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. river

    Messages:
    11,752
    BB , suggests the space , time and speed are fundamental to this Universe .
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. nebel

    Messages:
    1,730
    Yes, without them the universe as we know it would not exist, and without time being fundamental and the 1st dimension, there would be no space, no speed. Without speed, velocity, there would be no energy to counteract gravity. but
    serious thinkers also propose that time and energy are infinite, fundamental. period.
    infinitely older than the BB.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. river

    Messages:
    11,752
    Time is fundamental ?

    How ?

    The only reason you suggest time is fundamental is because you read it somewhere that it is .
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. nebel

    Messages:
    1,730
    I do not remember that, but of all the reading I do, like "from eternity to here", yes, that idea could have crept in. However I am capable of seminal thoughts, and prove it.
    That time is fundamental (for want of a better word) is the conclusion drawn from the fact that energy can not be destroyed or created, so must be fundamental, infinite, beyond our concept of cause and effect. Since energy has to have time to exist in, even a kind of "energy only space" and energytime (area#1) is within the range of possibilities. . so: here are the terms I did not read before they appeared on this thread:
    timespace, energytime, mattertime .
    even the spellchecker did not read them before, should have trademarked them.
     
  8. nebel

    Messages:
    1,730
    Yes, that can be said with certainty. In the works of Dirac, Penrose, others, time is seen to pre-date the BB, as in the field #1. Spacetime by contrast, having it's start in the BB #4, is confined to the expanding membrane universe #3 and #8. so,
    In the proposed model showing the primacy of time, The past, #2 interior, does not only contain no matter, it also does not comprise the 3 D space peculiar to this universe. Spacetime and it's matter, being shaped as a sphere, is prominent, extends through time #1 by its curvature, while, because of it's movement through time, it is truly temporary. The "now" applies to all the universe, and it is truly short.
    Hence the fundamental importance of the infinite timespace, energytime #1 we are moving into.
    All links go toward the constantly approaching the future, none exist - in, or to - the past.
     
  9. river

    Messages:
    11,752
    Duration rather than time .

    Why ?

    Because duration is based on the interaction between things .

    Time is nothing more than the measurement of this duration , between things .
     
  10. nebel

    Messages:
    1,730
    true, inside the universe, where we have things, but things are matter made of energy, that must have existed before it became matter in mattertime, starting at the BB, a conversion from energy to matter, partially.
    The primitive sketch of the expanding sphere moving through time model works with c, equating time with the possible space/time expansion at that rate.
    Since pre-BB conditions are the subject of serious science, even if they are not strictly your "things" they still require time and if you absolutely have to, could be defined as intervals between energy events, right?, but then,

    If, as the equations indicate, energy is of infinite age, uncreated, even to measure any fluctuation for example, would, even by your standards, require duration, aka time.
    Time is fundamental, and things just are allowed to move through it for a certain period, length, duration, as the world, the clocks turn. On that ride,
    May you not have to let go for a long time. I wish you a long rivertime.
     
  11. nebel

    Messages:
    1,730
    NEW SCIENTIST article "---- Universe before us." 15 August 2018
    “What we claim we’re seeing is the final remnant after a black hole has evaporated away in the previous aeon,” says Roger Penrose, a mathematical physicist at the University of Oxford.
    He is co-creator of a theory called conformal cyclic cosmology (CCC). It states that, rather than having started in the big bang, the universe infinitely cycles through periods of ballooning up and …

    Just as the sphere expanding through time model suggests, There was Time #1 before this universe. "previous aeons", energytime in timespace.
     
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2018
  12. nebel

    Messages:
    1,730
    https://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=28195
    Dec 2, 2014 - General Relativity says that any form of energy is a source of gravity.

    so, assuming that energytime predated our masstime, and we are moving into the future, that still is the same infinite energytime, and gravity is a mutual attractive force (you are pulling the Earth up to you), then we can conclude that the universe
    in the membrane #8 and #3 is in part pulled into the future, besides being pushed by the energy from the initial acceleration.
     
  13. nebel

    Messages:
    1,730
    FEATURE 19 September 2018
    “Evidence is building up to support the idea that the big bang might not have been the beginning” New Scientist magazine.

    If correct, Whatever preceded our universe's beginning most certainly needed time to exist, to happen in. The #1 energytime?
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2018
  14. nebel

    Messages:
    1,730
    About the universe.
    W4Y, let us examine the concept of your "time created through motion" vs "expanding through fundamental, "stationary", infinite time, of this thread.
    using a local phenomenon, the tides or "haut mare'e"*.
    Do tides create [their]time?

    Imagine a non - rotating planet, like the Moon, who is in a tidal lock. That planet would have 2 permanent, difficult to see, "haut mare'e" " Gezeiten" tidal bulges.
    Now start rotating that planet. (Joshua did it). Now suddenly you have tides that "arrive" in ~12 hour intervals. but these tides "haut mare'e*" high seas , the bulges, existed in time before.
    By rotation, you have created perceptible tides (the sea level was steady before) but: have you created Time?
    Tides exist as action of gravity on mass at different distances.
    Mass, with its gravity, is a form of energy. Energy is uncreated.
    Energy needs time to exist in; therefore, Time has to be uncreated, fundamental, infinitely old too. The tides d0 not create time. It is high time to get over the notion that they do. so,
    Before, and still outside the universe, we have energytime, in timespace, now we have mattertime in spacetime; soon it will be Holliday time, yuletide or whatever worthy religious preference you have coming up; so: Not all tides are high; but all are moving through time with our universe, expanding together like a sphere into time.
    the No. # 1 in the model sketch on page #38 , post #748.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2018
  15. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,838
    My perspective is very simple. Time does not exist until necessary for duration of an event, at which time it becomes evidenced by duration of the event. There is no time for something that does not exist.
    A muon has a timeline of a few planck scale moments before it decays and its timeline stops.
    http://www.physics.smu.edu/cooley/phy3305/lectures/muon_slides.pdf

    I view time as emerging simultaneous to "duration" of existence or work, including motion. All things have their own timeline in addition to the grand chronological "SpaceTime"

    Every event starts at t=0 at its own timeline and chronologically counts duration of the event, which can be in measured in increments of planck time to spacetime.

    There is a universal space timeline which started at the BB, i.e. (st = 0---> uncertain future)

    But there was no time before the BB, there was no measurable change. BB = st 0-------> end of spacetime, when there will be no longer any measurable change (infinite stasis) of all things in the universe and time ceases to exist. No change.

    IMO, time is a recording of duration of all things individually, bundled or combined as;
    world-line (particle), world-sheet (string), world-volume (brane).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_line

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Nov 3, 2018
  16. nebel

    Messages:
    1,730
    The expanding through time model agrees with all that. Minkowski himself, with his world line too, was confined there. so: expanding from that agreeable base:
    Energy is un-created, describes world lines only since some of it turned into matter in/at the BB. All matter world lines are in the expanding sphere.
    Some Energy turned into "things" at the BB, but time preceded that, because energy, being infinitely old, un-created, exists in a pre -BB "world block" or energytime contained in timespace.
    the No. # 1 in the model sketch on page #38 , post #748.
    added thought: only the universe in the expanding sphere is real, There are no actual concrete series of lines stretching back in a spiral to the BB. The past #2 is empty,
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2018
  17. nebel

    Messages:
    1,730

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    The star, named 2MASS J18082002–5104378 B, is part of a two-star system orbiting around a common point.
    Credit: ESO/Beletsky/DSS1 + DSS2 + 2MASS
    from science daily.

    Looking at the above Situation in view of present the model of an Universe expanding through time,
    here we have near us in our galaxy, disk or halo, a star 13.5 billion years old. Size matters, and as a star, being small, makes you live longer. Being small means it must be near us, not the other side of the Milky Way, This one came through time a long way, it is not there any more in the past #2, but old light from its first ignition must still travel through the expanding universe spherical membrane #3. The light we see now from it, can be how old ? 10 000 years? so it came from a point in time 1 / 135 000 from the Big Bang.
    simplistic? but that what it would look like, if time is modelled as a dimension, #1. Nothing exists without having the time to exist in, and we are always moving through it, -- 2MASS J18082002–5104378 B, moving for a longer stretch of time.
     
  18. nebel

    Messages:
    1,730
    So, with the universe moving through time never stopping in the zero length "present, now", how do we experience our permanence? here are relevant research results:
    ScienceDaily, 20 November 2018. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/11/181120151851.htm>
    "One type of anticipatory timing relies on memories from past experiences. The other on rhythm. Both are critical to our ability to navigate and enjoy the world, and scientists have found they are handled in two different parts of the brain."
    Time concept (stock illustration).
    Credit: © spaxiax / Fotolia

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2018
  19. nebel

    Messages:
    1,730
    Clemson University. "All of the starlight ever produced by the observable universe measured: The team's measurement, collected from Fermi data, has never been done before." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 29 November 2018.<www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/11/181129142414.htm>.
    That is great science. Now, that is all photons produced by all stars in the observable universe since the beginning, If matter moved out of a single BB area in all directions, to form the modelled expanding sphere, then the total universe would have 4 times that amount of light cruising around in it, but inaccessible. over the time horizon for us, see page #34, 35http://www.sciforums.com/attachments/4-sphere-31-jpg.1873/
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2018
  20. nebel

    Messages:
    1,730
    Uppsala University. "Our universe: An expanding bubble in an extra dimension." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 28 December 2018. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/12/181228164824.htm>. so:


    yes, , as seen here first, developed and battered about for more than a year, confirmed now ! From the university of Upsala, Our universe could be seen as a riding an expanding bubble, getting energy from the expansion, from another dimension, timespace or energytime, feeds the accelerating or sustained expansion.
    Nice to be seen in sae territory, alternate theories.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Perhaps it should not be light, photons projecting laser-like into the future, (the new dimension) but gravity.
    Light, carrying the messages from the past, travels inside the bubble. as seen by Hubble.

    PS: The article describes many details of these capable scientist's work, but
    What we have discussed here outlines the rough framework where all this integrate stuff happens:
    Because all has to have time to happen in, so that extra. outside dimension must include time, or be timespace, and energy being uncreated must be fundamental it all happening in energytime.
    An expanding sphere model, projecting influence into the future., and absorbing energy in the process.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2018
  21. nebel

    Messages:
    1,730
    Credit: Copyright University of Warwick/Mark Garlick

    looking at those stars, the ring, orbiting around the central void, gives an idea how matter would move in the expanding sphere #3 of the model moving through time#1 into the future. This here, I assume is a stable system seen by ALMA. In the model proposed, as seen in post # 800, last page, the matter in sphere #3 is expanding out, where energy is in infinity timespace , and of course gravity would pull in double action , just as here, in this photo, gravity is mostly the outside. just as part of the expanding sphere model :
    the universe might be pulled by gravity into the future.
    if time and energy are fundamental, and gravity is a feature of the energy/mass duo.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2019
  22. nebel

    Messages:
    1,730
    New scientist article: : " What is inside nothingness--?" excerpt: "reveal the truth about empty space, but also teach us about another big mystery: dark energy, the unknown entity accelerating the expansion of the cosmos. It is time to rip nothingness apart and see what is inside."
    While this article is about emptiness, nothingness inside the universe, it indirectly touches on the Nothingness that preceded the Big Bang, that has been labeled in this thread as energytime, timespace. a nothingness that is infinite, infinitely old, and young, and not empty, is fundamental. through which we are moving.
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2019
  23. nebel

    Messages:
    1,730
    Fron New Scientist article by Leah Crane " The emptiness of space has structure---+

    "The vacuum isn’t empty. Even where there is no matter and no radiation, there is structure – and we may be able to use the structure of the vacuum itself to send and receive messages.

    "--No matter how empty space gets, the fundamental laws of physics dictate that it is always teeming with energy from the quantum fluctuations of various fields, like the electric and magnetic fields. “Empty space is something dynamical,” says Achim Kempf at the Perimeter Institute in Canada. “It’s not really empty. --"

    Now, this does not talk about the condition prior to be Big Beginning, but having no matter, no radiation would fill the bill.
    In this thread, the pre BB condition is described as timespace, without structure, energytime without matter. just saying.
    Who is to say that empty space is not still the same as it was before the Big Bang? even as the future#1 we moving into?
    What if the expanding sphere #3 and older #8 of post #800, previous page, contain only the matter, but not local spacetime exclusively ?
    Picture the widely dispersed matter of the universe still moving through the same conditions too, that existed prior to the Big Bang, and exist out into the future? but having additionally the "structure" spoken about because being held in curved spacetime?
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2019

Share This Page