sylas, by "rulers" I mean "by whatever means we use to determine distance".
From galaxy A to galaxy B can be shown to be increasing by an amount, over time, minus gravitational effects. That's a "ruler". Am I too naive to be in this discussion?
tfb
Wikipedia is not my idea of a source for ultimate truth. When space expands my ruler also expands. And the raisins and currants in my cake expand. Gravity will work against expansion, locally as appropriate. And even as my atoms expand, tempered by local gravity, I cannot be aware of my local...
A popular "Science" TV program said "The accelerating expansion of the universe does not apply to structures as small as the Solar System". Why not? Is there a boundary, marker, or distance that limits where the accelerated expansion begins?
Thanks from an humble pupil,
tfb
Red-shift not a cause? If our assumptions on red-shift interpretations are false, then it is a cause. If we abandoned red-shift data, then we'd have no reason to invent "dark energy". What am I missing? Thanks,
tfb
Thanks, Force 1. Inflation was almost instantaneous, and "done" unless it restarts or continues. My interest is in the acceleration of expansion. Isn't that dependant on what we believe to be Red Shift?
Gravity-wise, I guess we're S.O.L.
tfb
The Doppler principal leads us to "The Red Shift". We worship the purity and infallability of conclusions born of "The Red Shift". But many of our current, troublesome puzzles can be traced back to "The Red Shift", i.e. The Dark Energy squabble. Wouldn't it be an ironic hoot if we learned that...
Learned Gentlemen,
My Doctorate is in Medicine, so my questions and comments might be below you. Where can I ask questions and make comments about an issue in cosmology?
Thanks,
tfb