michel123456

Could you say that we call "light" what is travelling at C?

It also means that Space and Time are linked by a kind of conservation law. If the metric of space changes, the metric of time must change reversely.

Let be frank, I still don't accept that. What i accept is that an observer at rest observing a fast moving object will observe the object getting more massive and shorter.

That looks like circular thinking to me. In mathematics, a square root has 2 values, positive and negative. Quoted from Wiki:

Books may disappear but paper will survive. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIeZg0-Tc9M ------------------------------------ Of course nothing replaces an Ipad http://www.snotr.com/video/8965/

It is not Bubble Cosmology, it is Champagne Cosmology. Otherwise one could ask: Is Hubble bubble?

Welcome to the club. The "having lived long enough" is worrying. My father-in-law passed away at the age of 92 and he never had this feeling, even in his last moments. He wanted to travel, as he has done at the age of 82 to see the Great Wall of China, after being operated. ---------------- Oh i just realize it is Blue Monday.

More seriously: When I read a book (that is related to science), the most important part of the book are the margins. That's the beautiful white space where I can put remarks, interrogation and exclamation points. I always use a pencil. and creates at the beginning of the book, where I can find a blank page, an index with my remarks. Can I do that with a Kindle?

This is a Space/Space diagram, the points are representing positions in space at T1. The observer is at point A. The observer receives information (light) from object B. Because there is a delay between the time T2 when the information was send and T1 when it is received, the observer does not see the object at point B but at point C. The information from point B has been authentically repositioned to point C. It is much like a photograph, all info from B is seen as appearing from C. The idea is that the observed velocity v1 (in black) is a decomposition of the blue Velocity. The black arrow represents the direction of the velocity as observed if information was sent in full simultaneity. The direction of the red velocity v2 is a decomposition of the "photograph" as observed in C, because the only observable part of light is the part that reaches the observer (it is the projection on the line between object and observer).

Spyman told me once: You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink... http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/48852-hubble-law-and-the-combination-of-acceleration-with-delay/?p=545956

What does common sense say to you? That you can communicate with the future? That the future is observable?

Observed velocity is a direct function of distance: V=kd Where k is a constant. It is a cosmological question not very different that the statement that the Big Bang happened "everywhere". It consists in accepting that everything was created at the place where it is today, and in the same state of motion. The only difference here is that the state of motion is an accelerated one. The fact that galaxies are separated is not different from the existing paradigm. 3D is not enough. Not even 4D (a video of a 3d model in motion) because you cannot render the fact that there is a delay in observation (that we are observing things in the past). The only available tool is mathematics. ------------ (edit) I tried several times to work with a Minkoswski diagram but the result is not obvious at all.

It is simple. All objects are on a parallel path, they all move in the same direction. They all have the same acceleration. At a time stamp Tx, they all have velocity Vx. Velocity increases with time (that's the definition of acceleration) As observers, we are first in the row, because we observe the past. The future is not observable. We are the first bubble in the glass of champagne. That's it. As to "where do the bubbles originate", hypotheses non fingo.

yes. No. there is a delay in observation.

No, I don't think so. If the delay is caused by distance, you need nothing else. the only way to have no effect of expansion would be to consider an hypothetical galaxy with a higher velocity than ours, IOW a galaxy from the future. Which we cannot observe. Isn't that what acceleration means? The suppositions are 2: 1. a delay (it is given by SOL) 2. an acceleration.

black on pure red? I see no red in the picture you posted.

There are no different accelerations, there is a same acceleration "a" at different times which means different velocities. Acceleration means for example T=1, v=1 T=2, v=2 T=3, v=3 T=4, v=4 Where v=4>v=3>v=2>v=1 Where velocity is a direct function of time (it is a single acceleration value a) Where time is direct function of distance. The farthest the object in space the farthest in time. Say you are an observer at T=4 and look around you. Everything you observe is in time less than you because you observe objects in the past: you look at T3, T2, T1 So you are observing Object 3 at T3 with velocity v=3 (it is the closest object) Object 2 at T2 with velocity v=2 Object 1 at T1 with velocity v=1 (it is the farthest object) You are observing all objects receding from you at a faster rate that corresponds to distance. Like Hubble's law.

One must be very careful when reading statistics from diagrams like those. The image has a power that strict numbers do not have. I know very well from my experience in urbanistic & geographic statistics, that when you make a diagram, you must make some choices, that you diagram must show something, sometimes must (or will)hide something else. For example in the above: _the 4 pies of same dimension represent in fact different dimensions: the second pie is about 3 times bigger than the first, the third 3 times bigger than the 2nd, and the fourth 3 times bigger thatn the third. _the people from the second pie are the one who survived from the first, and so on. _the ages have been chosen on what basis? the first pie has a gap of 24 years, the 2nd 19 years, the 3rd also 19 years, the 3rd unknown (I guess 100-65=35 years). _the parts of the pie are not in the same order from the beginning till the end, it is very difficult to understand a progression for lets say homicide because it is not represented in all 4 charts.(is it in "other causes" in pie #4?, or is it null?) _where is "warfare"? In "other causes"? hidden for people under 24, the brave U.S. soldiers that die in Irak? _how many deaths in 2010? Is it the sum of the 3 pies (2,441,199)? If this is correct, the 1st pie represents 1,5% of deaths in the U.S. in 2010,and thus accidents at age 1-24 represents 0.6% of deaths. I am sure if one makes a pie at age 16-24 the most injuries are there. _and so on.

No, the bubble analogy is just an analogy, it is not a model. In the analogy, the bubbles have to begin at different times in order to create the delay. In the model, all objects are created at the same time. All objects have the same acceleration and all objects travel on a parallel path. The delay is observational and is caused by the constancy of SOL. It means that an object observed at 100LY distance travels at velocity less than us when it was 100 Years ago (that is exactly a function of the distance). Also, there are no bubbles in front of us because we cannot observe the future, the only "bubbles" that we can observe are in the past, and all those "bubbles" are delayed in direct function of the distance.

In the universe, the delay is caused by the constancy of the Speed Of Light.

Open a beer then. Leffe, Grimbergen, Stella Artois,... You will observe that the bubbles are in a state of acceleration. They do not start all at the same time, there is a delay. The result of both delay & acceleration makes that the distance between the bubbles increases.

You should open a champagne and observe carefully what happens.

I guess your 27.6 billion figure comes from the fact that the farthest object observable at the East is 13,8 BLY away and the farthest object observable in the opposite direction at West is also 13,8 BLY away. So you added the 2 figures. Well, it is nothing like that following the standard explanation. I'll try to explain something I have many difficulties to accept*: _first of all no object traveled through space a distance of 13,8 billion Light Years, or 27,6 BLY in order to come from a singular point to the place it is today. It is assumed that the Big Bang (the singularity) happened everywhere. It means that all objects observable in the sky were roughly created at the place where there are. _secondly, the object you are observing today in your telescope is the object as it was 13.8 billion years ago (roughly). So you are observing a very young object, meaning its a baby: you are observing it as it was a few instant after its birth. The Theory that allows this object to be 27,6 BLY away from another object is called Inflation. ------------- *it is an euphemism, in fact I do not accept any of the 2 statements.

I have to admit I don't understand clearly the above statistics: _in 1900 there were 1100 deaths/100,000 _in 2010 there were 600 deaths/100,000 Do I read it correctly? the last numbers mean 600 deaths/year/100,000. Does that mean it will take on the average 100,000/600= 166 years for all to die?

I see that there is no "natural death", as people used to say some time ago. Now death has a cause that looks "unnatural", I mean death has a cause that you can fight. But at the last point, everybody has to die. The volume of thick square is a direct function of Earths population.