Scribe2b wrote::

so... we see fossil light.
a vast array of billions of galaxies and all the rest.
ancient light reveals millions or billions of images of what was.

but what about NOW?

how do we know that, for instance, andromeda is still there?
how do we know that it hasnt exploded and the first tremors of a tidal wave of
energy arent headed this way?

rather than the most brilliant informed assumptions, i am asking how do we know
about NOW?
are there concrete means of calculation?
means of sensing reality beyond waiting for the lightspeed messabes to arrive?

most people seem to rationalize--- best-guessing gropes for generalizations
based upon solar system objects or localized phenomena--- a visibility within
nanoseconds, or hopeful intrapolations to support probability, etc.

but...
can we prove--- without assumptions or the most imformed guessing--- that
remote objects whose ancient ghost images we observe--- exist NOW???


It would be nice to have instantaneous knowledge of what's out there
NOW, but the limited speed of light, though it bars us from knowing
NOW, does give us a wider window on the universe. Without it we would
not be able to see events that happened billions of years ago. Our
view of the universe, limited to NOW, might be much less rich than it
is, er... now.

Of course, maybe things going on out there NOW have suddenly started
to pick up and the NOW Universe is much richer in events than it has
been in the past. Only, we are prevented from knowing this because we
haven't gotten the news yet. This doesn't seem likely.

It would be nice to have instantaneous information from the far flung
universe as well as being able to retain our stretched-out window on
the past. But one of the ruling principles of the universe seems to be
that you can't have it all. So, putting it to a vote, which would you
rather have: instantaneous news from the edge of a possibly much
bigger universe or stale news from a possibly much more varied past?

Of course, these considerations are apart from the grosser effects of
an infinite light speed. What would be the effects of instantaneous
light transmission on the normal mechanical and chemical processes of
our world?

If all the gamma rays, x-rays, etc. of the NOW universe were delivered
to us instantly would we be getting a larger (or smaller) dose than we
do now, having them arrive from many events spread out in the past?
Would the skies be brighter in an instantaneous lightspeed universe or
dimmer? More variable? Guess it depends on the "true" size of the
universe. (Anyone have an idea on what size an instantaneous
lightspeed universe would need to be in order to deliver to us the
amount of photons we are currently receiving from our time-delayed
universe? Guess it depends on the rate of stellar processes now vs.
the past.)

Not to mention the effects of instantaneous light speed on sub-atomic
processes (because I don't have a clue). That might be a whole nuther
can of worms.

--
kandr