- Thank you received: 0
Tired-light and slowed-light
19 years 11 months ago #12129
by Messiah
Replied by Messiah on topic Reply from Jack McNally
If there is a minute property of mass in space - undetectable by our technology - and the density of space over light years of distance varies (say it DOUBLES) from place to place, what effect would that have on the nature of light over vast distences.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- tvanflandern
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
19 years 11 months ago #11802
by tvanflandern
Replied by tvanflandern on topic Reply from Tom Van Flandern
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Messiah</i>
<br />If there is a minute property of mass in space - undetectable by our technology - and the density of space over light years of distance varies (say it DOUBLES) from place to place, what effect would that have on the nature of light over vast distences.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">For starters, it helps to use consistent definitions of terms. Although these "mixed" definitions are used even today by professional physicists, we at Meta Research feel strongly that one must adhere to physical definitions rather than mathematical ones if we are to make progress in understanding physics.
As this applies here, "space", "time". and "scale" are dimensions, which are concepts, not physical entities. The simplest concept for space is Euclidean space, so we always prefer that unless we have some reason to deviate from it. In cosmology, there is normally no good reason to choose any concept of space other than the Euclidean one.
With this meaning. space has no such property as "density". However, space can be filled with a tangible, material, light-carrying medium, for which the term "elysium" is now used. And elysium can easily double its density, allowing us to give a sensible, non-speculative answer to your question. If the density of elysium doubles, the speed of light through that elysium would be reduced by 30%. (It's not 50% because wave speeds vary inversely with the square root of medium density.)
When the light leaves the denser elysium, its speed changes again to accord with whatever the density is at that place. So the time it takes light to traverse space depends on the density of elysium everywhere along its path. -|Tom|-
<br />If there is a minute property of mass in space - undetectable by our technology - and the density of space over light years of distance varies (say it DOUBLES) from place to place, what effect would that have on the nature of light over vast distences.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">For starters, it helps to use consistent definitions of terms. Although these "mixed" definitions are used even today by professional physicists, we at Meta Research feel strongly that one must adhere to physical definitions rather than mathematical ones if we are to make progress in understanding physics.
As this applies here, "space", "time". and "scale" are dimensions, which are concepts, not physical entities. The simplest concept for space is Euclidean space, so we always prefer that unless we have some reason to deviate from it. In cosmology, there is normally no good reason to choose any concept of space other than the Euclidean one.
With this meaning. space has no such property as "density". However, space can be filled with a tangible, material, light-carrying medium, for which the term "elysium" is now used. And elysium can easily double its density, allowing us to give a sensible, non-speculative answer to your question. If the density of elysium doubles, the speed of light through that elysium would be reduced by 30%. (It's not 50% because wave speeds vary inversely with the square root of medium density.)
When the light leaves the denser elysium, its speed changes again to accord with whatever the density is at that place. So the time it takes light to traverse space depends on the density of elysium everywhere along its path. -|Tom|-
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
19 years 11 months ago #12069
by north
may i also suggest that if you go to theuniverse.ws that there other thoughts of the tired light puzzle.(although not much different from what Tom suggests)
then go to published papers and then to Energy Density and Temperature of Universe.
just another look at the problem.
Replied by north on topic Reply from
may i also suggest that if you go to theuniverse.ws that there other thoughts of the tired light puzzle.(although not much different from what Tom suggests)
then go to published papers and then to Energy Density and Temperature of Universe.
just another look at the problem.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
19 years 11 months ago #11810
by Messiah
Replied by Messiah on topic Reply from Jack McNally
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by tvanflandern</i>
<br />For starters, it helps to use consistent definitions of terms. Although these "mixed" definitions are used even today by professional physicists, we at Meta Research feel strongly that one must adhere to physical definitions rather than mathematical ones if we are to make progress in understanding physics.
As this applies here, "space", "time". and "scale" are dimensions, which are concepts, not physical entities. The simplest concept for space is Euclidean space, so we always prefer that unless we have some reason to deviate from it. In cosmology, there is normally no good reason to choose any concept of space other than the Euclidean one.
With this meaning. space has no such property as "density". <br />
---snip---
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Anything which has physical presence within the universe <u>exists </u>. Space has physical presence. Other than the property of volume, it seems to have no discernable attributes; however, discernable is the operative modifier here. Early man perceived air in much the same way <i>'modern'</i> science currently perceives space. Just because our instruments are not sufficient to detect them does not mean space has no other attributes but volume.
<br />For starters, it helps to use consistent definitions of terms. Although these "mixed" definitions are used even today by professional physicists, we at Meta Research feel strongly that one must adhere to physical definitions rather than mathematical ones if we are to make progress in understanding physics.
As this applies here, "space", "time". and "scale" are dimensions, which are concepts, not physical entities. The simplest concept for space is Euclidean space, so we always prefer that unless we have some reason to deviate from it. In cosmology, there is normally no good reason to choose any concept of space other than the Euclidean one.
With this meaning. space has no such property as "density". <br />
---snip---
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Anything which has physical presence within the universe <u>exists </u>. Space has physical presence. Other than the property of volume, it seems to have no discernable attributes; however, discernable is the operative modifier here. Early man perceived air in much the same way <i>'modern'</i> science currently perceives space. Just because our instruments are not sufficient to detect them does not mean space has no other attributes but volume.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- tvanflandern
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
19 years 11 months ago #12071
by tvanflandern
Replied by tvanflandern on topic Reply from Tom Van Flandern
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Messiah</i>
<br />Anything which has physical presence within the universe <u>exists</u>. Space has physical presence.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">My point completely eluded you. I agree that whatever fills space has physical presence, volume, and other properties. I argued for reserving the term "space" for the dimension (concept), rather than for the material, tangible medium(s) that allow us to detect it. -|Tom|-
<br />Anything which has physical presence within the universe <u>exists</u>. Space has physical presence.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">My point completely eluded you. I agree that whatever fills space has physical presence, volume, and other properties. I argued for reserving the term "space" for the dimension (concept), rather than for the material, tangible medium(s) that allow us to detect it. -|Tom|-
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
19 years 11 months ago #11849
by Messiah
Replied by Messiah on topic Reply from Jack McNally
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by tvanflandern</i>
<br />My point completely eluded you. I agree that whatever fills space has physical presence, volume, and other properties. I argued for reserving the term "space" for the dimension (concept), rather than for the material, tangible medium(s) that allow us to detect it. -|Tom|-
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Yes, I can get lost in a walk-in closet.
OK - given the REALITY of space, my question stands.
Not to stray from the subject (yeah, right), what would be the effect - as it pertains to the "cosmological constant" and the expansion of our local 'big bang' - of an infinite amount of mass at distances ranging from the limit of our threshhold of detection to the depths of infinity?
How do you work with infinity as a variable?
<br />My point completely eluded you. I agree that whatever fills space has physical presence, volume, and other properties. I argued for reserving the term "space" for the dimension (concept), rather than for the material, tangible medium(s) that allow us to detect it. -|Tom|-
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Yes, I can get lost in a walk-in closet.
OK - given the REALITY of space, my question stands.
Not to stray from the subject (yeah, right), what would be the effect - as it pertains to the "cosmological constant" and the expansion of our local 'big bang' - of an infinite amount of mass at distances ranging from the limit of our threshhold of detection to the depths of infinity?
How do you work with infinity as a variable?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.265 seconds