Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Physicist; Publius6961
But the universe doesn't have any requirement--mathematical or philosophical--that anything come "before" it, just as there's no requirement for anything to be south of the South Pole. Causality presupposes time, and time presupposes the universe. The universe doesn't require a cause.

Every phenomena that arises within the universe has as its cause some condition or conditions but the phenomena of universe itself arises without cause or conditions? What is the reason for that?

43 posted on 02/24/2005 7:57:46 AM PST by TigersEye (Intellectuals only exist if you think they do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]


To: Physicist; RadioAstronomer; longshadow
The article says this:
In the current standard model of cosmology, galaxies with a redshift of about 1.5--that is, whose light has a wavelength 150 percent longer than the laboratory reference value--are receding at the speed of light. Astronomers have observed about 1,000 galaxies with redshifts larger than 1.5. That is, they have observed about 1,000 objects receding from us faster than the speed of light. Equivalently, we are receding from those galaxies faster than the speed of light.

Question: why aren't there greater consequences than the appearance of the light from these objects? Why is this motion, relative to ours, immune from the effects of special relativity?

44 posted on 02/24/2005 8:05:06 AM PST by PatrickHenry (<-- Click on my name. The List-O-Links for evolution threads is at my freeper homepage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson