I reserve the right to recant this position I am about to state, as it's just a thought and have not actually done the math on paper to know that I haven't made some blunder. I have not done so because I tweaked my neck moving furniture. I'm currently in pain, but when an idea hits, you gotta write it down or it gets twisted in with dinner and other wants. Plus I need other eyes and brains to point out my obvious oversights.
Space at time zero is a singularity. At time t > 0 we have various expanse between light sources in proportion to t.
Now move just 1-millionth of a second past 0 and whatever earth was then, the SPOT that earth exists in right now is a linear travel line. It starts where it came from and has arrived here. Yes I know that the earth was formless and void, but all the stuff that would be the earth started at some point, and ended up here.
Now lets take the furthest star from earth, which would have to be the star that is in opposite but exact travel line from earth. Earth went left, that other star went right. Lets call this star Zeta-Centauri.
I'll deal with fast expansion in a second, but assuming the star travels polar opposite the earth along the same line of travel just in different directions, could we see the light from Zeta-C?
At 1/millionth of a second from BB, yes.
At 1/hundred-thousandth of a second, yes.
At 1 second, yes.
In fact there was a constant stream of light coming from Zeta-C from the big bang till now. and at no point has earth or any other point in the universe not been receiving light from Zeta-C since what was perpendicular to the Earth/Zeta-C travel line used to be the same spot, the singularity, and so all points in an all-points-expanding universe were recipients of Zeta-C's light for all time.
So what about the creation/formation of Zeta-C at a later date? I've never seen a star created or forming. We have gas clouds that are theorized to be a forming star...but our witnessing of "new" stars now. If you follow me further, it is more sensible that obstruction was the culprit, not the non-existence.
By the photon, we'd have constant stream of photons, so much so that Zeta-C would seem to be propelled by the photons itself. Think of it like a faucet of laminar flow, and the distance between end of the spicket, Zeta-C, and the bottom of the sink, Earth, are never out of contact. No imagine you lift the tap up 5 feet above the sink, did the water ever stop hitting the sink bottom? No. Only if the rate of rise in the tap exceeds the rate of flow of water.
Now what if we have a speed of departure between the 2 objects as being greater than the speed of light. Pretty sure Einstein proved that this wasn't possible, but lets just say that it were so. Light still moves at C, distance between E and Z increases at C+x. But the rest of the setup is the same.
Light from Zeta-C would still be intermittently hitting its target. The phenomenon that we'd see would be an oscillating light which should blink at rate of C/(C+x). In fact, only in a scenario where light from Zeta-C were being out ran by the departure rate...that is, when C/(C+x) = the length of the universe, only then would we not see blinking.
Now the reason why I bring this up is because Cosmologists use the distance of stars from earth to approximate the age of the universe. But it's a chasing of the tail.
IF Zeta-C is the maximal distance from earth, a universe length away, and we know that light travels at C, how many C's away is Zeta-C? If its 300-billion C's away then we say that earth is 300-billion years old. Or whatever the calculation is.
Instead we would be better served by our oscillating lights then we could take the oscillation rate, multiply the reciprocal by C that would give us the distance, then triangulate relative position between the directions some star Z is going with respects to earth. That would give you a rate of speed, then divide that rate of speed by C to find out how many C's of time have transpired. This likely also give you a center point of the universe.
There's just one problem. There are no blinking stars. Which means that for all stars, the departure rate between any observing point and any light source C/(C+x), "x" must be smaller than zero.
Therefore, there has been a constant stream of light from the source to this point in space since the dawn of time. Any "new" light sources are only new because of some cosmic disruption, something in the way.
Since we are within the range of some objects light, and speed doesn't exceed the speed of light...no blinking lights. Our observing position could have been the 1st iteration of some cosmic yo-yo phenomenon or it could have been the 20th iteration. Therefore we have no way of knowing how old the universe is...or isn't.
What about the doppler effect and red shift stuff.
Simple C/(C-x) = wave length of red light where light is red shifted.
C/(C-x) = wave length of blue light where light is shift blue.
No comments:
Post a Comment