So how fast are we actually moving?

[ray b]

No. This is one thing that cannot be. Since there is no frame of reference external to the universe, there can be no movement or rotation of it.


:sigh: The fact that you do not see the need for things does not mean the need is not there.



You do realize that in a one year time frame, the Earth returns to its original location. So, the distance traveled is zero.

Thus, the only relevant movement left is the sun's movement around the galaxy. The sun is supposed to make one orbit of the galaxy in about 260 million years, so that's 360 / 260,000,000 = 1.4x10^-6 degrees.

first not only can the univerce spin it could be in proper motion too
and while we can't tell if it is happening
that does not mean it can't happen
as many things we thought could not happen
have been later proved true

see you own second bit
we may need or want many things that have no proof
but the lack of data does not mean something is not possible

in a year the Earth does NOT return to the very same point in space/time
it's track would look more like a bent cork screw then a simple circle
that was the point of this thread
as far more then the Earth orbit around the sun and the sun's motion
are factors in the question of our speed in space

 

[russ_watters]

first not only can the univerce spin it could be in proper motion too
and while we can't tell if it is happening
that does not mean it can't happen
as many things we thought could not happen
have been later proved true
see you own second bit
we may need or want many things that have no proof
but the lack of data does not mean something is not possible

You're misunderstanding the ideas of "can" and "can't" as they relate to science. When someone says in science something "can't" be done, that generally means it is specifically forbidden by the laws of science. The way you use the word, it implies ignorance: that we don't know/don't have any information one way or the other. But that just isn't the case here.

By definition, the universe is everything there is and even if the universe is finite, there exists no possible reference for measuring the motion you suggest. It is a relatively simple matter of geometry: By definition, motion is measured between two objects. You can't measure a distance/motion in a 3d space unless you have two points to measure between in that 3d space. This hypothetical 'outside' to the universe that you are speculating about does not provide that. You're trying to drive from New York to the Moon.

You've made an assertion here, one that I'm quite certain can't be proven and is actually forbidden by the laws of physics, but that doesn't mean the burden doesn't still exist: you need to explain and substantiate how the universe could spin or be in proper motion. Just asserting it is not enough/isn't allowed.

[edit] And while we're at it, you asserted that "many things we thought could not happen have been later proved true". In context relevant to this thread, you will have quite a bit of difficulty substantiating that as well. There have not been a lot of theories in science that have been just flat wrong because the process of science makes such a thing largely impossible. In order to be a theory, an idea must already be able to explain evidence. As such, it can't be completely wrong.

For example, when GR replaced Newton's theory of gravity, it could not be said that Newton's gravity was completely wrong. It wasn't, isn't and won't ever be.

in a year the Earth does NOT return to the very same point in space/time
it's track would look more like a bent cork screw then a simple circle
that was the point of this thread
as far more then the Earth orbit around the sun and the sun's motion
are factors in the question of our speed in space

Also, you are definitely moving the goalposts here, as others have suggested. In that quote right there, you said "our speed through space". Space is what the universe is "made of". So this pseudophilosophical nonsense about the universe moving is quite another matter altogether, not at all related to "our speed in space", which, as others have said, has been quite adequately answered.

 

[ray b]

yes but at one time the Earth was ''known'' to be fixed
and all the other stuff was thought to move around the fixed earth

we learned that was not true
but not before lots of effort was put into epicycles
not to go into crystal spears or pillars to hold up the earth
or other ideas long ago dropped

who knows what the future may bring
but already there is talk of a multiverse in which our everything
is but a small part of the true system
now I said we currently can not prove any of that
but that is not the same as saying something can not ever be known

 

[Integral]

yes but at one time the Earth was ''known'' to be fixed
and all the other stuff was thought to move around the fixed earth

we learned that was not true
but not before lots of effort was put into epicycles
not to go into crystal spears or pillars to hold up the earth
or other ideas long ago dropped

These notions were not the result of modern scientific method. So they are irrelevant to this discussion. Which IS about modern scientific method.

who knows what the future may bring
but already there is talk of a multiverse in which our everything
is but a small part of the true system
now I said we currently can not prove any of that
but that is not the same as saying something can not ever be known

We can only work with what we know. Any speculation about what the future will bring is just that speculation. Note that we have rules against speculative posts on these forums. I think it is getting close to lock time for this thread.

 

[ray b]

the speculative post was post was not my post
dave posted the universe can NOT move
we have no way to know that is my point
not that it does or doesNOT but that anyone could say it canNOT
the universe has proven to be stranger then we think
so let's not set unproven limits on it
even if with current teck we can not say what's happening

what ever we now claim to know
will looks as silly as the fixed Earth in a few thousand years

I am willing to drop unproven motions
so let's get back to the unanswered question
DIRECTION on the X Y & Z plot with X on our current path and Z near north
where are we going
and how far apart are the vectors of the sun galaxy and local group's motions

 

[Integral]

Clearly you have not learned anything from this thread. There is no point in continuing.