View Single Post
  #37  
Old April 18th 21, 04:07 PM posted to alt.astronomy
R Kym Horsell[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 111
Default Pyramids-How Were They Built and What Do They Serve - Extraterrestrial Knowledge

palsing wrote:
On Saturday, April 17, 2021 at 10:16:58 PM UTC-7, wrote:
palsing wrote:
On Friday, April 16, 2021 at 9:46:16 PM UTC-7, wrote:

So you're another one that claims the universe in infinte.
I'll put you down.

I have no idea if the universe is infinite or not. All I said is that Olber's Paradox has been refuted.

A paradox is not refuted. It is a paradox and "wrong" to start with.
A paradox is RESOLVED to show why it is wrong.

It seems you have not read anything I wrote in the past 3m
or of you did did not understand a word.

In an argument with a Hillbilly who claims the universe it
"obviously" infinite in time and space why would anyone bring
up Olbers Paradox?
Obviously to refute the claims the universe is infinite.
And equally obviously anyone that has been banging on about
the universe starting with a big bang ~13 bn years back is
quite aware how Olber's paradox was supposedly "recently refuted".
You are just making a fool of yourself.
--
, 17 Apr 2021]
You know you're a hillbilly if #45:
You didn't believe a paradox was "recently proved incorrect".

So, you are unable to provide evidence for your claim that the universe is not infinite. Got it.


This from someone that reverses if/then. Lame.

Olber posits an "if X then Y". That was maybe the last time X included
an "open and shut" assumption of an infinite universe. If X is false
then nothing is said about Y. If Y is true it shows nothing about X --
that's a fallacy of inverted-if.

The "light" from the CMB anyway can't be mistaken for the "light" in
Olbers Paradox. The CMB doesn't come from stars scatted between here
and the far distance -- it comes from a dark wall about 50 GY distant.
OP wants more than just any old kind of radiation -- it talks about
light from an approx uniform distribution of stars. Given science in
the mid 18th cent didn't recognize galaxies or even meteorites OP
represents a simplified but reasonable world view.

The simple math is if the universe is infinite then an inverse square
law don't save you -- the stars visible at 1000 LY in a patch of sky
shines with the same amount of light as the same size patch of stars
2000 LY away, 1 mn LY away, 1 bn LY away, etc. The number of stars at
distance R scales as R^2 and that cancels out the inverse square of
the individual point sources. A patch of sky is not a point source.
You integrate up the radiation directed your way from distance 0 to
infinity (don't forget to allow for lensing of light around nearer
stars -- they don't end up blocking totally any starlight coming from
behind) and you get a big number even from a small patch of sky, let
alone the whole celestial sphere.(*)

Infinite universes have other logical problems. These problems don't
guarantee an infinite universe doesn't exist. It just makes it unlikely.

We see out to 50 GLY which we calculate takes us about 13 GY into the
past. Beyond the blank wall we can see out there is calculated to be
another 1 GY worth of space -- the Dark Age -- before you reach the
tiny region that was the big bang. How much space in LY is back there
is up for debate. Considering the BB stretched the space we can see
in front "only" about 4-fold it's not likely an infinite amount.

[other stuff about infinities]

(*) My calc gets 13,000 sun's worth of light hitting Earth 24/7.
About 13 MW/m2. With that kind of pressure it might be impossible
for dust clouds or planets to form.