Structure 4 Billion Light Years Across Discovered, Challenges Cosmological Principle

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

well, wormholes theoretically could exist. We don't know that they do; but if they did time would be irrelevant, as the wormhole would only be a way to shortcut through what we consider time. But considering that time doesn't even exist in physical reality, we are only talking about our limited perspective of our events and space.

And since time doesn't really exist how are you wondering what the properties of time are like that area? I'm wondering what matter, other planets, life, has been pulled into this structure. One blackhole will suck up everything within light-years. I'm wondering how it go so large and if a black hole closer to Earth will grow and end our planet.

He's referring to this i believe.

Gravitational time dilation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks kool g trap the gawd for responding to these heathens for me

 

[Ghost Utmost]

I think it's hilarious that we get kinda ticked off if the Universe doesn't fit our eqations. The sheer scale they are describing makes my head swim but I also realize that no one really "knows" what anything is.

They say the galaxies move but not one of them have moved enough to even register since humans have been watching them. According to the math, they SHOULD move and they are assumed to be moving incredibly slowly. Not saying the galaxies are not moving, just that what they are seeing are readings on their equipment and they are theorizing about what the readings mean. In many cases they are spot on, but science still contains some dogmatic ideas that are an article of faith like any religious dogma.

I don't think we were seeing a photo of it. I think they use alot of artists' renditions of these types of astronomical features. The video didn't work for me so iono.

Basically, the Universe is stranger than we could ever imagine. Our "fantasy" stories are just mash ups of stuff we've actually seen: like Pegasus, horse with bird wings. Dude with one eye instead of two, or even three eyes. Snake hair, bull head, three headed lizards, man turns to wolf. Etc. No one really creates anything new and if you could it would prolly not be as interesting as all the real shyt. So yeah, the Universe's ability to strike awe far outpaces our ability to expect it. We'll never know the limits.

Even so, they could somehow be wrong about the size and nature of this cluster. There's no way to actually measure how far away it is or the size, they just have to judge by the brighness of standard candles and shyt like that. Dope stuff, may or may not be exactly what they think it is

 

[Breh Obama]

its the mothership

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

I think it's hilarious that we get kinda ticked off if the Universe doesn't fit our eqations. The sheer scale they are describing makes my head swim but I also realize that no one really "knows" what anything is.

They say the galaxies move but not one of them have moved enough to even register since humans have been watching them. According to the math, they SHOULD move and they are assumed to be moving incredibly slowly. Not saying the galaxies are not moving, just that what they are seeing are readings on their equipment and they are theorizing about what the readings mean. In many cases they are spot on, but science still contains some dogmatic ideas that are an article of faith like any religious dogma.

I don't think we were seeing a photo of it. I think they use alot of artists' renditions of these types of astronomical features. The video didn't work for me so iono.

Basically, the Universe is stranger than we could ever imagine. Our "fantasy" stories are just mash ups of stuff we've actually seen: like Pegasus, horse with bird wings. Dude with one eye instead of two, or even three eyes. Snake hair, bull head, three headed lizards, man turns to wolf. Etc. No one really creates anything new and if you could it would prolly not be as interesting as all the real shyt. So yeah, the Universe's ability to strike awe far outpaces our ability to expect it. We'll never know the limits.

Even so, they could somehow be wrong about the size and nature of this cluster. There's no way to actually measure how far away it is or the size, they just have to judge by the brighness of standard candles and shyt like that. Dope stuff, may or may not be exactly what they think it is

The fact that they use a standard candle doesn't mean they don't know how far away something is or how big it is. These things are all easily measurable. And standard candle is only one method.

Most galaxies are moving further and further away from us, except Andromeda, which is moving towards us and will eventually collide with the milky way. I don't know how you came to the conclusion that galaxies "don't move". They're moving at incredible rates of speed. All of which are MEASURABLE. No faith required dude. I don't know where you got your info from but you're wrong.

 

[Ghost Utmost]

The fact that they use a standard candle doesn't mean they don't know how far away something is or how big it is. These things are all easily measurable. And standard candle is only one method.

Most galaxies are moving further and further away from us, except Andromeda, which is moving towards us and will eventually collide with the milky way. I don't know how you came to the conclusion that galaxies "don't move". They're moving at incredible rates of speed. All of which are MEASURABLE. No faith required dude. I don't know where you got your info from but you're wrong.

How do we even know time flows at the same speed everywhere in the cosmos? One basic assumption about properties of the Universe can skew all the interpretations you base on your basic assumption. I'm too lazy to look up the latest developments in astrophysics right now, but I will brush up on it. See if I'm convinced. But..

The standard candle is assumed to be the exact same size and type of object everywhere in the known universe... I can see where that would make it nice and easy, but to me it's a pretty big assumption. The galaxies giving off red shifted light is not PROOF of anything except red shifted light. They have deduced that this means the galaxies are moving, but that's different than seeing them move with the naked eye. Could they not be mistaken about what the red shifted light means? If you say "absolutely not" then you may be supporting dogmatic science.

 

[Mowgli]

But friend humble doesn't get you grants. Implying something 'may' be groundbreaking leads to more funding to see if it's groundbreaking. If it wasn't for this train of thought we wouldn't even be able to talk through these computers, which were created from unhumble scientists who wondered why quantum particles acted so funny.

So yes friend I will continue be silly

You arent a scientist.

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

How do we even know time flows at the same speed everywhere in the cosmos? One basic assumption about properties of the Universe can skew all the interpretations you base on your basic assumption. I'm too lazy to look up the latest developments in astrophysics right now, but I will brush up on it. See if I'm convinced. But..

The standard candle is assumed to be the exact same size and type of object everywhere in the known universe... I can see where that would make it nice and easy, but to me it's a pretty big assumption. The galaxies giving off red shifted light is not PROOF of anything except red shifted light. They have deduced that this means the galaxies are moving, but that's different than seeing them move with the naked eye. Could they not be mistaken about what the red shifted light means? If you say "absolutely not" then you may be supporting dogmatic science.

The Hubble Law: Measurements of Velocities and Distances

breh please read this shyt, all of this is hard science. there is no debate. you're implying the doppler effect is in fact opposite

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

Other points in space HAVE to be accelerating away just based on the expansion of the universe

 

[Ghost Utmost]

I've watched all the Discovery Channel shows and read a handful of books about Quantum Physics so I am familiar with how the ideas work.

I'll just leave this last thing here:

They say that light is subject to the doppler effect. They also say that light speed is constant. These two ideas are incompatible. Dopplrr effect works with sound becuase the speed of the waves change and you hear that as different pitch. Supposedly ligt moves at the same speed no matter how fast the source is moving. *drops mic*

 

[Hawaiian Punch]

You arent a scientist.

Not that anyone here would believe me but I am unfortunately

 

[BlvdBrawler]

That's exactly what they say. No scientist makes a claim of absolute truth.

That's what religion is here for.

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

I've watched all the Discovery Channel shows and read a handful of books about Quantum Physics so I am familiar with how the ideas work.

I'll just leave this last thing here:

They say that light is subject to the doppler effect. They also say that light speed is constant. These two ideas are incompatible. Dopplrr effect works with sound becuase the speed of the waves change and you hear that as different pitch. Supposedly ligt moves at the same speed no matter how fast the source is moving. *drops mic*

Reading doesn't = Comprehension. Clearly you're retarded.

"When the source of the waves is moving toward the observer, each successive wave crest is emitted from a position closer to the observer than the previous wave. Therefore each wave takes slightly less time to reach the observer than the previous wave. Therefore the time between the arrival of successive wave crests at the observer is reduced, causing an increase in the frequency. While they are travelling, the distance between successive wave fronts is reduced; so the waves "bunch together". Conversely, if the source of waves is moving away from the observer, each wave is emitted from a position farther from the observer than the previous wave, so the arrival time between successive waves is increased, reducing the frequency. The distance between successive wave fronts is increased, so the waves "spread out"."

If you wanna get on after me
Think about it, wait, erase your rhyme
Forget it and don't waste your time
'Cause I'll be in the crowd if you ain't controlling it
Drop the mic, you shouldn't be holding it

These are facts.

 

[My neck and my back]

It's actually physically impossible for a human being to fathom anything that masssive in our mind

that's what she said

 

[Ghost Utmost]

Reading doesn't = Comprehension. Clearly you're retarded.

"When the source of the waves is moving toward the observer, each successive wave crest is emitted from a position closer to the observer than the previous wave. Therefore each wave takes slightly less time to reach the observer than the previous wave. Therefore the time between the arrival of successive wave crests at the observer is reduced, causing an increase in the frequency. While they are travelling, the distance between successive wave fronts is reduced; so the waves "bunch together". Conversely, if the source of waves is moving away from the observer, each wave is emitted from a position farther from the observer than the previous wave, so the arrival time between successive waves is increased, reducing the frequency. The distance between successive wave fronts is increased, so the waves "spread out"."

If you wanna get on after me
Think about it, wait, erase your rhyme
Forget it and don't waste your time
'Cause I'll be in the crowd if you ain't controlling it
Drop the mic, you shouldn't be holding it

These are facts.

And how is what ws written above differ from the light moving at different speeds depending on the object's motion? (it does not)

Isn't the speed of light supposed to be constant? (yes)

I am not saying both ideas are not true. I am saying they can't BOTH be true. None of these details are the point I am making. Again, Svience contsins dogma and true believers fight tooth and nail to debunk alternative ideas, just like with religion. Basically a critque of them hqving calculated some size that was supposed to be the maximum size of an object. No laws have been defied. The size of your imagination has been defied. You didn't think it could be but it is. Anyways, looking at these "facts" from uncanny angles is the very spirit of science, not the wikipedia entry. They re-write the "laws" all the time.

 

[Mowgli]

I've watched all the Discovery Channel shows and read a handful of books about Quantum Physics so I am familiar with how the ideas work.

I'll just leave this last thing here:

They say that light is subject to the doppler effect. They also say that light speed is constant. These two ideas are incompatible. Dopplrr effect works with sound becuase the speed of the waves change and you hear that as different pitch. Supposedly ligt moves at the same speed no matter how fast the source is moving. *drops mic*

What does that mean?