe COULD have any consequenses for the Theory of Relativity!
    sigurdW, no one is holding anything against you. We are merely...
    I think I have the right
    to remain silent.
    I need a lawyer, but who
    in here is there with
    unquestionable moral
    and intellectual integrity?
    Edit:

    It dawned on me that I should not shut up in absurdum
    since I must at least say "yes" or "no" if,
    contrary to my expectations,
    such a person would ask me if I consider him hired?

    So,ok... I proved something, didnt I? ...
    so with the absolute skepticism of Groucho Marx,
    I will give my decision a second thought...
    You may meanwhile "safely" continue insulting and provoking me.

    Last edited by sigurdW; August 18th, 2012 at 08:02 AM.
     

  3. #103  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Sigurd... Do you deny making this analogy up???

    Galileo notices that if odd numbers are boys and even numbers are girls then everybody is dancing. There are as many boys as girls. This is the fact and cantor pats galileo encouraging on the shoulder and says And yet you think there is not an infinity why? Galileo says: But if I take the clothes off all them girls and put the clothes of each girl in neat pile beside her and then let the boys and the girls unite...(g looks at c: ure not thinking what im thinking are u?) THEN surely there cant be as many piles as there are girls AND boys!
    Pats cantor on his head: I suspect you dont understand arithmethics very well my dear little cantor.

     

  4. #104  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    legal advice sigurd???

    Say nothing, exercise your right to remain silent. Thats free for you my friend.
     

  5. #105  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    500
    There are a lot of strange misconceptions of "the age of the universe" throughout this thread. Commonly, the age of the universe really identifies the time coordinate for the extent of that period which we can describe using physics in the reference frame in which the cosmic background radiation averages out to be (roughly) isotropic and (hopefully) so is cosmic expansion. It doesn't matter what the motion of any one or any number of observers is, everyone will agree on what that defined age of the universe is for any given spacetime point. The theory of relativity guarantees that we will all agree on what different systems of coordinates will say.

    We can describe the universe using different frames of reference and then certain regions will be "younger" and certain others "older" appropriately. Additionally, the former regions will be more dense and the latter less dense. If we wish to approximately model the universe using only special relativity, we can do so, roughly. In this case, we have a universe in which we are at the center and the CMB is at rest (so to speak), the universe gets denser farther away from us, and there is a hot, dense plasma generating a background radiation at the edge of the universe. Donald Page wrote one or two papers describing this. (To paraphrase his colorful language, the Big Bang is still going.) Reference frames in motion relative to this chosen frame will disagree about the shape of the universe pretty much as expected.
    SpeedFreek likes this.
     

  6. #106  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    493
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    legal advice sigurd???

    Say nothing, exercise your right to remain silent. Thats free for you my friend.
    NO! Not now!!
    You could be studying law...
    after all how do I tell?!
    Even Groucho warns me
    you might be the real thing...

    SIR! ARE YOU A CHEAT?

    But I should warn you in advance
    This IS your one and only chance to escape ...
    (Since even Groucho Marx was "genuinley disturbed")
    Your answer may get you the job!
     

  7. #107  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdW View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    legal advice sigurd???

    Say nothing, exercise your right to remain silent. Thats free for you my friend.
    NO! Not now!!
    You could be studying law...
    after all how do I tell?!
    Even Groucho warns me
    you might be the real thing...

    SIR! ARE YOU A CHEAT?

    But I should warn you in advance
    This IS your one and only chance to escape ...
    (Since even Groucho Marx was "genuinley disturbed")
    Your answer may get you the job!
    Well sig, I don't consider myself a cheat, as im not subject to any rules.

    If rules are apllied then i will try to play the game and win within the rules...

    If this looks unlikely to suceed, I might cheat to win, depending on how much i want to win...

    Does this answer your question satisfactorarily?
     

  8. #108  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    As Sigurd appears to have little interest in science, only in filling threads with unsubstantiated claims and irrelevant ramblings I would close the thread. Personally, I would also ban Sigurd as an annoying troll who contributes nothing useful. But that is for the wise moderators to decide...
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  9. #109  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    493
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdW View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    legal advice sigurd???

    Say nothing, exercise your right to remain silent. Thats free for you my friend.
    NO! Not now!!
    You could be studying law...
    after all how do I tell?!
    Even Groucho warns me
    you might be the real thing...

    SIR! ARE YOU A CHEAT?

    But I should warn you in advance
    This IS your one and only chance to escape ...
    (Since even Groucho Marx was "genuinley disturbed")
    Your answer may get you the job!
    Well sig, I don't consider myself a cheat, as im not subject to any rules.

    If rules are apllied then i will try to play the game and win within the rules...

    If this looks unlikely to suceed, I might cheat to win, depending on how much i want to win...

    Does this answer your question satisfactorarily?
    No answer ever will, because this ignorant
    cant tell if its a copy from a book of law
    or if its you improvising...that will have to do.

    You decide if to look for a sad detective/scientist out of work.
    (Perhaps his wife left him and he might now be pondering suicide?)
    And ask him to start a careful investigation of facts
    so YOU can concentrate on what to do with them.

    Any comments?

    Oh I forgot:
    Its me who decides
    what is a WIN!
    Understood?
    But its you
    who win.
    Do you accept?
    If you do, Ill speak when you advice me to do so.
     

  10. #110  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    This is rapidly descending into meaningless word salad.
    I would agree with Strange - let's put an end to this.
     

  11. #111  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdW View Post
    No answer ever will, because this ignorant
    cant tell if its a copy from a book of law
    or if its you improvising...that will have to do.

    You decide if to look for a sad detective/scientist out of work.
    (Perhaps his wife left him and he might now be pondering suicide?)
    And ask him to start a careful investigation of facts
    so YOU can concentrate on what to do with them.

    Any comments?

    Oh I forgot:
    Its me who decides
    what is a WIN!
    Understood?
    But its you
    who win.
    Do you accept?
    If you do, Ill speak when you advice me to do so.
    I was improvising an answer for you, im not the type to do any research for a question like that.

    Are you a sad detective scientist out of work? did your wife leave you?

    Are you offering to investigate facts for me?

    If you decide i win then i accept!
     

  12. #112  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    This is rapidly descending into meaningless word salad.
    I would agree with Strange - let's put an end to this.
    Just give sic one chance to answer my questions please markus... I may be very naive but you never know... he might be preparing a straight answer.
     

  13. #113  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    Just give sic one chance to answer my questions please markus... I may be very naive but you never know... he might be preparing a straight answer.
    You need not worry, I am not a moderator, so it is not my decision whether to lock this or not.
    I was just voicing my opinion.
     

  14. #114  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    493
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    This is rapidly descending into meaningless word salad.
    I would agree with Strange - let's put an end to this.
    Not necessary, I just left!
     

  15. #115  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdW View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by river_rat View Post
    Hi Markus

    Sorry to jump in at such a late stage but you have raised a personal bugbear of mine. Violating a current scientific theory does not make something physically impossible. The mere possibility of the creation of such a clock, for want of a better example in this thread, assures me that the equivalence principle is falsifiable and thus a reasonable scientific proposition. It does mean you would have quiet a battle convincing me that your miracle clock works the way you say it does though. However, that is a question about my beliefs regarding the universe and not about what is physically possible.

    Anyway, that's my two cents on the matter.
    Hi river_rat,

    I understand your point, and in general I would have to agree with you that mere violations of principles do not constitute a physical impossibility. However, in this particular case the existence of such a clock would be tantamount to the existence of an absolute reference frame in relation to which one can determine his/her state of motion - this would invalidate not just the equivalance principle, but the entire theory of relativity.
    I am not currently aware of any empirical evidence which can support such an absolute frame, while on the other hand there is plenty of evidence to support the theory of relativity as it is, i.e. without any absolute rest frames so that two inertial observers can only measure their relative speeds.

    For that reason I will maintain that, in the context of this thread, the theory of relativity should remain a valid point of reference, in accordance with currently accepted scientific knowledge.

    Appreciate your input though !
    I am being told by other members of this forum that you are very knowledgeable about these matters - what's your take on this discussion ?
    Hi Marcus! Look at your blue sentence: Please acknowledge it was not me daring to claim this!

    ALL they CAN hold against me, is that I ASKED if the measuring of the age of the universe COULD have any consequenses for the Theory of Relativity!

    Im very sorry if I disprove the theory, I pray for forgiveness and promise never to do it again
    I just want to point out at this point, since I don't see it mentioned:

    If I am not mistaken, then the speed of light is the same for all frames, is it not? That is, the speed of light in a vacuum. So I would expect that "the vacuum's" motion relative to you would also be the same for all observers in all frames of reference.

    If so, then the age of the universe would have no consequences for Special Relativity. Neither theory would have anything at all to say about the other.

    Quote Originally Posted by SpeedFreek View Post
    What you are suggesting is akin to trying to measure your own motion across the Earths surface in, say, 1 hour, against your motion due to plate tectonics, using a perfectly elastic ruler you can never be sure you aren't stretching, whose increments are too large to measure the motion of plate tectonics!

    And as for the CMBR "rest frame", it is a convenient frame to use in cosmology, when dealing with distances and ages the span billions of years, but a real clock can never actually remain in that frame (gravity again).

    The Solar System is moving at something around 600 km/s or so relative to the CMBR rest frame (the error bars for this estimate are quite large and it took years of analysis of the WMAP data to get this figure), but there is also a lot of gravity in these here parts. These are not calculations that can be done "on the fly", and even if they could they would still be subject to the other problems we have mentioned.
    If you think about it, the charged particles which emitted the CMBR at the moment of last scattering would have been traveling at every possible velocity relative to every possible observer's frame of reference.

    With that in mind it actually kind of surprises me that it conforms to a black body spectrum at all.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
     

  16. #116  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,966
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    If you think about it, the charged particles which emitted the CMBR at the moment of last scattering would have been traveling at every possible velocity relative to every possible observer's frame of reference.

    With that in mind it actually kind of surprises me that it conforms to a black body spectrum at all.
    No -- you need to think about it much more than you have. The surprise isn't from the mere fact that the velocities are distributed. The surprise is that the distribution is the particular one associated with thermal equilibrium. That is the remarkable fact.
     

  17. #117  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    As per the warning in post #99, this thread is closed.
     

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Discrepancy between age and size universe?
    By Defiler in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: May 27th, 2012, 08:52 AM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: April 17th, 2011, 08:20 AM
  3. Regarding the age of the Universe.
    By Twixly in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: May 22nd, 2008, 10:58 AM
  4. Age of Universe Question
    By ajg624 in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: March 14th, 2008, 05:51 AM
  5. Particles and the age of the universe
    By zinjanthropos in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 27th, 2005, 11:23 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •