>>Ok, if not gravity then what other physical force creates the large-scale structures that we see in the cosmos?
"Magnets"
Posted on 03/22/2010 8:02:28 PM PDT by Feline_AIDS
"Dark flow" is no fluke, suggests a new study that strengthens the case for unknown, unseen "structures" lurking on the outskirts of creation.
In 2008 scientists reported the discovery of hundreds of galaxy clusters streaming in the same direction at more than 2.2 million miles (3.6 million kilometers) an hour.
This mysterious motion can't be explained by current models for distribution of mass in the universe. So the researchers made the controversial suggestion that the clusters are being tugged on by the gravity of matter outside the known universe.
Now the same team has found that the dark flow extends even deeper into the universe than previously reported: out to at least 2.5 billion light-years from Earth.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.nationalgeographic.com ...
Agreed. If a theory is not experimentally falsifiable then it is not a true scientific theory. It is merely a belief system.
String Theory has so many unknown parameters that you can basically build any universe you want by just fiddling with the knobs in the equations. It doesn't have any real predictive value.
Uhg, this crap makes my head hurt. All I’ve ever wanted to know is, assuming the universe is finite, what’s on the other side? Has there ever been an astro-physicist that answered this question?
“What?” — or...is it “Who?”
Aye, an' there's the rub.
There is no "other side" to the edge of the universe. The universe can be finite without having an "outside", if it wraps on itself like a Mobius strip in 3-D (or 4-D, or whatever-D).
> Has there ever been an astro-physicist that answered this question?
It's not a question, it's a misconception. :)
What's the difference between a duck?
This kind of reminds of a question I used to always ask my Mom when I was a child. I'd say "Where did God come from?" I forget how she answered it, but I'm sure the first time I asked it she was probably taken aback.
Well, I wasn't trying to be all -that- helpful, since my answer was at least 50% tongue-in-cheek... glad you LOL'ed.
> This kind of reminds of a question I used to always ask my Mom when I was a child. I'd say "Where did God come from?" I forget how she answered it, but I'm sure the first time I asked it she was probably taken aback.
Kids ask the simplest darn questions. If only we, as adults, could begin to answer them... ;-)
They do ask some doosies. Fortunately, most of the time they'll accept whatever B.S. answer we give. When it's all said and done, we look like geniuses to them. Suckers! :-)
"Magnets"
I like the theory myself. The commies have pissed me off enough to the point where I prefer to be crushed to a pulp and explode rather than decompose into nothingness.
>>>So the researchers made the controversial suggestion that the clusters are being tugged on by the gravity of matter outside the known universe.
It has been suggested before the universe is multiple times larger then we can observe. Not as a matter of dark matter, nor of multiverses. But “simply” that at the time of the Big Bang, the expansion began in ALL directions at very high speeds.
The acceleration of the portions of the universe opposite and receding from us added to the acceleration in the other direction of the portion of the universe where we reside may well add up to more then the speed of light. If so neither section of the universe can ever observe the other, though existing side by side.
>>>I think the Einsteins theory of space-time shows us you can not exceed the speed of light
True but nobody violates this barrier, as each region itself travels at lesser velocities. The theory is it is the cumulative velocity in opposite directions may reach a level that would exceed light speed, but no object by itself in its own perception would exceed light speed. Red shift applies only to the portions of the universe we can observe and measure. Beyond this theoretical horizon it would apply as well, if we could observe it. Instead all we can do is infer it by such indications as suggested in the article.
Or the theory may be nonsense. But it seems to tie in with the article.
for the string theory ping list
>uh....the speed of the universes expansion is measured in red shift and its less than the speed of light...also, I think the Einsteins theory of space-time shows us you can not exceed the speed of light (though you can change the rate of time) You can mark this as a geek response.
Thought Experiment:
You are God, creating a universe. In this universe you have ruled that physical objects may not exceed the speed of light. The Universe, though doesn’t exist [neither does time, but that’s another thought experiment...]. So you bring it into existence saying “Let there be light.” The universe is now defined by this ‘light’ which according to its nature is zipping along outwards from it’s starting-point, spherically, and thusly defining the edge and scope of the universe.
Now, [any] two photons opposite each-other on this sphere are both traveling at the speed of light, though in opposite directions and so in the linear dimension defined by those two points your new universe is expanding at TWICE the speed of light. Does this violate your rule of a light-speed speed-limit?
One must never forget the basic theory of Chuck Norris Relativity: Any object kicked by Chuck Norris will rise to a height that transcends the limit of any known or conceivable Universe.
bttt
Indeed! Thank you for the ping, dear brother in Christ!
Perhaps these aliens you speak of look like a teleprompter, so they think IT’S is the intelligent being in charge and we are all just some sort of pets or slaves.
God
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.