ALMA sees old galaxies before they merged. two ways to look back into the past?

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by nebel, Dec 8, 2017.

  1. NotEinstein Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,533
    I know it wasn't originally yours, but you are the one arguing in favor of it in this thread.

    Let me try again: what does it mean for two regions of spacetime to not be causally connected? It means that anything that's happening in one region doesn't (cannot) affect the other region. There is no causal link.
    We can only learn about something by it having some influence on us. If something doesn't affect us, we cannot detect it. A star's light reaches us, and its photons cause electrical signals in our eyes; it affects us, therefore we can (in principle) determine that the star exists. There is a causal link.
    Let's say a hundred years from now, a machine is made that makes a noise. That noise cannot affect us: it's in our future (I'm assuming time-travel doesn't happen). There is no way for us to gain any information about that noise, and we cannot actually determine that that noise really will happen. There is no causal link.

    If there was something before the BB, and there's a causal link between pre-BB and post-BB, we can (in principle) learn about it.
    If there was something before the BB, but there's no causal link between pre-BB and post-BB, we cannot ever learn anything about it. There literally is no way for information from the pre-BB period to reach us in that case. We can never know anything about that period, so we might as well assume it doesn't exist (Occam's Razor).
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,381
    Yes we could; but very serious thought has been given to the cause, the time scenario that would precipitate a big bang, or whimper origin of us.
    Since the universe appears to be of a finite age, denser, smaller in size in the past. it might be an out of this world question to probe. The expanding sphere model embedded in infinite time is just an attempt to visualize that. Expanding our horizons is a time honoured human endeavour. why stop at the big bang, or at the the fringe of expansion into the future time, , where you and I reside, in that symbolic membrane?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,381
    if it could be shown, theorized, that time reched past the big bang and is reaching into the future where we have not arrived at yet , and time has characteristic in common, or similar with the 3 dimension we are directly touched by, i.e. that there are wrinkles in it, other features, since we are constantly moving through it, temporarily in touch with it, it would be a means to probe beyond our horizons? or?
    It appears the infinite time perspective is a more liberating viewpoint than examining what bounces around in images, messages, since space was added to the mix? messages
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. NotEinstein Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,533
    Science indeed doesn't stop at the BB, and nobody has suggested that. However, we know of a big limitation: we don't have a quantum theory of gravity. This (and perhaps more) prevents us from understanding what happened at the BB. Speculation about what happened before the BB is just that: speculation.

    And your expanding sphere model is flawed; it violates both SR and GR, as I already stated, so your attempt to visualize it that way that are only hindering actually understanding what our universe is really like.

    Yes, that would be interesting. Too bad we are clearly nowhere near knowing that, and thus everything along those lines is pure speculation.
     
  8. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,381
    I can see the limitation of the model in the sense, that while infinite time exists for it, once a point in that nebel has been used as a centerpoint for a 3D, energy + matter expansion into it, the inclosed time in the inside of the membrane, although empty, containing only nothing and time, is sealed off by the curved 2D space membrane around it. appropriated by the universe forever?
    Came to that conclusion from looking at your questioning of the side, surface, leaf, page membrane questioning. The membrane has one convex surface, facing the future and a concave surface, facing the past. Can there be new structures emerging in the empty cave?
     
  9. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,381
    Could the time inside the cavity, through which the universe once moved, be considered as used time? Although all the information is contained and travelling in the membrane, could there any wrinkles, traces be left in the inside, in the so well -travelled-through time? and;
    NAIVE QUESTION :
    in simple geometry, for every unit in the radius (here time), the linear measurement of the circumference increases by ~1.57 corresponding units. even in an universe model 13,8 billion years across. but
    the limiting speed of any movement is 30o 000 km( membrane distance) for every 1 seconds of radius, (time). could not the oldest radiation made several turns inside the membrane before detection by our sensors? or at least one circumnavigation of the merging galaxies in the OP?
    1/1. 57 vs 1/300 000?
     
  10. NotEinstein Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,533
    "inclosed time"? So you do have two different time-dimensions in your model. That is violently incompatible with mainstream cosmology, if not GR!

    By universe, do you mean only everything inside the sphere, or everything outside of it as well?

    So your membrane has a non-zero thickness? Because you cannot meaningfully talk about two different surfaces if they always overlap.

    Per your model: no, because that's in the past, and thus cannot be changed.

    No.

    Define what you mean by "wrinkles, traces".

    Your membrane isn't moving through space, so you cannot compare it to the speed of light.

    What do you mean by "turns inside the membrane"?

    No, because the universe is too flat for that. To the best of our knowledge, you cannot fly off in one direction and circumnavigate the universe to end up in the other direction.
     
  11. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,381
    so here is a prediction what happens in the expanding sphere in indefinite time model. simply based on the formula above, given a constant movement through time:
    In the first seconds of the universe, the expansion rate was ~14 ^15 times ( fifteen zeros) greater per unit of time than today, thats also called inflation.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2018
  12. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,381
    very true, but the ratio, whatever the units used, gives an indication of the flatness or reduced curvature of the membrane now.
     
  13. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,381
    New structures? how about if these structures were unrelated to the universe, that resides after all in its entirety in the membrane?
    There is nothing sic in the cavity except used time, all the memories, old messages are circulating in the membrane.
     
  14. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,381
    Because the membrane pictures the "now" in time, which has zero length, the radius thickness has to be zero. think of a membrane that has an outer and inner surface, but which inner dimension has shrunk to zero. not two membranes overlapping. The model is an ideal geometrical construct, as good old Euclid would have it.
     
  15. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,381
    There is nothing sic outside the membrane except used time in the con-cavity and pristine time in the unwritten-on future outside. But: here is an intriguing, possibly impossible feature though:

    prediction: while there is no gravity in the past, the empty inside of the sphere, the future time outside , could feel the influence, acceleration, tension of gravity of the universes, the mass in the membrane. if there is really nothing sic and time out there.

    prediction: the unrushing future might be in part a function of the gravity of the universe's mass. In other words, gravity has a grip on time. and nothing sic. or gravity gives the universe traction on time., pulling it into the future.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2018
  16. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,505
    Nebel, please don't post this stuff in the science section, if you want to make speculations you should make them in the Fringe section. There is nothing wrong with making speculations and guesses at how nature works but it should not be in the math and physics section.
     
  17. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,381
    It did not start out this way in the original OP. origin, I asked it to be moved right away, but, there seems to be some appetite for reading this stuff, never would have happened in the fringes, cesspool. and speculation often has hit paydirt, particularly with inflation.
    The fractal-like nature of this discussion developed through the responses to the objections raised . much appreciated to clear the fog.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2018
  18. NotEinstein Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,533
    Can you please show how you got these specific numbers out of your model?

    The membrane's curvature in your model has nothing to do with the curvature of spacetime. For example, a flat spacetime will still produce a spherical membrane in your model.

    Violating causality means the end of the modern scientific paradigm. If you are saying things from outside the universe can change the past of the universe, you have just thrown out everything we know about our universe.

    (I said two surfaces overlapping.)

    None of this addressed the meaningfulness or meaninglessness of two by construction overlapping surfaces.

    Provably false; gravity appears to have existed in its current form ever since a few moments after the BB. If you mean gravity today doesn't affect things in the past: that's true, but you shouldn't formulate it as such.

    (Why the plural: universes?)

    How could the influence be felt, if there's not corresponding force?

    Also, how is this a prediction? It certainly doesn't follow from your model.

    Please explain what you mean by "unrushing future" and "gravity of the universe's mass".

    That is only true if one uses the most vague definitions of the words involved.

    That is clearly false. In a universe with no gravity, time still ticks.
     
  19. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,381
    I was referring to the possibility in the modeled membrane, that radiation with a constant "c" would have enough time to complete more than one great circle route in the earlier, smaller membrane phase, before entering our sensors now.

    Time in the model is pictured as a non-directional all pervasive fundamental condition. with no limits. For an entity, moving through that dimension, there is the perception of the ahead, in front of the point of the arrow of time and the behind, the past time. Conceivably, a new entity could appear in a point of time through which a previous structure has moved, and that is vacant again. unique in the sphere model, easier in the writ4you's type bell shown in post#3
     
  20. NotEinstein Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,533
    So it's a "flight around the universe".

    In that case, the answer to your original question is: not in our universe, because it's too flat for that to be possible.

    False. Time in your model is the radius of the membrane. Unless (which was my point) you are now introducing a second time dimension.

    So you are introducing time-travel (= changing the past).

    I invite you to draw the situation of what you are suggesting into that picture. You'll find that it's impossible to time-travel.
     
  21. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,381
    NE, sorry I am too old to draw a diagram and put it up with a click of the mouse. Time, in the model of an expanding membrane universe is not the radii of the sphere. The infinite time I tried to define is not a infinite bunch of arrow radii. The measurable distance in time travel since the big bang of any given point in the membrane is the duration,.
    Once the membrane has moved through time, there is no structure, memory left in the cave enclosed by the sphere. all the information left of the past is residing in the membrane in the form of radiation, existing durable structures.
    If however, the temporary presence of energy, matter could be shown to permanently shape the nothing sic and the time, like in wrinkles in time , then we would have records of us outside the universe.
    the universe, you and I have only a temporary presence in time,( the now), as we are hurried along.

    No, I am not, I did not suggest that anything or anyone was transported into the radial space that has been vacated by the moving membrane. Any supposed new entity there would not be part of our normal universe, which is exclusively defined to the membrane.
     
  22. NotEinstein Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,533
    You are now contradicting yourself. See post #108 (and many, many posts following that).

    Right, which is why I asked you why you were introducing a second time dimension.

    Now you say it's impossible for changes in the past to have any effect on the present; you are excluding time-travel, contradicting your post #196.

    I don't disagree, but since there's no (known) way to go outside of our universe, and it's not even clear that's possible, that's just pure speculation.

    Post #196: "through which a previous structure has moved, and that is vacant again."

    Please explain to me what you meant by that then.

    So those new entities can simply be thrown out based on Occam's Razor, because they literally cannot have any effect on our universe. You literally cannot prove their existence. Then why postulate them? They are wholly unnecessary, pure speculation, and unscientific.
     
  23. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,381
    What I am supposing is, that the bell shaped universe of write4you is moving through time to the right in the coordinate system. If time would be all pervasive and infinite in that model too, it would be easier to conceive of a new structure appearing anywhere, because the bell is is open ended, whereas the membrane is closed.
    The bell is pictured full of stuff, memories perhaps? the interior of the membrane by contrast is full of nothing sic , and used time.
    It would be a unique situation though, a structure appearing in time confined by our universe, but not in our shared space, the moving membrane.
     

Share This Page