Rascal .... please be patient with me. I'm getting to a point I thought of while thinking on your theory over recent weeks
Quote:
Originally Posted by RascalPuff  |
I have perused, some parts in depth, others read assiduously.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RascalPuff Greg: We do observe matter in a state of constantly accelerating expansion, we simply don't recognize it, because everything is expanding proportionately. |
Why, if both expand proportionatley, do we only
recognise space expanding, but not matter.? Logic would dictate that we
recognise both or neither, but not one or the other only ???
Quote:
Originally Posted by RascalPuff On the other hand, every time you drop something the test object is not moving from A to B... B is accelerating upward to overtake and strike A, generating the illusion that A is moving 'downward', instead of your entire frame of reference moving upward... |
I understand this point as well as the geodesic curves, no problem
Rascal, this is the point I thought of the other night. Perhaps it sounds stupid and I am hesitant to voice it, but here goes.
Your EinsteinGroupie pages and other postings all support your theory that everything is expanding. Good. In other words the conclusion drawn is supported by the facts you provide.
But the facts you supply can also be used to draw another conclusion. I'm not saying this is right or wrong, its certainly a bit crazy, but it is not ruled out by your evidence provided. At least, I can't find a loophole, perhaps you can.
If the reverse was happening, matter was compressing, or the opposite of expanding, the geodesics remain the same, the measurements remain the same, our recognition of events remain the same.
Therefore if both outcomes can be deduced from your supporting evidence then surely a third conclusion can be drawn,
Nothing is changing ! Of course this is not meant literally, just that it is not ruled out.
What argument, or debating point, or idea can you give me that will only allow for one of these outcomes and will rule out the other two.
Rascal, I haven't really thought this through as I would normally do, and it well may be that I have missed something glaringly obvious. But the Maths that I checked describe acceleration and deceleration as the same. The Maths does not differentate between these two, only our perception does.
cool bananas .... greg
Could it be that we are in a contracting Universe, getting denser in proportion daily ... LOL
Perhaps we should have debated this in Roberts Monthly theme forum ??