Genady

Thank you for the recommendation. I will do this. And then, if I survive, I'll be back

Hint: This problem is about comparing frames of reference.

I understand this. My issue is that our existence seems to me less interesting and intellectually engaging than existence of physical and mathematical entities. This is why I keep going OT here. On this note, I'd rather quit. P.S. My coffee was really good this morning. But I guess I am a couple hours ahead of you anyway.

A better solution is incorporating of the law changes in the law itself. Example could be the "running coupling constants" in QFT.

If they change over time, then there are other laws that govern this change.

Is existence an absolute attribute or it might depend on a frame of reference?

Does it apply to mathematical objects?

But I did write "same" rather than "some", didn't I? Yes. I meet a person. This event affected some events in my life and also some events in that person's life. Later, some of these events in that person's life affected some events in my life. Etc.

Some are not connected; some are causally connected. Same events participate in many sequences.

The nature of our existence is a sequence of events.

To discuss these questions, we need to establish what is meant by 'geometry.'

This is more like it. Acceleration is a separate effect, though. Do you see that this dependence of expansion rate on distance is the same for all galaxies and thus means homogeneity?

No, I do not mean anything like this.

Oh yes, it is compatible! It is "expansion 101." Now, with this comment, you show that you don't know the very basics of the topic you try to argue about. I am happy to explain complications, but basics, you should learn yourself. If you really want to know, that is. Anyway, you made it clear with this last comment, that I have nothing more to do in this conversation. Come back, when you understand that Hubble Law means homogeneity and isotropy. Until then, I am out.

Who are the "we" that you refer to? No, the space does not get bigger. The statement of "making the same space bigger" does not have any meaning. Space does not have "size", to start with. Also, space does not have identity to be "the same" or not. Expansion of the universe makes the distances between neighboring free-falling systems larger. Neighboring in real universe means at the distances of the order of magnitude about 100 Mpc.

Exactly. During the expansion of the universe, no "new space" is added to it. What happens is, the geometry of the space changes.

I'd be glad to try, but I don't know what. Maybe you can clarify your request.

Space is not an entity. There is no "new space" or "old space."

I've received this "riddle" from a friend this morning: Doing my best to translate it to English here, while cutting off irrelevant details. Bob got an electronic clock in shape of an apple. It shows time with a precision of a hundredth of a second. As he was moving down on an escalator, Bob threw the clock up and noticed that at the top of its trajectory the clock showed 11:32:45:81. His teacher Mary was moving up on the escalator at the same time, and she noticed that the clock showed 11:32:45:74 at the top of its trajectory. Find the speed of the escalators, given that they move with the same speed, at the angle of 300 to horizon. Ignore the air friction. Take g = 10 m/s2.

I've already answered such question here: https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/132162-is-the-universe-at-least-136-billion-years-old-is-the-universe-not-expanding-at-all-did-the-universe-begin-its-expansion-when-hubble-measured-its-redshift-for-the-first-time-or-was-light-twice-as-fast-135-billion-years-ago-than-it-is-today/?do=findComment&comment=1246785 Here it is again:

It's the distance that the light covered since it was emitted until it has reached us. The light-travel distance. If the light had an odometer attached, that would be what its odometer shows.

The galaxy is now at about 34 billion light years from us. Its redshift z=11. Thus, when the light was emitted, it was at the distance 34/12=2.8 billion light years away.

It was not in that position 13.5 billion years ago. The surface of last scattering was in that position 13.8 billion years ago. The surface of last scattering has z=1100. The galaxy has z=11.

It is homogenous and isotropic on the scale of >100 Mpc (>300 million light years). And on cosmological distance concepts, esp. the proper distance and the light-travel distance.