Live data from Hacker News

The universe is expanding faster than expected

quantamagazine.org

31–40 of 242 posts

Re: The universe is expanding faster than expected

#31
post #24
post #19

One thing that really frustrates me about cosmology, or at least popular science reporting and books, is a particular kind of lack of intellectual rigor. Specifically, even as a layman, it's clear that observation and model are being conflated. Cosmology is a science in the broadest sense of being a field of human knowledge, but it isn't a science the way that, for example, physics is. It would better be described as…

No, you are absolutely wrong here. But before I explain why I need to ask a question: are you by chance a young-earth creationist? Because your rhetoric here is very similar to that employed by YECs. (The reason I ask is that my explanation is going to be different if you are not a YEC than if you are.)

I'm engaging in dialectic, not rhetoric. I don't believe rhetoric has a place on this site, at least not from me.

Since this is a site dedicated to intellectual curiosity, why don't you please present me with both?

Re: The universe is expanding faster than expected

#32
post #13
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry too much about it. In the end, everything will be nearly 0k.

The worry is that not only will we be utterly destroyed, but that the destruction will be so thorough it will blow backward through time erasing all events that ever happened and making it so that we never even lived. That means everything we experience right now didn’t happen, we are just seeing a probability of what could happen but didn’t because it’s all destroyed. These lives mean nothing.

"Everything we experience right now, didn't happen, we are just seeing" - Who exactly is seeing?

Re: The universe is expanding faster than expected

#33
post #13
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry too much about it. In the end, everything will be nearly 0k.

The worry is that not only will we be utterly destroyed, but that the destruction will be so thorough it will blow backward through time erasing all events that ever happened and making it so that we never even lived. That means everything we experience right now didn’t happen, we are just seeing a probability of what could happen but didn’t because it’s all destroyed. These lives mean nothing.

It seems like in that case there isn't much to worry about then :)

Re: The universe is expanding faster than expected

#35
A few years ago, a published article suggested an alternative to the universe expanding is increasing mass. Older objects increase their mass and therefore are red shifted. Why is this alternative plausible theory recieving such little attention?

Edit: changed mass decay to increase in mass. I misremembered the theory.

Re: The universe is expanding faster than expected

#36

Time runs slower when you're young; but then as you age there's less time in each day. Perhaps it's the same for everything else that experiences time, from us to galaxies and universes.

This is because information in your brain is constrained by physics. It takes tangible time for signals to travel between neurons. When you're young, you're small, and the distances are shorter. As you age, you grow in size, and the signal length grows also. Thus as you grow you literally think slower; though hopefully, more effectively (wisdom). Your perception of time changes accordingly.

Re: The universe is expanding faster than expected

#37
post #25
post #19

One thing that really frustrates me about cosmology, or at least popular science reporting and books, is a particular kind of lack of intellectual rigor. Specifically, even as a layman, it's clear that observation and model are being conflated. Cosmology is a science in the broadest sense of being a field of human knowledge, but it isn't a science the way that, for example, physics is. It would better be described as…

Wasn't there a time, not so long ago in fact (pre-1920's), where almost all your beloved physics models, beside Netwonian gravities, were wrong as well? So Astronomy, as a "hard science", is around 100 years behind...what's the big deal with that?

newton was a bit wrong and we are still a bit wrong. where wrong means our models of reality are imperfect.

Re: The universe is expanding faster than expected

#38
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate your optimism. I tend to be optimistic about the future myself. But there is no law of the universe that everything will work out ok. Only if we make the right decisions as a species and we don't get unlucky. I'm quite apprehensive that the great filter lies ahead - that technology accelerates too rapidly compared to our wisdom and we end up nearly destroying ourselves. We're getting the ability to progr…

I believe the OP said 0K, not OK. There may not be a universal law which says everything will be OK, but there is one which says everything will be 0K in the end.

Ah, I get it now. It's hard to see the difference!

Re: The universe is expanding faster than expected

#39

Time runs slower when you're young; but then as you age there's less time in each day. Perhaps it's the same for everything else that experiences time, from us to galaxies and universes.

This is because information in your brain is constrained by physics. It takes tangible time for signals to travel between neurons. When you're young, you're small, and the distances are shorter. As you age, you grow in size, and the signal length grows also. Thus as you grow you literally think slower; though hopefully, more effectively (wisdom). Your perception of time changes accordingly.

Yes that's an interesting aspect that I hadn't thought of. I do agree with the wisdom part. ;)

I also like to consider the experience of time in relation to total life lived.

e.g. A month to a five year-old is the equivalent of a year to a 60 year-old.

So as we experience more time, we feel that time passes more quickly. Although I sure hope there is a plateau to it as we get older.

Re: The universe is expanding faster than expected

#40

A few years ago, a published article suggested an alternative to the universe expanding is increasing mass. Older objects increase their mass and therefore are red shifted. Why is this alternative plausible theory recieving such little attention? Edit: changed mass decay to increase in mass. I misremembered the theory.

I would love to hear someone talk about this actually as it has been my pet theory for the last 15 years since high school physics.

My reasoning was p = mv. m drops (through various processes in a star emitting energi==mass) and since p is constant, v increases.

Probably totally naive, but it is just a thought which has stuck around with me.

Post reply on HN