ACG52

This certainly doesn't meet the first rule of the speculations forum This should be trashed and locked.

Search for Snell's theory and you will find NOTHING. There's Snell's law of refraction, but that's not what this .... poster is talking about. Snell's theory is totally a bogus fiction created by this... poster. He's been spamming this nonsense over on physforum.com. This belongs in speculations, at best.

No. It doesn't exist.

I've refreshed several times, but don't see the reputation buttons. Ah, now I see them. And now I don't.

First of all, what does being a 'bubble in space' even mean. Second, how would it explain anything?

You can just go to the far right and click on today, which will give you the last post, but not the next post you haven't read yet. We've also lost the symbol which says you've posted in this thread.

We've also lost the 'view last post' buttons. Yea upgrades.

Special relativity is special in that it is a limited case, where there is no gravity. General relativity includes gravity.

E=mc2 is not the complete equation. e2= m2c4+p2c2 is the complete form. For light, the first term m (rest mass) is zero, so the equation simplifies to e = pc, where p is momentum.

No.

Sure. They tried it with neutrinos. It didn't work. Are you simply saying that you won't accept relativity regardless of the observational and experimental results? Cause if that's the case, there's no point in trying to teach you anything.

Relativity, both Special and General, is one the most tested theories in science, and has been verified to an astonishing degree. Not only can you be wrong, but you are wrong. Your argument against it is basically argument by incredulity. i.e. You don't understand it, so it must be wrong.

Are you kidding Krash? G_A is one of the biggest cranks around, banned from every forum except physforum, because nobody gets banned there.

In that case you're comparing two different galaxies. Older light from AN object means that we are seeing THAT object when it was younger.

Are you the Keymaster?

I remember a line from Robert Heinlein's Glory Road, (paraphrase) "logic is a way of saying that if it didn't happen yesterday, it can't happen today."

But again, OLDER LIGHT means we are seeing the object at a younger stage in it's existence.

So when we look at a galaxy 10 billion light years away, we are seeing the light which left it 10 billion years ago (ignoring expansion time), which means we are seeing it as it was 10 billion years ago, when it was much younger.

The CMBR is as far back in time as observation can take us, and it is spread equally, everywhere. There is no point from which everything expands.

Come back a few years ago.

Then stop bringing it up.

I don't really see anything in your post involving logic at all.

Relativity has been experimentally and observationally confirmed to an astounding degree. The reason you see so many youtubes denying the validity of relativity is because the are an astounding number of cranks in the world, and anybody can post any nonsense on youtube.

NASA spent 2 million dollars designing a pen which would write in zero g. The Russians used a pencil. (Funny story, even though it isn't true.)

The line of ink laid down by a ball point is VERY thin. It takes a long time to go through a barrel full of ink, much longer than fountain pens.