Recent content by Hugh de Launay

Thanks for your input. I will read that article.

This post is a series of responses to Peter Donis's observations in post #36. I became aware of my misstatement of "tracks the photon" last night and planed to edit a correction into post #35 (which has been accomplished). Peter Donis caught the error also. Yes, the Eulerian observer does not...

Even though it is since Nov. 2, 2018 you posted your comments, I am now responding in case you are still interested. At first I did not understand most of your statements, but I think I understand them now after a little studying, so I will restate what I think you said in my own words. (1)...

Okay. I see that the answer to my question is no. Cosmology will not deal with a question that refers to events that are not integrated within the accepted models of the universe, and the increment (encroachment) in size of the universe has the status of not taking place within the...

I understand the expansion of the universe is a change of the scale factor in the metric, and that because of this the visible universe has a radius greater than the age of the universe in light years. I wanted to avoid bringing that up, but now I see I have to. The universe expands, so it...

Assuming a speed of light expansion, the increment would be the speed of light multiplied by your choice of a length of time. I had in mind a small amount of time like a microsecond or less.

{Reference: Wikipedia's Friedmann-Lemaitre-Robertson-Walker (FLRW) Metric article)} The FLRW (1935) mathematical model of the universe is the one most used by cosmologists. It is differentiable, which means it is based on sound, consistent, mathematical formulations. (The Lambda-CDM model is...

This is true if the observer begins and ends his/her trip inside our universe. Beyond being philosophical, what would an observer outside our universe observe about our universe? -- assuming some sense can be made of such a question.

Thanks a lot for your explanation. Is such an abstraction applied to the "edge" (if any) of our universe?

What do you think I meant by "edge" and by "universe" and by "no edge"? How complicated do you want to get?

I accept your correction because I have not studied this kind of topology -- unless you mean curved surfaces that can be made to be unlimited in two dimensions. May I trouble you for an explanation or a reference?

-- in my humble opinion-- When we choose to believe in an idea that states the the nature of what existed before the big bang, or chose to believe in an idea of what exists beyond the edge (if any) of our universe (the one we live in), these choices are philosophical. Physics laws can...

You are right in your assessment, that I can see now. I believe I have projected pictures into the concepts I was reading about in books of physics which did not belong there. I plan to fix this during 2019. This I will do and correct in the coming year. I will take your advice and work on...

I can see that you are guessing correctly what I had in mind. I can see from what you said that what I had in mind was wrong. You are right by suggesting I learn to find a realistic model of the EM field's action. I will do that in the coming year. Thanks for your comments and good advise.

It seems to me that if what is in the scenario is the case, gravity might be the cause of the difference. If so, it would be an interesting relation between fundamental particles and gravity. How you would measure such a distance would likely require a new technology. I had in mind the...