The discussion revolves around the hypothetical scenario of a bowling ball remaining stationary in an expanding universe, with a focus on the implications of motion and reference frames in the context of general relativity. The scope includes conceptual clarifications and theoretical considerations regarding motion and reference points in cosmology.
Participants express differing views on the concept of being "stationary" in an expanding universe, with some emphasizing the relativity of motion and others questioning the possibility of a true state of rest. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these perspectives on the original question.
The discussion highlights the complexity of defining motion and rest in the context of general relativity and cosmology, with participants acknowledging the dependence on chosen reference frames and the absence of absolute motion.
Absolutely - you can use anything you want. I prefer to always define myself as stationary. It's usually easier that way. And it makes me feel special!DARKSYDE said:I believe we could use lots of things in the universe for reference. Pulsars, background microwave radiation, etc.
We know how fast our solar system is traveling with respect to some objects and vice versa: we know how fast they are traveling relative to us. Either can be considered moving or stationary and neither is an absolute or "priveleged" selection. All - ALL motion is relative.and as far as stationary, i do mean relative to our motion. we do know how fast our solar system is traveling as well as our galaxy.