Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

O/T: Space. Gamma Burster or Pulsar?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    So the cosmic microwave background would have had to come into existence almost instantaneously, while the galaxies and all else would have followed the speed of light rule.
    I seldom do anything within the scope of logical reason and calculated cost/benefit, etc- I'm following my passion-

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by darryl View Post
      So the cosmic microwave background would have had to come into existence almost instantaneously, while the galaxies and all else would have followed the speed of light rule.
      That's my understanding. My layman's understanding, of course.

      -js



      EDIT: Perhaps Fasttrack or one of our other physicists can help us understand...
      Last edited by Jim Stewart; 01-11-2021, 11:06 PM.
      There are no stupid questions. But there are lots of stupid answers. This is the internet.

      Location: SF Bay Area

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by darryl View Post
        Any of you astronomy guys have a 'telescope deck' as part of your house? Backyard observatory is one thing- but what about a rotating dome cut through the roof above an upper floor, the observatory room as it would actually be. I would love to have one, perhaps big enough to stand up inside, but even if it's only big enough to accommodate the telescope. A rotating dome would not even have to be clear if it had a sliding window that the telescope could be mounted to. That way you're getting azimuth and altitude without letting air in.

        A roof top site is probably not preferred because of light pollution effects in some cases, but I can sure see being able to be inside the house, in say an upstairs room with a telescope 'viewing port' built into the ceiling. The cold can stay outside, and the cold dark nights can be excellent for viewing.

        You would want a deployable cover for the lens, which would be outside in the rain. And you would probably want to be near the peak of the roof, depending on trees, whatever, as obstacles to viewing. A 360 degree view would be nice.



        I wish. But I live in town so that would be kinda pointless. I was building a trailer that would have the pier mounted to it with jacks to level it but I ended up getting a generator and mounted the generator to that. I did get another trailer so I might try to set something up like that again.

        Comment


        • #19
          Something else to consider is that time itself is affected by both gravity and relativistic velocities. So the few microseconds of the big bang may actually comprise a much longer period of time depending on the POV of the observer. There are transuranic elements and particles that have half-lives of microseconds or nanoseconds, but when accelerated to near the speed of light they exist in our timeframe long enough to analyze, and their mass also greatly increases due to the energy imparted by acceleration.
          http://pauleschoen.com/pix/PM08_P76_P54.png
          Paul , P S Technology, Inc. and MrTibbs
          USA Maryland 21030

          Comment


          • #20
            Something else I've wondered about- we can apparently see back about 13 billion light years, so it might be possible to sense perturbations in quasars that are caused by masses further out that we can't yet see. I wonder if there's any evidence for this?
            I seldom do anything within the scope of logical reason and calculated cost/benefit, etc- I'm following my passion-

            Comment


            • #21
              Total amateur here.
              Sorry, my mind is just to simple to grasp much of this universe or its events.

              I was reading where they discovered a source of a GRB and it was 12 billion light years away! I absolutely can not conceive just how powerful the explosion (or whatever it's called) was that caused that if it can be detected that far away.
              Wouldn't it be true that for every "farthest" event that is discovered, that the radiation has also gone in the opposite direction the same distance...24 billion light years?
              What are the chances that this "event" was not blocked from our view by intervening stars, matter, or gases, over the course of a 12 billion light year distance?
              You might be able to see through a one acre thin forest, but a not through a one million acre thin forest.
              S E Michigan

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Jim Stewart View Post

                So since it doesn't make sense to you it's BS? Totally wrong about everything in our solar system, including the moon? Perhaps you can elaborate (with details, not handwaving).

                -js
                Jim,
                Actually I can’t think of anything they predicted correctly regarding our solar system except the orbits. Even then they could not reconcile Mercury’s orbit. They needed a little help from Einstein. They predicted no water on the moon, because only earth had water. Totally blindsided that the back side of the moon is different from the side we see. Substantial geologic activity of moons around Jupiter and Saturn. A water moon with a sub surface ocean. Geologic activity on the “dead” Pluto. Our solar system extending 1/2 way to the nearest star. They used to say just beyond Pluto. Building blocks of life are everywhere. Remember them saying there is no such thing as a black hole. None of these things were predicted or postulated correctly.

                I remember reading about pulsars in the 60s. They ain’t what they said they were back then. As our exploration expands so does our knowledge. I’ll continue to enjoy learning and imagining.

                another beauty just came to mind. Subatomic particles that can talk to each other across the universe. I filed that one in the BS folder with the Big Bang.

                I’ll continue to enjoy but will not believe every theory that comes out.

                Comment


                • #23
                  If faster than light is beyond the concept stage and is real- then we might have to consider another 'speed limit' in that realm. In our everyday realm, the speed of light is our limit, and everything works out in the math and the physics. I can imagine that such a thing would also be true in the other realm. It's quite probable that a similar fundamental would exist that would eventually help explain how things work in that realm. At that point the 'magic' would fade and understanding would take over. We might either find ourselves without an explanation for anything 'sub light speed', which might be akin to our still somewhat miserable understanding of sub-atomics, or we would incorporate a fuller understanding of this along with the 'next' realm.

                  As we have it now, sub-atomic physics still uses the speed of light to explain the workings of it. I can envision an entirely new reality in sub-atomics, one which has as much depth and vastness as has our current view of the universe as we know it. I don't think there is any fundamental limit, either to small or to large. Explaining the cosmic microwave background will eventually happen, and as is usual, that will open the door to more questions than it will answer. We may one day pop over to Mars in mere seconds, but a journey to a quasar could still take hours, maybe a few weeks. When we are able to conquer what to us now is an impossible distance, we could find ourselves at the edge again, wondering what kind of telescope we will need to peer beyond.
                  I seldom do anything within the scope of logical reason and calculated cost/benefit, etc- I'm following my passion-

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by darryl View Post
                    If faster than light is beyond the concept stage and is real- then we might have to consider another 'speed limit' in that realm. In our everyday realm, the speed of light is our limit, and everything works out in the math and the physics. I can imagine that such a thing would also be true in the other realm. It's quite probable that a similar fundamental would exist that would eventually help explain how things work in that realm. At that point the 'magic' would fade and understanding would take over. We might either find ourselves without an explanation for anything 'sub light speed', which might be akin to our still somewhat miserable understanding of sub-atomics, or we would incorporate a fuller understanding of this along with the 'next' realm.

                    As we have it now, sub-atomic physics still uses the speed of light to explain the workings of it. I can envision an entirely new reality in sub-atomics, one which has as much depth and vastness as has our current view of the universe as we know it. I don't think there is any fundamental limit, either to small or to large. Explaining the cosmic microwave background will eventually happen, and as is usual, that will open the door to more questions than it will answer. We may one day pop over to Mars in mere seconds, but a journey to a quasar could still take hours, maybe a few weeks. When we are able to conquer what to us now is an impossible distance, we could find ourselves at the edge again, wondering what kind of telescope we will need to peer beyond.
                    It’s is eluded to above but not mentioned that matter through space has a speed limit. Space itself does not, and could exceed the speed of light as it expends. Latest theory to travel the speed of light or faster is to create a bubble in space around yourself which opens in front of you and closes behind.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by darryl View Post
                      I've recently been reading about the earths magnetic field- what put me onto this is the bermuda triangle, and the other similar areas such as the devils sea. These seem to be areas of magnetic anomalies, with the polar areas being where a jet of whatever particles may emanate by following the magnetic lines. On earth these 'jets' might be of little consequence, since earth is quite small to begin with, and the polar areas relatively uninhabited. But for something like a black hole, or other massive spinning body in space, the energy in the jets could be quite intense to say the least. We know of some forms of these jets- gamma rays, radio waves, and even acoustic waves which have recently been discovered emanating from some massive bodies.

                      Recently I've been intrigued by the idea that something like a black hole can be spinning with a surface speed being in the area of the speed of light. I can just imagine that if a resonance sets up to the point where a focused beam of energy can exit through a polar region, that could well be an X-ray source, a gamma ray source, or some other frequency of radiation that perhaps we haven't learned about yet.

                      Down here on little old earth, or even on Jupiter, there may not be enough spinning mass to form a significant jet of anything, although it would appear that some effects do arise in certain areas (like the Bermuda triangle). It makes me wonder if anyone has discovered polar effects from spinning masses like flywheels. At the sizes and speeds that are possible here on earth, perhaps any such effects are not measurable, but perhaps there is something to this. I don't think it has to be a magnetic effect, although ultimately I think it would have to be related in some way.
                      what is the diameter of a black hole?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I think some new Theories are coming out in Re: to Dark Matter and Dark Energy. Lets chew on those two opposites for a sec. It does explain some Theories. JR
                        My old yahoo group. Bridgeport Mill Group

                        https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/...port_mill/info

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          My philosophical take is that zero point quantum mechanical fluctuations create matter and anti-matter from "nothing", and perhaps energy and dark energy (anti-energy) as well, with everything canceling out. The process is reversible as well, and can be duplicated in the lab. Perhaps other concepts, such as good versus evil, are also "zero sum", such that one requires the other in opposition. Apparently there is much more matter than anti-matter, but perhaps that can be explained by dark matter and dark energy. Also, perhaps many of the exotic particles we discover are an artifact of having directed much energy and particles into sub-atomic particles that appear to be made of quarks and other smaller components. Every observation has an effect on an object, and the result can be, for example, wave-like or particle-like in the case of light (photons).
                          http://pauleschoen.com/pix/PM08_P76_P54.png
                          Paul , P S Technology, Inc. and MrTibbs
                          USA Maryland 21030

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by PStechPaul View Post
                            such that one requires the other in opposition. Apparently there is much more matter than anti-matter, but perhaps that can be explained by dark matter and dark energy. Also, perhaps many of the exotic particles we discover are an artifact of having directed much energy and particles into sub-atomic particles that appear to be made of quarks and other smaller components.
                            Exactly.. The theories I have heard support what you said.

                            The issue is Us. Dark matter/energy theory has been around for some time. Now they are trying to piece it together, through math and theory how it plays into the space time issue. Thanks whats his name for that,,

                            I think we are limited to this constant, speed of light. We have already disproved the actual constant.

                            Just because we cant subject a Quark to any influences to notice change, (we are trying deep under ground to just see it) doesnt mean the super light quark doesnt progress "faster" than a Photon. Tip of Iceberg. JR
                            My old yahoo group. Bridgeport Mill Group

                            https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/...port_mill/info

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              JR,

                              You ask if others here are into the stars. I certainly am - I 'm Aries

                              Ian
                              All of the gear, no idea...

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Ian B View Post
                                JR,

                                You ask if others here are into the stars. I certainly am - I 'm Aries

                                Ian
                                Them darn Aries are always good to go. I am am a Leo. JR
                                My old yahoo group. Bridgeport Mill Group

                                https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/...port_mill/info

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X