michel123456

If they are gravitationaly bounded, doesn't that mean that they would orbit each other instead of colliding?

Oh. I thought mathematics could explain everything (sarcasm).

No it is not proportional. Here below the diagram of post #72 You are right, velocity is not proportional to distance in this diagram. A diagram where velocity is proportional to distance is (i hope being correct this time) the one from post#74 see below Which I don't fully understand, I have to admit. It looks like a locked situation. G1 cannot go to G2 unless at infinite speed. I don't know what this time 0,01389s represents. It is impossible to move G1 at another location at another time. I must be wrong somewhere.

Fascinating. In the article, scroll down to the end to see 3 reconstructions of homo neanderthalensis. look here for the Daily Mail article

That's amusing. Mathematics should be used to answer this question instead of words.

broken links

I have seen over the Net some example of robot-fish that seem quite easy to work out. Ill try to find it back.

oh. You are doing all this by your own? You could create an institution with your work!

No. Or i don't get what you mean, or you don't get what I mean. You cannot simply replace Time by Speed. It is a Distance/Time diagram You cannot mix the one with the other. Your last post is very confusing. This diagram is a Distance/Velocity diagram (redshift=velocity as supposed). I understand that. I want to translate this into a Distance/Time diagram. Since Velocity is distance/time there must be no problem to do that. In a distance/time diagram, velocity is the tangent of the angle.

Shouldn't we feel some centrifugal force coming from all those orbits? for example caused by orbiting the Sun, and caused by the rotation of the solar system around the galaxy?

good question. Let's check out with Hubble's law. V=HoD where Ho is Hubble's constant with Ho=72 and units of distances as unity Vo=0 V1=72 V2=72.2= 144 V3=72.3= 216 V4=72.4= 288 Correct so far? ------------------ Damn. Got it. ------------------- Actually I got nothing. Can you put that into a graph? Here what I get Note: time=1/72=0.0138888 approx

So you accept finally that there is a rate of change of velocity. You are right Here you are Is it a straight line, or a curve?

fascinating! Concerning elevating machines (cranes) maybe you could insert the various techniques used to grap the objects. i found this site about ancient technology that shows most of it. Go to The elevating mechanisms of the ancient Greeks / Methods of stone suspension. --------------------------- Also IMHO you shouldn't give so much hope about perpetual motion mechanisms. -------------------

YES. VELOCITY is proportional= the rate of change of VELOCITY increases along a straight line = for the same time DISTANCE increases following a curve. Velocity increase: At T0, D0, V0 T1, D1, V1 T2, D2, V2 T3, D3, V3 If V3>V2>V1 this is accelerated motion: there exist a rate of change of VELOCITY Wiki Here below a Distance/Time diagram representing increasing velocity. After 1 sec, object G has a velocity of 1m/s (displacement 1m on the horizontal, 1 sec on the vertical) After 2 sec, G has velocity 2m/s (displacement 2m on the horizontal, 1 sec on the vertical) After 3 sec, G has velocity 3m/s (displacement 3m on the horizontal, 1 sec on the vertical) Hubble's law states that VELOCITY increases with distance. Not that velocity remains the same.

green dots represent position. Not relative velocity to the observer. Increasing velocity with distance gives a diagram similar to an accelerating body: a curve.

Yes and no. Detection is one thing. Communication is different. We can detect dinosaurs, we cannot communicate with dinosaurs. ------------------ edit And I think "detectable" can be understood as "a mean of communication that we could detect like scripture or radio frequency", not necessarily inside our range.

you are sticking to SOL. This diagram is about observed velocity. Maybe you should do it for yourself. on a simple diagram Distance/Time like this one You have to plot 4 moving objects, G1, G2, G3, G4. the placement upon the diagram indicates velocity: meters/sec. _You know from Hubble's law that velocity of G4> vG3 > vG2 > vG1 _You know from Hubble's law that distance of G4 from origin is > G3 > G2 > G1 _You know from Hubble's law that velocity is proportional to distance. _You know that velocity at origin is null.

I don't understand it the same way. that is this civilization that knows about EM radiations or other technology that we know also about. such a civilization 3BLY away is not able to communicate with us. this same civilization 3BLY away released detectable radio signs for a thousand years, so what? it is still not possible to communicate.

The equation misses something important: "the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible" is dependent from the physical capacities to communicate: distance & time. For example, if such a civilization existed 3 billion years ago anywhere in the universe, we cannot communicate. If a civilization will exist here on Earth a million year from now, we cannot communicate. If a civilization happens to exist today 25 billion light years away, we cannot communicate. If you think about it, there may exist-haveexisted-willexist an incommensurable amount of civilizations and still be unable to communicate. -------------------- in order to be able to observe such a civilization (observe, not communicate), it must be in our observational range: that is at such a distance & time where d=ct with c=SOL

I was searching for indications about plants: was vegetation also bigger at these times? I found nothing.

I would have a look at the label on the plastic bag.

Yes, that is correct. But the speed under discussion is not the speed og light, it is the recessing speed. What I do is simply this: G1 at the origin Take a galaxy cluster G2: what's its distance: say 1 Billion LY. what's its recessing speed: say 1 BLY/10 Billion Years or 1/10 (note 1BLY/1BY is SOL) plot G2 on the distance/time diagram. Take G3 distance say 3 billion years. recessing speed: 3 BLY/20 BY or 3/20 > 1/10 plot G3 Take G4 distance say 6 BLY recessing speed: 6 BLY/30 BY or 6/30 > 3/20 > 1/10 plot G4 And so on. You get a curve.

because V is not the speed of light. V is redshift.

Those 2 diagrams represent the same thing: speed is increasing with distance. Left is corresponding to wikipedia redshift diagram. Right is corresponding to diagram of post #36. What is that you don't understand? (or what is wrong?)

The definition from all dictionaries, the law from governments, humans in general consider medicine as a science, except you as it seems. from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/medicine from Collins http://dictionary.reverso.net/english-definition/medicine from wikipedia in French (checking outside the U.S. for another culture) even in Greek http://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%99%CE%B1%CF%84%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%BA%CE%AE in Japanese Nokidin i dono tzapaneze.