spooky3 Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 Has anybody sighted a decent pub and chippy out there yet? I think Weazel2006 has found a whole distillery... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 Just one question. In the video it says some of the galaxies are rushing away from us faster than the speed of light. I thought Einstein said nothing could travel faster than the speed of light. It is to do with the "hubble sphere" and spmething to do with the nature of space the further away stuff is.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_sphere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 An example... If they go in that direction at say the speed of light, and we go in the opposite direction also at the speed of light, then relative to us, they are travelling away from us at twice the speed of light... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormy Posted October 24, 2010 Author Share Posted October 24, 2010 At the time religions were formed, nobody knew that there was anything in the Universe outside of this planet and a few completely irrelevant dots of light. There are two possible reasons why the Holy Works don't address anything outside of the earth; one is that, being written by men and not God, their authors didn't know such things existed. The other is that, written by God, they left out the other stuff because the people to whom they were addressed wouldn't have understood it anyway. The two possibilities are not, necessarily, equally likely. Thats what my point was in essence: That religion cannot or will not evolve to provide answers to new questions which we have as a result of our advancement as a species Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagel Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 It is to do with the "hubble sphere" and something to do with the nature of space the further away stuff is.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_sphere I read that and it kind of makes sense, although the concept of some light photons overtaking others does my head in. I was always taught that the speed of light is a constant, regardless of the velocity of the object emitting it. I thought that the only effect of velocity was a change in wavelength, the well known red shift: "The boundary of the Hubble volume is known as the "Hubble limit". Per Hubble's law, objects at the Hubble limit have an average comoving speed of c relative to an observer on the Earth. This is significant, because, in a universe in which the Hubble parameter was constant, light emitted at the present time by objects outside the Hubble limit could never be seen by an observer on the Earth. However, the Hubble "constant" is not constant. In a decelerating Friedmann universe, the Hubble sphere expands faster than the Universe and its boundary overtakes light emitted by receding galaxies. In an accelerating universe, the Hubble sphere expands more slowly than the Universe, and bodies move out of the Hubble sphere. So the Hubble limit need not define the cosmological event horizon (that is, the boundary separating events visible at some time or other and those that are never visible), because (depending upon the cosmological model) light emitted at earlier times by objects outside the Hubble sphere still may eventually arrive inside the sphere and be seen by us. If, as is inferred from current observations, the expansion of the universe is in fact accelerating, then at a later time, some objects within the Hubble limit no longer will be observed (by us) as they are today." :shocked: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncocker Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 I wonder if they're any trolls out there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncocker Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 the only true wisdom is that we in fact,know nothing socrates:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 I wonder if they're any trolls out there? Looking at the original meaning, more than probably... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 the only true wisdom is that we in fact,know nothing socrates:D I know I disagree, therefore, surely defeating the statement instantly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncocker Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 The fact that something exists is proof that your conclusion is false. There are only three possibilities: 1> Nothing exists. 2> Something exists, which came into existence from nothing. 3> Something exists which has always existed for inifinite time - in which case, nothing caused it, so it effectively came into existence from nothing.Nobody's ever thought of a fourth. Various religious types have crowbarred a god into option (3), by saying "something exists, therefore it must have been created; the creator has existed for infinite time" ... but that's not improving on the original statement, but just making it more complicated than it needs to be. If its infinite its always been there no begining and no end .its infinity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.