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. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,900
    I was referring to my journey not yours.
    Alex
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,336
    Of course, your journey is important, even to us viewers. but,
    to be on topic, lets talk about why this threat is viewed:
    It is pertinent to current findings, which come from the better instruments we have to focus deeply back into time, and what we see, those closely packed, supposedly merging galaxies,-- seem to not be in the picture when we scan the scene in time closer to us. so,
    1) The inner picture: Assuming that all visible matter has moved radially out in all direction from the BB, it would be in a sphere now, that is still on its way, expanding into the future.
    Since focussing in on the longest travelled light we see closely spaced objects, all around us, we can conclude that it came from a past, when the universe was smaller, more closely packed. yes, even the source of the background radiation.
    The model shows though, that 3/4 of the universe must be beyond our horizon now, because we could not see further away than the way we here on Earth came, and others have travelled in the other direction, 3 times farther away. That deals with the OP. question:
    These merging galaxies are probably among the others, that were once close, but are now facing the other way now:

    2)The bigger, outer picture in the model deals with the question of the past time that the universe has travelled through and will in the future, time even before the start, and waiting in the future:
    Energy is uncreated and indestructible. Gravity, a result of energy and its concrete form: matter, reaches into infinity, must require time to exist in , so we comfortably can assume Time and energy to be infinite in nature not only beyond our spatial, but also comprension horizon.
    From the picture of the ESM (hate that term) model we can see then at the BB change in phase from time+energy, the first dimension, to the addition of matter, spreading out in all directions, in the 3 additional Ds, moving through time.
    This energytime is still in existence, was infinite in the past, is infinite into the future, and lucky us, we are moving that way.!
    That is the essence of this thread, it was not planned that way, but that is how seems to be here, to be challenged.[/QUOTE]
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,336
    Trying to somehow make an alternative theory, out of that favoured drink*.
    The above quote shows a way into the future I had not thought of, that even when you have left time #1 for good, and are not even in the the past # 2, -- that is empty and void. ---- Therefore you have not moved on , but the rest of the universe in the membrane#3 has. (diagram page 35)
    Atoms from your last suppers move on, into the future. Even some genes possibly . genius.
    * there must be a more fitting forum for this?
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2018
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,336
    Do we see objects in their past?
    a good subject started by absolute space, 2.23.2016
    according to the sausage model in post # 3, possibly yes. (at least showing them)
    In the mass sphere expanding through time model: no! because
    There are no objects in the past #2 to see.
    You can touch wood now, that existed in Pharaohs' time, but it is not there anymore.
    Someone with a good telescope in a planetary system ~ 300 light years away in membrane #3 might see young trees growing in what are now the California mountains, but those photons coming in are of the past, smaller universe.
    Lucky that tree was kept, and not turned into rail road ties, burned. then it would not even be in our present time.
    Just because we have old artifacts, old photons, does not mean they exist in any shape or form in the past.
    The future, loaded with energy is that we are moving into. Sequoia seeds just sprouting now.
     
  8. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,336
    With no objections, questions, it is hard to pin down what viewers are looking at in 38 pages. here's a resume':
    Th expanding sphere model treats time as prime. from a point in time matter has spread out in equal time in radii in all directions, supposedly forming a spherical membrane, still advancing into the future.
    That point location of the BB is now empty, so is all the past of the inside of that sphere, void of all forces too.
    The energy to start the appearance of Mass must have preceded the beginning, because energy can not be created or destroyed. so:
    There must have been infinitely old energy, requiring infinite time to exist in, a condition that might be called energytime, whereas we live in masstime. We have now both mass and so, since the BB, both energy and mass.
    We need space to have mass hang into so we have the familiar spacetime, but how about energy alone, virtual particles popping in and out of existence, did they need virtual space to happen in? could we call that timespace?
    The infinite time that energy existed in (both are fundamental), energytime?
    The BB clearly would not have exhausted infinite energy, or consumed infinite time, so, both are still our there, stretching to the infinite future.
    The expanding matter confined in that time/radius/sphere, moving through time into the future, is still exposed to the energy that must be present as it was before the BB. so:
    The ESM model has time as prime, an empty past, an energetic start but energizing future, but us being able to see only 1/4 of it.
    time is prime.
    seen in timespace, energytime, masstime, spacetime.
     
  9. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,336
    The model of the universe expanding through time does not allow to receive information from before, older than the BB. Even some messages since the BB have gone the other way, beyond our horizon #9.
    But we can extrapolate form the current, and supposedly universal laws, that energy must be uncreated, existed in infinite energytime. We live now, since the BB, in masstime, confined to 3D space.
    Mass, Concrete Material appeared out of energy in the BB. Is that not what mainstream science and the ESM agree on?
    We do well in working with models that show images reduced by one dimension. Radar images of objects seen from above, direction and distance only; Vertical sections, distance and height only. So:
    The model shows mass in movement through the time dimension only, on Page 35 in section.
    If inflation occurred at post -luminal speeds ,-- fine, it still was moving at the steady pace through time. Geometry shows though that even at a "normal" pace the expansion would have been 10^16 times faster than today.
    So, while we can not look back into past(the only way to look) the point in time ~14 billion years ago, and not into the infinite future time, we can respect that laws applicable here now, were, and should be a feature of time then.
    There is nothing out side the universe. true, in the model, things , matter started with mattertime at the BB, when some of the infinitely old energy converted to material. there is no mass outside the expanding membrane. only mass effects. In timespace #1. The model is not as anti-mainstreams as it seems.
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2018
  10. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,336
    Cross referenced form " Is there more gravity, inside or out?"
    Perhaps we can all agree that there is nothing outside the universe. There was not a thing before the universe either. Energy converted into matter, (things) at the Big Beginning, but
    does that mean the effects of mass, matter can not reach beyond it's location? Do the effects of gravity reach into infinity? even if matter does not?

    PS: "ALMA" is a fitting short name for the thread, although in the OP referring to the most advanced radio telescope, it also means Milk, the very basic food, and this theme is of the very basic nature, for those willing to be simple minded only.
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2018
  11. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,336
    from the pseudo science forum:
    river said:
    time , has never in and of it's self changed any object(s) position in space nor the energy of any object in space .
    We should know this by now .


    Yes, and without time --, energy, space, objects to change would not exist in the first place.
    In the ESM model, energy has to exist prior to any change. Energy is un-created, indestructible, therefore infinite and fundamental.
    Energy can not exist without time to exist in, so time must be infinite, fundamental.
    The model indicates a time with only energy, energytime. If anything happened there, even virtually, potentially, there had to be a "location", timespace. At a point in time ~ 13.8 billion years ago, some energy converted into matter, mass., giving us mattertime, or because matter needed 3 dimensions, spacetime.
    If matter moved through time since the BB, it would now be extended through a 13.8 bly radius, forming a model time sphere; still expanding moving through time, into the future #1

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,336
    Yes, as seen in the sketch above, time #1 has no direction or dimension, although it must extent to infinity in the past and future.
    It can be traversed though, from the future #1 into the past #2, but used time is kind of useless. void of all forces.
    This can not be said of infinite energytime, or timespace, because time must exist to harbour infinite uncreated energy. Time is ready to receive all legitimate comers, any old time, or young time.
     
  13. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,336
    Nothing exists in the past, but in far, and not so far away places are messages now, that are under way, via light or sound that will arrive in our future, but none older than the universe we live in, in mattertime, spacetime.
    Hopefully we will not accelerate to hyperluminally expansion , for it would make us blind to the past messages coming our way.
     
  14. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    Time has no physical properties to receive any thing .

    Time is a concept only .

    Time harbours nothing but infinite imagination . With no possibility of influencing any movements of any physical things .

    Change time in any physics equation and this change will not change the out come of the , the physical things represented in the equation ever .

    The only way to show that the change in time affects the change in any physical thing is through a physical experiment . Not through time theory alone .
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2018
  15. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,336
    The direction of the time axis in the velocity and other graphics is at 90 degrees(radius to tangent) to the physical space, as it is in the Expanding sphere model. Change the values on that axis and see what happens . Take time away, and existence will disappear. nothing exists without having time to exist in. imhop.
     
  16. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    Disagree

    Take time away , does not make the object disappear . You just don't know direction . and that does not change the physical space in which the sphere is expanding into .

    YOU just don't know , direction . But the object doesn't care whether you know or not . The object just expands .
     
  17. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,336
    you are right. The object could not disappear, because had if it not have had time, a priory, to exist in , it would not exist, and not existing, it could not disappear. but to correct what I said:
    Nothing has ever existed that had not have had time to exist in. and If it does not exist in the now*, it does not exist. actually *(move through time )
    thank you for the stimulating comments.
    * only matter that is modeled to exist in the expanding membrane #3 is thought to exist, clearly the past does not.
     
  18. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    Disagree

    Everything before you existed or the concept of time existed , existed .
     
  19. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,336
    I think we are actually agreeing.
    There are things, and energy that things are made of, that existed before us, and for us. But any existence like our's has the prerequisite to have the theatre, aka time available to dwell in. That is why I have tried to specify in this developing thread the existence of
    energytime, timespace, mattertime in addition to spacetime that physicists are working with. now:
    Note, in all these essential combinations, for us to be here, time is the common component. perhaps the first, infinitely old co- component with energy.
    and we are moving through it in the membrane into the future.
     
  20. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    Time only matters when we try to understand the movement and interactions of things . But to the objects themselves , time matters not .

    Objects exist in three dimensional space , not in four dimensions .
     
  21. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,336
    interesting statements. Because I have only little time left, I prioritize it? The Universe would not exist if it were not for the movements and interactions, which express the energy that keeps it from collapsing against gravity. If time is at the basis of all movement, we better pay attention to it. Basic to all movement, because it is through time that everything moves, unless you are light itself.
    Time is not just a tool for understanding, it is fundamental . the EMS model tries to show that.
     
  22. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,336
    time is not just something that developed because we have started to discover it at some point in our journey to our present metal capacities, it was an essential part of nature, the cosmos, functioning as part of the make up, without us.If advanced thinkers can manipulate 10 dimensions, should we not see the way duration, time is apart of our spacetime makeup?
    If you are not in time you are not. Find your place on the crowded compressed membrane in the model, come along it is time to join the ride into the future.
     
  23. nebel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,336
    Moved this over from the " More gravity in or out ? thread.
    "--there is now zero gravitational force at the centre #4, like everywhere in the empty sphere cavity #2. No gravity would be detectable, because the opposing masses' "pulls" cancel? but you will be forever young? because the overlapping g forces and their relativistic effects are there,--- if the sphere is heavy, or small enough, or both? Has this ever been tested or detected in reality?
    Minimum gravity accompanied by max time dilation?---"
    For the purpose of the present model, mass moving through time, that is fine, it allows the photon message moving from #7 to us at #5 to travel without aging. ( no senile photons in or telescopes, even ALMA in Chile)
     

Share This Page