Speed of light

[makc]

there's no way in that case to distinguish between a photon of zero energy, and the simple absence of the photon

Another crazy idea on this one what if we run towards the black hole very fast, shouldnt we see those zero energy photons effectively blue-shifted back to non-zero, vs seing nothing at all if there are no photons?

[Qev]

there's no way in that case to distinguish between a photon of zero energy, and the simple absence of the photon

Another crazy idea on this one what if we run towards the black hole very fast, shouldnt we see those zero energy photons effectively blue-shifted back to non-zero, vs seing nothing at all if there are no photons?

Wouldn't you have to run at infinite speed (or at least at c), though?

[Qev]

Wow! Earth really IS at the centre of the universe after all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You're always at the center of the universe, though.

[aristarchusinexile]

Wow! Earth really IS at the centre of the universe after all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You're always at the center of the universe, though.

Only if the universe is infinite .. and the seeming fact that two points separated by googolplexes of googolplexes to the power of googolplex of light years are each at the centre of infinity poses certain perplexing questions to my mind which I must abandon the pondering of until I have a drink of something which dulls the senses.

[makc]

that would be so, if we were up to blue-shift "real" zero frequency (by multiplying it by infinite factor). but in this case, zero frequency supposed to be merely consequence of our specific position in 4D relative to black hole; it seems, therefore, that by changing this position, we could expect to see reversed effect.

[Chris Peterson]

You're always at the center of the universe, though. :)

Only if the universe is infinite ..

There is no need at all for an infinite universe in order for every point to be considered the center in three dimensions.

[neufer]

Wow! Earth really IS at the centre of the universe after all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You're always at the center of the universe, though.

kentein/cento : prick

"It is believed that Centaurs arose from a misinterpretation of horse and riders which seems to explain the origin of the name, Centaurus, -cento meaning 'to goad or prick' and -tauros meaning 'bull', which implies they were cattle herders" . Greek kenteo means to goad, urge on, drive on, kenteo-tauros, 'goad a bull', 'to prick a bull'. Centaurs had a similar occupation to modern cowboys, rounding up herds of cattle while on horseback, cowboys were also called cowpokes implying goading or pricking. The South Americans have gauchos. Greek kenteo comes from the Indo-European root *kent- 'To prick, jab'. Derivatives: center, centre, eccentric ('out of the center'), -centric, concentrate, concentric, (these words from Greek kentein, to prick, kentron 'needle'). Suffixed form *kent-to-; cestus¹ (a woman's belt or girdle, especially as worn in ancient Greece, from Greek kestos, belt, girdle).

[BMAONE23]

Neufer,
Ever consider going on Jeopardy???

[neufer]

Neufer,
Ever consider going on Jeopardy???

No, but thanks. 8)

I freeze up on the answers/questions just sitting on the couch.

[BMAONE23]

Neufer,
Ever consider going on Jeopardy???

No, but thanks. 8)

I freeze up on the answers/questions just sitting on the couch.

Perhaps you need a warmer couch???

[makc]

old but good news:

"What the gravity-agenda scientists need to realize is that 'gravity waves' and 'gravitons' are just secular words for 'God can do whatever He wants.'"

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39512

[bystander]

I hadn't seen this. Was this for real or was someone making fun of ID? as IF. You never can tell with the Onion. Sometimes they just report the ridiculous, sometimes they create it.

Intelligent Falling (IF)

Of course, Isaac Newton himself argued for interference by an intelligent agent.

To your second query I answer that the motions which the planets now have could not spring from any natural cause alone but were impressed by an intelligent agent.

[aristarchusinexile]

Humility is a wonderful thing. (I wish I had some.) Scientists who think they know it all will perhaps find cause to think again through http://technology.sympatico.msn.ca/News ... &date=True .. in which the discovery of 50 new species of inhabitants in one tiny corner of planet Earth is announced. If we're still finding brand new life forms on Earth in such large numbers in one small locality, what do we really know about things seen and unseen 'out there' beyond our atmosphere, or indeed, on this side of our atmosphere?

[aristarchusinexile]

"Intelligent Falling" ? I propose an "Intelligent Holding Up" (not of banks or corner stores, either, as that wouldn't be intelligent or) smart, unless the banks were riverbanks in Fargo.)

[aristarchusinexile]

You're always at the center of the universe, though.

Only if the universe is infinite ..

There is no need at all for an infinite universe in order for every point to be considered the center in three dimensions.

Please explain your statement, Chris; because according to my basic understanding of simple geometry the three dimensions are length, height, width; and only one point in the centre of a cardboard box or balloon can be considered their centre.

[aristarchusinexile]

Another crazy idea on this one what if we run towards the black hole very fast, shouldnt we see those zero energy photons effectively blue-shifted back to non-zero, vs seing nothing at all if there are no photons?

It seems to me that would only happen if our running towards the photons added energy to the photon(?)

It is an interesting question whether a non-zero energy photon exists. Might it revert to a quantum fluctuation?

[Chris Peterson]

There is no need at all for an infinite universe in order for every point to be considered the center in three dimensions.

Please explain your statement, Chris; because according to my basic understanding of simple geometry the three dimensions are length, height, width; and only one point in the centre of a cardboard box or balloon can be considered their centre.

It's been discussed many times here. Mathematically, and physically, any point on the N-dimensional surface of a (N+1)-dimensional manifold can be considered the N-dimensional center. Again, the easiest way to visualize this is by considering the surface of a balloon. This is a 2D surface on a 3D manifold, and by any reasonable definition of 2D center, any point on that surface is central to every other.

The Universe is a 4D structure (you left out time). The three spatial dimensions we observe are a N-1 surface on the Universe, and any 3D point is central.

[bystander]

"Intelligent Falling" ? I propose an "Intelligent Holding Up"

I suppose this is your anti-gravity??

[aristarchusinexile]

There is no need at all for an infinite universe in order for every point to be considered the center in three dimensions.

Please explain your statement, Chris; because according to my basic understanding of simple geometry the three dimensions are length, height, width; and only one point in the centre of a cardboard box or balloon can be considered their centre.

It's been discussed many times here. Mathematically, and physically, any point on the N-dimensional surface of a (N+1)-dimensional manifold can be considered the N-dimensional center. Again, the easiest way to visualize this is by considering the surface of a balloon. This is a 2D surface on a 3D manifold, and by any reasonable definition of 2D center, any point on that surface is central to every other.

The Universe is a 4D structure (you left out time). The three spatial dimensions we observe are a N-1 surface on the Universe, and any 3D point is central.

I'm not familiar with your term "N-1". I'll do a Wiki search, but until then it's easy for me to understand any point on the surface of the balloon as being the centre of the surface. However, your 3D plus Time Spacetime is (only) theoretical, with some phsicists saying time has two or more dimensions, and space four or more spacial dimensions. Personally, I hold space and time to be separate, although interacting with each other, so I will have to either go with basic 3D geometry with its one centre , or consider the possibility that with multiple space and time dimensions we can be in two or more places, towards infinite, of the universe at the same 'instant'. According to some physicists, it is also possible to be at any point in time. Vast possibilities, restricted only by ?

[aristarchusinexile]

Chris, am I correct in thinking that your N-1 only applies to a flat universe?

Perhaps next winter I'll study math, although I really can't see any logic in the math you describe, so it would be difficult for me to overcome that obstacle, and as Relativity itself is beginning to be seriously questioned, because of seeming reality of non-locality, which I see as totally logical, I may wait for the big, fresh brains to come up with some answers my tired brain can understand.

[Chris Peterson]

Chris, am I correct in thinking that your N-1 only applies to a flat universe?

No, the shape of the Universe doesn't matter in this respect. It does matter for determining if all 3D points are equidistant or not from the higher order center, however.

[Chris Peterson]

However, your 3D plus Time Spacetime is (only) theoretical, with some phsicists saying time has two or more dimensions, and space four or more spacial dimensions.

What isn't theoretical? But the 4D nature of the Universe, which is fundamental to GR, is one of the best supported theories we have. There are other theories that invoke additional dimensions, but these are normally on a quantum scale, not a cosmological scale. You won't find many physicists who disagree that spacetime is integral to understanding the structure of the Universe.

[aristarchusinexile]

"From the position of a millwright in a steel mill on Pittsburgh's South Side, with little formal education, John A. Brashear became one of the most successful producers of telescopes and precision scientific instruments in the world. Brashear telescopes are still in use, worldwide, including two in public observatories in the Pittsburgh area: 11-inch Brashear Refractor at the Nicholas E. Wagman Observatory, operated by the Amateur Astronomers' Association of Pittsburgh[originally commissioned by Andrew Carnegie, so students in his Carnegie Technical Schools(now, Carnegie-Mellon University) could see Halley's Comet in 1910], and 4-inch Brashear Refractor at the Henry Buhl, Jr. Planetarium and Observatory of The Carnegie Science Center[originally, donated to The Buhl Planetarium and Institute of Popular Science in 1972].

John Brashear served as Acting Director of Pittsburgh's Allegheny Observatory(then located on the campus of the Western University of Pennsylvania on Old Observatory Hill in Allegheny City, Pa., prior to the University's planned move to the Oakland section of Pittsburgh; with annexation to the City of Pittsburgh in 1907, Allegheny City became Pittsburgh's North Side) and, almost singlehandedly, raised the funds to build the three-dome Observatory building which exists today. He was also Acting Chancellor of the Western University of Pennsylvania(now, the University of Pittsburgh) and served on the Board of Directors of Carnegie Institute and the Carnegie Technical Schools(now Carnegie-Mellon University). He associated with many of Pittsburgh's captains of industry including Andrew Carnegie, Henry Clay Frick, George Westinghouse, William Thaw, and Henry Phipps.

With his love of people, particularly children, most Pittsburghers knew him as "Uncle John." The cremated remains of John Brashear, and his wife Phoebe, lie in a special crypt below the base of one of the telescopes Brashear's company produced for the Allegheny Observatory. From the poem, "The Old Astronomer to His Pupil," by Sarah Williams, which both Brashears loved, the epitaph on their spaces read:

We have loved the stars too fondly to be fearful of the night."

Oops - almost forgot the credits: Authored By Glenn A. Walsh *** Sponsored By Friends of the Zeiss http://johnbrashear.tripod.com/

[aristarchusinexile]

"Intelligent Falling" ? I propose an "Intelligent Holding Up"

I suppose this is your anti-gravity??

I suppose yours is intelligent humour with a spiritual twist (?)

[aristarchusinexile]

However, your 3D plus Time Spacetime is (only) theoretical, with some phsicists saying time has two or more dimensions, and space four or more spacial dimensions.

What isn't theoretical? But the 4D nature of the Universe, which is fundamental to GR, is one of the best supported theories we have. There are other theories that invoke additional dimensions, but these are normally on a quantum scale, not a cosmological scale. You won't find many physicists who disagree that spacetime is integral to understanding the structure of the Universe.

From what I've read lately Relativity may be on its way out .. again .. due to non-locality.

My computer time is up .. drat!