Parker Solar Probe: How Nasa is trying to 'touch' the Sun.

The big bang theory ignores the law of physics.

Science tells us that energy cannot be created or destroyed, only changed. So we are to believe that everything was created in a space smaller than an atom in a random explosion by matter that already existed?

When did it begin to exist?

That's the same problem Christians have with explaining God, its not possible according to physics.

 

That's not the only mistake attributable to him, either.

But, please note that this statement isn't contrary to any theory of physics. He didn't hypothesize that atoms can't be shattered, for example.

 

No it doesn't but it does show that his knowledge of physics was incomplete.

Rudimentary so.

 

Well, scientists have a very good idea of when T0 was.

They even have a better idea of where it happened, though I doubt you will like the answer.

As for the specifics of how it happened or what it came out of, there are few answered questions.

Just for grins let's remember that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence of the event.

 

You are confusing engineering and science. At the time of the quote, Einstein misjudged future engineering.

And, given where you are today, it's really rather surprising to hear you suggest there was something "rudimentary" about Einstein!

 

Am I alone that. as a child shining a flashlight into the night sky while thinking of the light from the flashlight traveling to other stars?

 

You aren't going to to do it with anything that has mass.

 

You aren't going to to do it with anything that has mass.

Uh....what? That is exactly what relativity prohibits.

 

Maybe what she was talking about is the expansion of the universe.

The understanding is that space is expanding. I don't know the best way to say it, but the speed at which stars are receding is a combination of their actual speed plus the expansion of the intervening universe. The farther away they are, the greater the expansion of the universe will be. At some point, the distant galaxy's speed plus the expansion of the intervening space will be greater than the speed of light - thus any new light from the galaxy will never get to earth.

The number of galaxies we can see is decreasing as the universe expands.

 

Ok, i see that, but any light that did reach us would still be measured at exactly the speed of light.

 

Space can expand faster than the speed of light and no one yet knows why, only that it does.

 

Definitely. Special relativity covers the speed of light, but general relativity includes expansion of the universe. It's certainly a weird thought, but there should be cases where photons aimed at Earth have reached the point where the expansion of space between the photon and earth is slower than light speed - so the photon will get here - even though the distance between earth and that distant galaxy is increasing at faster than light speed.

Of course, that doesn't help with our desire to travel at light speed. It just means that there are objects we "see" that are too far away for us even if we did travel at light speed.

If any physicist out there notices where I'm full of it, please do let me know!

 

You heard it here first.

 

No, it makes sense, and is completely dependent on the distance of that Galaxy from us.

Imagine two ends of a rope. If every foot of rope expands to two feet of rope in an hour, the speed at which the ends are moving away from each other would depend on the length of the rope. If the rope were 10 feet long, they would move away from each other at 10 feet/hr. If the rope were 20 feet long, they would move away from each other at 20 feet/hr.

 

Good clear description!

 

It would seem light is not effected in any way by expansion.

 

You assume physics as we now understand it is all there is, basically falling into the sound barrier analogy you present.

 

It might have been a little better if nightmare had been clearer about the difference between laws of physics and barriers of engineering.

 

Yet the two are intricately tied together by intellectual sentience. As physics and understanding come about engineering then uses the new knowledge almost immediately.

 

True.

I was considering flight as that was mentioned. It seems the root problem was that engineering didn't know how to create enough power within the size and weight limit. I would suggest engineers worked to apply known physics and materials science in improving engine efficiency, making progress through numerous experiments.

The Wright brothers had a reasonably adequate airframe before powered flight.

 

But the time it takes to travel between two points is.

 

I suppose then it must be that we just cannot note it.

 

Sure we do, we note redshift. We note that, the further away a galaxy, the faster it is moving from us. The demonstrates the expansion of space, which must be the case, if special relativity is true. I am not contradicting anything you said.

 

Yes, that little photon is whizzing along at the speed of light - oblivious to the rate of expansion of the universe.

I do have questions about this. For example, when objects are receding we see light as being red shifted. So, the cosmic background radiation is so red shifted that we detect it in the radio spectrum - not as light.

So, how does that fit in with our little model of a lonely photon, zipping across the universe toward us? I think this has to be looked at as a wave model rather than a particle model. Light can be particles but also waves - a duality, right?