seamless

Spell right or shut up.

"Nick" wrote in message
oups.com...
One way time would slow down.
The other way time will be the same
for all galaxies.

How do you work that out?

I say if galaxies aren't moving through
space TomGee then there can be no relativistic
effect on clocks.

Galaxies are moving through space. However this may not be in the way you
think you mean here.

Space stretching is not the same
thing as galaxies moving through space.away
from each other.

True.

There is a distinction to be made.


Yes

T Wake wrote:
"Nick" wrote in message
oups.com...

Yes. If you follow your logic that space cannot
curve then it has to have a space then a no space boundary
where space just ends.

Unless you accept the fact space is infinite.
Space is only finite.

Einsteins cosmology is that the curvature closes
the universe and there is no boundary like there
would be if you were right!

This is an interpretation. If the universe is closed then travel far enough
in one direction and you return back on yourself. This has not happened in
the observable universe so isnt a testable theory.

No curved space?
A Space then no space boundary?
I don't think so!


You say that a lot. I think it implies you dont think.

"Nick" wrote in message
oups.com...


T Wake wrote:
"Nick" wrote in message
oups.com...

Yes. If you follow your logic that space cannot
curve then it has to have a space then a no space boundary
where space just ends.

Unless you accept the fact space is infinite.
Space is only finite.


You don't know this, you assume this based on your belief structure.

If the universe curves back on itself, its possible to identify how far you
have to travel before you re-appear on the horizon behind yourself.

How big is your finite universe?

T Wake wrote:
"Nick" wrote in message
oups.com...


T Wake wrote:
"Nick" wrote in message
oups.com...

Yes. If you follow your logic that space cannot
curve then it has to have a space then a no space boundary
where space just ends.

Unless you accept the fact space is infinite.
Space is only finite.


You don't know this, you assume this based on your belief structure.
Touche.
If the universe curves back on itself, its possible to identify how far you
have to travel before you re-appear on the horizon behind yourself.

How big is your finite universe?

twake says:
You don't know this, you assume this based on your belief structure.

Well touche twake!

Too hard for you!!!

Nick wrote:
One way time would slow down.
The other way time will be the same
for all galaxies.

I say if galaxies aren't moving through
space TomGee then there can be no relativistic
effect on clocks.


No, not necessarily. we don't know about time as far as comparing
galaxies, although we can guess that a galaxy system will have an
overall time rate accruing to it in comparison to other galaxies moving
at different speeds. SR contends discrete persons and things will
accrue different time rates depending on their particular states of
motion, and so galaxies should do the same.

I don't know if galaxies are moving through space. It sure looks that
way to us. But if that's true, why don't their coordinates wrt each
other change? Wassup with that?

We agree that they seem to be moving away from us, but we don't know at
this time the correct explanation for the paradox which ensues from
saying that they are moving through space. It seemed reasonable to
think that space is expanding, and if it is, that would resolve the
paradox. However, that only creates another paradox, the claim that
space can indeed expand. But I do not think we can have it both ways,
Nick. Either space is expanding, or not. If not, what is the
alternative explanation and how good is it?

Mine claims that DM is a medium for energy waves and matter, and it
exists in the space which defines our universe, therefore it is DM that
is doing the expanding, and not space.

You seem to think that if galaxies do not move through space, then
objects, say like the moon, cannot move through space either. But that
is not true because the coordinates of the moon change as it moves
around the Earth wrt to other objects moving in the universe.

The problem only applies to situations of motion where coordinates do
not change. Maybe that will explain my notion better. But, a Biig
But, if DM is expanding far out in space between galaxies, why is it
not doing that here between the Earth and the moon? I think it is, and
that may explain certain effects better than Relativity does, in the
long run, but we should not expect large occurrences of such expansion
locally because remember that DM may explain why galaxies stay together
and it just may be that DM keeps its expansion to a minimum within
galaxies by preventing them from freely dispersing into the medium by,
who knows what?, maybe negative gravity, a push instead of a pull, or
anti-gravity, pay your money and take your choice, they've all been
thought of before DM came into vogue. Ain't science great?

TomGee wrote:
Nick wrote:
One way time would slow down.
The other way time will be the same
for all galaxies.

I say if galaxies aren't moving through
space TomGee then there can be no relativistic
effect on clocks.


No, not necessarily.

Yes. I am saying that if galaxies are not moving *through
space* Tom they can't have any time slowdown.
If you accelerate a particle only its time will slowdown.
Contrary to belief the accerelated particle doesn't see
the clock still on Earth going slower.
IOW there is no reciprocity of effect.
How can there be if only one clock sees the other blueshifted?
Sorry but it is nonsense.
And there is a distinction to be made in cosmology if
time is basically the same for all galaxies with space
only stretching inbetween them.


we don't know about time as far as comparing
galaxies, although we can guess that a galaxy system will have an
overall time rate accruing to it in comparison to other galaxies moving
at different speeds. SR contends discrete persons and things will
accrue different time rates depending on their particular states of
motion, and so galaxies should do the same.

I don't know if galaxies are moving through space. It sure looks that
way to us. But if that's true, why don't their coordinates wrt each
other change? Wassup with that?

We agree that they seem to be moving away from us, but we don't know at
this time the correct explanation for the paradox which ensues from
saying that they are moving through space. It seemed reasonable to
think that space is expanding, and if it is, that would resolve the
paradox. However, that only creates another paradox, the claim that
space can indeed expand. But I do not think we can have it both ways,
Nick. Either space is expanding, or not. If not, what is the
alternative explanation and how good is it?

Mine claims that DM is a medium for energy waves and matter, and it
exists in the space which defines our universe, therefore it is DM that
is doing the expanding, and not space.

You seem to think that if galaxies do not move through space, then
objects, say like the moon, cannot move through space either. But that
is not true because the coordinates of the moon change as it moves
around the Earth wrt to other objects moving in the universe.

The problem only applies to situations of motion where coordinates do
not change. Maybe that will explain my notion better. But, a Biig
But, if DM is expanding far out in space between galaxies, why is it
not doing that here between the Earth and the moon? I think it is, and
that may explain certain effects better than Relativity does, in the
long run, but we should not expect large occurrences of such expansion
locally because remember that DM may explain why galaxies stay together
and it just may be that DM keeps its expansion to a minimum within
galaxies by preventing them from freely dispersing into the medium by,
who knows what?, maybe negative gravity, a push instead of a pull, or
anti-gravity, pay your money and take your choice, they've all been
thought of before DM came into vogue. Ain't science great?