Strange

In fact, I was wrong. (This often happens,) we have never observed anything receding at 5 times light speed. The greatest distance we can ever observe corresponds to a recessional speed of just over 3 times light speed (if I remember correctly). And we have never observed anything at that distance. Mans when I said “always” I obviously meant “always since the expansion was discovered”. Not since the Stone Age. Because that would be silly.

Any process is going to require energy. And what moving parts are you talking about? And the cost of electricity What does “from scratch” mean?

It has been known for about 350 years. But that wasn’t what I said. You seem to have severe reading comprehension problems. Here’s the science part: https://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0310808

Yes there were. This has always been known. The new observations have nothing to do with galaxies receding at more than light speed. And that has nothing at all to do with the simulation hypothesis. You clearly don’t understand anything you are reading. That has nothing to do with expansion. And nothing to do with anything moving faster than light.

That doesn’t invalidate existing physics. It just extends it. Like when evidence of Neptune was detected. It didn’t invalidate our model of the solar system, just suggested that there was an extra planet. None. It was the default assumption at the time. (Based on the known evidence.) Einstein never claimed to know everything. And, ironically, it was Hubble who never accepted that the universe was expanding.

! Moderator Note As we don’t have a specific place for history (this is a science forum after all) I have moved this to The Lounge. @chemguy can you summarise what you wish to discuss. And maybe provide sources for your data?

As it says, that is measuring the electric field (measured in volts/metre) not electromagnetic radiation. The electromagnetic field measurement capability is on the following line: Which measure the power of the EM signal. Please provide some evidence to support his claim. And the opinions of a deluded idiot on the Internet do not count as evidence. ! Moderator Note Moved to Speculations. Please note the requirement to provide evidence.

! Moderator Note This does not appear to have any connection to quantum theory or cold fusion. More detail or clarity is required to start discussing this. It may seem clear in your mind but you need to give us enough to talk about to form a response. Please try and be clearer in future.

What radiation? And how do you measure the electric component? I don't think radiation can cause a corona discharge. You need a high voltage. I have no idea why you are talking about low energy photons. Can you explain how they are relevant to high voltage discharge? Light (which includes radio waves, in physics) can be modelled as either classical waves or particles. Depending on the application.

It is not the radiation, it is the voltage. The words "high voltage" appear 3 times in that paragraph. And the first paragraph of that article explains what causes it. And the Mechanism section provides more detail: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corona_discharge#Mechanism (And, yes, obviously photons of radio waves exist.)

It s a news story, reporting on scientific research. What would "disagree with the article" mean? That the journalist made up the story and no such research has taken place. I have seen the same research reported in multiple places so I the article appears to be accurate. Where does it say that it invalidates physics as it is currently known? It says that two different measurements, which were expected to give the same result, provide different results. This is intriguing and tells us that something is wrong with the measurements or that our model of the universe needs to be adjusted (or both). Further work may tell us which. That is how science works.

And, apparently, without using their brains in some cases.

Actually, that article is about making more accurate measurements; ie. about knowing more. So, yes, this may show up something new that we don't know about. This sort of "crisis" is why science is so exciting; it may indicate a new discovery. One the other hand, it might just be down to some sort of error in one of the measurements.

Go to your local hardware store and buy some washing powder. Otherwise, it depends what you want to start from. One easy method would be to start with sodium hydroxide and bubble carbon dioxide through the solution. Another would be to heat sodium bicarbonate. The problem with burning plant material is separating the sodium carbonate from all the other compounds present. (I'm sure an actual chemist will be along soo with better answers!)

Uncertainty in measurements of the rate of expansion is not the same as “no one knows”

It’s a joke: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrogen_monoxide_parody

peaceworld has been banned as a sockpuppet of Ser. And now 5D-Math. (It's pretty amazing we are able to spot these sometimes.) And the, cleverly named, extradimension.

This has been discussed. I'm not sure why it hasn't been done yet! (I cannot do it, as I am involved in the thread.)

The only (well tested and confirmed) theory we have for black holes is General Relativity. This says that all the matter that enters a black hole is compressed to an infinitely small singularity with infinite density. Therefore, this theory is almost certainly not correctly describing what happens. A theory of quantum gravity might tells us what happens to the mass inside a m black hole - although we can probably never confirm that directly. Unless it changes how we view the event horizon; it might turn out to be "porous" or not really exist or something. (String theory describes the inside of a black hole as a "fuzzball", but until we have some way of testing string theory, we have no idea if that is any more realistic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuzzball_(string_theory)) Both gravity and time dilation (and length contraction) are ways we perceive the curvature of spacetime. So it is not that gravity "affects" spacetime; but gravity is spacetime. I think only in the case of something like a black hole (where there is a concentration of mass in one place). I don't think it is true for the singularity in the big bang model, because in that case, mass is always uniformly distributed throughout the universe. (I may be wrong. I often am!) In our current theories nothing can escape from the inside of a black hole. Jets are generated outside the black hole.

Yes, as I said, we can measure voltage or current or power or field strength or many others things. There are instruments to measure these and units defined to quantify them. There are no instruments that will measure “electricity” and no units that it can be measured in. I think you need to take some classes in Basic English. But that is not what you said. You said the “electricity” is different at each end, I pointed out that this is pretty meaningless and that it is the voltage that is different. Please learn to understand and speak English properly. I am not ignoring it. It says that voltage and current vary. Not that “electricity” changes. This has been stated repeatedly. But not by you. You have repeatedly said that “electricity” is different at each end. Which is gibberish. When people attempt to correct your use of English, you ignore them. If you are so sure you are correct, why are you unable to provide an example of how “electricity” is measured? Or even one reference that supports your claims? Maybe because you are talking nonsense?

I'm not sure how you got the "without gravity" idea from that post. Gravity is, as you say, one of the ways we experience the curvature of spacetime. Black holes represent an extreme form of the curvature of space time (it becomes infinite at the singularity; which is a good indication that the theory no longer works at that point). So the only reason black holes exist is because of gravity/spacetime-curvature.

We can measure the amount of gas (just as we can measure voltage). But we cannot measure "electricity", can we? You obviously agree because you have not said what device you would use to measure "electricity" or what units it is measured in. What is the SI unit for electricity? You also still refuse to provide any sources or references that support your misuse of words. Because the voltage is different. Obviously. So, again, in what way is "electricity" quantitatively different at different parts of the wire? Does Ohm's law change? Is current no longer due to the movement of charge carriers? Show me how you would measure the difference in "electricity". No. Electricity is the same everywhere. Even in the absence of any charges, currents or voltages.

! Moderator Note Moved to Mathematics (seems most appropriate).

Space is not a constant. It is observer dependent. And can be affected by the presence of mass or energy. Who said anything about the absence of gravity? The photons tell us about the stars that emitted them: their composition, their brightness, their relative speed, etc. All of this can tell us about the universe and how it is expanding.

The fact that we have a model based on that assumption, and the model has been shown to be consistent with observation. The is no center in cosmology. This is either because the universe is infinite or because it is "finite but unbounded" (a 2D analogy is the surface of a sphere; that has a finite area but no edge). The average density decreases but expansion is sufficiently slow that there is time for gravity to cause collapse to happen in small areas so that stars, galaxies and planets can form. There are other possible explanations for the CMB (but not many). But none that are consistent with all the evidence.