- #36
PhanthomJay
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
- 7,201
- 529
I don't see how the rainbow gravity theory would affect light geodesics on cosmological scales (maybe to a minor degree close to massive objects), especially to this extent:IGBY International said:Excuse me for my ignorance. I have been referring to implications of Gravity's Rainbow which is a recently added experiment at CERN.
If you are not familiar with it then of course you would not understand my posts.
IGBY International said:Light circulates within creating a multitude of past "Light" objects that are observed as further and further away. Reflections, duplicates of our past existence.
Why would the edge of the seeable universe be the edge of the whole universe? Is the horizon the edge of the earth?lifeonmercury said:It's possible the edge of the observable universe is actually the edge of the entire universe. We can't see any further than 46 billion light years in any direction and really don't know for sure what's behind this horizon. However, the consensus is that we wouldn't find anything special out there.
IGBY International said:According to the general theory or relativity light bends. A universe is a closed system nothing gets out, nothing comes in. Light circulates within creating a multitude of past "Light" objects that are observed as further and further away. Reflections, duplicates of our past existence.
How does the gravity rainbow theory state that light circulates and gives us "duplicates of our past existence"? From my understanding, gravity rainbow theory states that gravity has different effects on different wavelengths of light and that the Big Bang never actually happened. What is the relation?IGBY International said:Excuse me for my ignorance. I have been referring to implications of Gravity's Rainbow which is a recently added experiment at CERN.
If you are not familiar with it then of course you would not understand my posts.
Jason R Carrico said:If I'm on the surface e of the balloon and look up, what do I see?
Algr said:Under the balloon analogy you can't look up because you are a two dimensional being on a universe expanding into the 3rd dimension. The real universe is expanding into a fourth spatial dimension (not time) that you can't see because you are three dimensional.
Grinkle said:Hmmm. It never occurred to me before that expansion might imply a 3d surface embedded in a 4d space. Does expansion imply a 4th spatial dimension, or is that carrying the balloon analogy further than is meaningful?
diogenesNY said:@Jason R Carrico, Grinkle, et al:
Have a look at the following article by Charles Lineweaver and Tamara Davis. "Misconceptions about the Big Bang." This was published in the March 2005 edition of Scientific American. It deals fairly directly with most of what is being kicked about here.
Here is a link to a copy of the article:
http://www.mso.anu.edu.au/~charley/papers/LineweaverDavisSciAm.pdf
Highly recommended.
diogenesNY
fencewalker said:in my not-so-humble opinion, if we could see a person looking thru a telescope in our direction, that person could not see us, but how our galaxy looked 13-14 billion years ago.
fencewalker said:since that person was alive at the 'beginning of the universe' the visible universe may have been that one galaxy. it wouldn't actually be the only galaxy, just the only one to shed enough light to see. light from other galaxies hasn't reached the viewer yet, so darkness in all directions would be seen.