MigL

A point is, by definition, dimensionless, and without extent. The early universe, even at Planck scale, might not have applicable spatial and a temporal dimension, but it would still have an extent. ( just an extensive, non-causal quantum foam )

If that is the case, why was the Democratic Primary held in Wisconsin today ? Is political ambition more important than people's lives ?

Then please correct me where I'm wrong... You assert correctly that, the energy of the light received from a distant, receding star, is less than the emitted energy by the distant, receding star. And you offer a reduced speed of light as a possible explanation, with various amounts of hand waving as the explanation. You have been told that relativity tells us the energy measured in different frames, WILL be different, and we can predict mathematically by how much. And you have been told why a changing speed of light is non-sensical, and can be proven to lead to non-sensical results/conclusions. I think the mis-understanding might be on your part.

So you look for the 6 main Carbon absorption lines in the spectrum of the light from a far-away receding galaxy, and instead of finding one in the blue, two in the green, one in yellow, one in orange and one in the deep red, you find one in the orange, two in the red and three in the infra-red region of the spectrum. You can measure the frequency and wavelength of he incoming light, and it follows the relationship F*L=c . So, either Carbon absorbs different wavelengths/frequencies of light in that far-away galaxy, or, the spectrum is red-shifted. Those are your only two choices; The choice of c being variable is not even a consideration.

Sure they can. In Canada every eligible voter ( with a mailing address ) receives a voter registration card in the mail before elections. That is your voting ID. No need to make a separate trip to a window to get a 'code'. A person without a mailing address would still have to present ID, which is checked for eligibility, and duplication of voter registration. And I've seen your voter turn-out numbers. They are no better than ours. You do not need to practice much social distancing with the low number of voters that turn out. You should be safe even if the pandemic is still raging in November.

Whether infinitely old or infinitely vast makes no difference whatsoever. Anything outside the observable universe, anything before the 'big bounce' or Planck era ( actually it should be inflationary era ), is causally disconnected from us. We can never observe it, and it can never affect us in any way.

Why wouldn't He be ? He is omnipotent, and already knows everything that will ever happen, including the problems. Why would he have any interest in His creation after the fact ? So many paradoxes in religion...

Don't you guys have a census that generates, and mails, voter registration cards, automatically before an election ? I assume you're not homeless, airbrush, so why is this such a problem for you ?

No. We may have different ways of measuring, but after conversion, the differences due to gravitational potential and relative motion will still be apparent. The differences are sot an effect of different units of measurement. edit: I know, old post; but I had to correct this.

Maybe if you tell us what you mean by 'speed identification'...

Keep in mind that the 'virtual particle pair created on the edge of the EH' is an interpretation introduced by S Hawking in his book, A Brief History Of Time, and as such, is intended for laymen. The actual paper describing the process is a little more involved. https://www.brainmaster.com/software/pubs/physics/Hawking Particle Creation.pdf While that might be true for yourself, and even myself, it obviously isn't for S Hawking and many others. Not understanding =/= not knowing.

While the Event Horizon of a BH is a mathematical construct, the limit it represents has to follow certain Physical laws. Heisenberg says the EH radius cannot be a hard limit, because of the 'fuzzyness' inherent in the HUP. Virtual particles can, in effect, manifest inside the EH limit and 'tunnel' out, through the 'fuzzy' EH limit. Or you can choose to look at it differently. The virtual particles are 'fuzzily' spread over space, again because of HUP, and while one might have its 'probability sphere' inside the EH, the other might be have some part of its 'probability sphere' outside. In both cases the quantum mechanical 'tunneling' effect is used. Virtual particles are dependent on the local energy density. In free space, that would be vacuum energy ( see Casimir effect and Lamb Shift ). But they also constitute a 'halo' around normal particles ( due to their fields ), and makes calculating specific attributes ( mass, charge, etc. )of the particle very difficult ( see 'renormalization' ).

You have till November. Wait and see how things turn out. Besides, once D Trump declares himself dictator, the election will be cancelled.

These kinds of discussions are pointless and only lead to frustration on both sides. You cannot prove his arguments wrong, and he cannot prove them right. ( to me, that's enough not to entertain the idea of a creator, but that's my opinion ) IOW neither of you can have his mind changed or his perspective widened. And since the whole point of a discussion is to present your ideas in the hope of widening the perspective ( or even changing the opinion ) of your audience/co-discusser, it seems a rather useless waste of time. Then again, with this Covid-19 and self-isolation, we all have plenty of time to waste.

Can we agree that light emitted by distant stars is the same as the light we see from our own sun ? That the same elements and processes that power our sun, and emit light, are the same as those in far-away stars ? And that this light follows the inverse relationship between frequency and wavelength ? IOW F*L=c where F=fFequency, L=waveLength and c=SoL We know this relationship is followed at the moving source, and at our 'stationary' receiver. We also know that the energy of light is proportional to its frequency IOW E=hF where h=Planck's Constant So if we can agree that the Energy is less at the receiver, or, we can measure the Frequency and waveLength , and find it to be less and longer ( respectively ) for a common emission process, we can easily multiply the two together, and get the exact same SoL. Or are you suggesting light/stars/elements are different in different parts of the universe ? edit; If that is your suggestion, you have a really high mountain to climb in terms of proof, as you are now attempting to re-interpret a much wider area of Physics. Good luck.

And again, no. The received light is actually less energetic as its frequency has decreased, and its wavelength increased. And as Studiot explained, energy is frame dependent.

There are some caveats, like the fact that the analysis is from 1976, using 2 neutrino flavors. and zero rest mass, but here are the expected radiation types, also from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation#Emission_process "For a mass much larger than 1017 grams, Page deduces that electron emission can be ignored, and that black holes of mass M in grams evaporate via massless electron and muon neutrinos, photons, and gravitons in a time τ of τ = 8.66 × 10 − 27 [ M g ] 3 s . {\displaystyle \tau =8.66\times 10^{-27}\;\left[{\frac {M}{\mathrm {g} }}\right]^{3}\;\mathrm {s} \,.} For a mass much smaller than 1017 g, but much larger than 5×1014 g, the emission of ultrarelativistic electrons and positrons will accelerate the evaporation, giving a lifetime of τ = 4.8 × 10 − 27 [ M g ] 3 s . {\displaystyle \tau =4.8\times 10^{-27}\;\left[{\frac {M}{\mathrm {g} }}\right]^{3}\;\mathrm {s} \,.} " IOW the smaller the BH, the more energy it is able to invest in particle production. Ooops. That didn't copy/paste too well.

Oh, I thought you were going in a different direction, JC. I thought you were going to mention the Democrats who are buying/selling stock, with arguably insider information, in an attempt to gain from the country's suffering. I guess they are, after all, politicians.

But it sure was a long-winded way of saying "We don't know everything".

So is the issue the fact that the radiation is particulate in nature and not EMR, or is the issue the fact that it is non thermal ? The two virtual particle interpretation, where one falls through the EH and the other escapes and becomes real at the expense of the BH's mass-energy, is just one of many. Another involves quantum fluctuations just inside the EH, where one particle tunnels out; but that still involves particles. This interpretation is straight out of wiki at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation#Trans-Planckian_problem "Hawking radiation is required by the Unruh effect and the equivalence principle applied to black hole horizons. Close to the event horizon of a black hole, a local observer must accelerate to keep from falling in. An accelerating observer sees a thermal bath of particles that pop out of the local acceleration horizon, turn around, and free-fall back in. The condition of local thermal equilibrium implies that the consistent extension of this local thermal bath has a finite temperature at infinity, which implies that some of these particles emitted by the horizon are not reabsorbed and become outgoing Hawking radiation." The difference between HR and black body radiation is summarized as ... "An important difference between the black hole radiation as computed by Hawking and thermal radiation emitted from a black body is that the latter is statistical in nature, and only its average satisfies what is known as Planck's law of black-body radiation, while the former fits the data better. Thus thermal radiation contains information about the body that emitted it, while Hawking radiation seems to contain no such information, and depends only on the mass, angular momentum, and charge of the black hole (the no-hair theorem). This leads to the black hole information paradox. However, according to the conjectured gauge-gravity duality (also known as the AdS/CFT correspondence), black holes in certain cases (and perhaps in general) are equivalent to solutions of quantum field theory at a non-zero temperature. This means that no information loss is expected in black holes (since the theory permits no such loss) and the radiation emitted by a black hole is probably the usual thermal radiation. If this is correct, then Hawking's original calculation should be corrected, though it is not known how." Also from Wiki at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation#Emission_process Hawking's original calculation and it correction ( mentioned above ) is known as the trans-Planckian problem because of the infinite frequency of the radiation that results at the EH as seen by a distant observer. More information on the trans-Planckian problem at the 1st link I provided.

That would be true for rotation powered pulsars or magnetars. But most accretion powered pulsars emit x-rays in relation to the 'temperature' of the accretion disk. Also , pulsars are thought to be one of the sources for high energy cosmic rays ( non-EM )

I have not seen descriptions that HR is assumed to be purely EM. Then again, you can describe temperature in terms of energy, and mass in terms of energy, so maybe sometimes talking about one thing, we understand it about something else.

I agree, a neutron star would emit EM radiation, based on its temperature, in accordance with Black body radiation spectrum. As to whether it would also emit non-thermal ( non-lack body, but consisting if alpha, beta, gamma and other particles ) radiation also, I'm sure there is some, but would have to look into it.

The 'economy' was actually the first means to re-distribute wealth. ( whatever 'wealth' meant at the time ) In pre-historic times, you exchanged 'work' for food, provided by the tribe. In medieval times, you exchanged work for a parcel of land that you worked for yourself. Today we exchange 'work' for something that takes the place of food, land, or other forms of wealth; we call it money. In all of these cases, the 'economy' is the means for survival. ( although a case could be made that you don't really need an iPhone 11 pro )

Anything that has a temperature, has to emit black body radiation.