Space Is Expanding

Well the !@#$%^&* thing bounced again. The freaking GG "times out" and
bounces it. Gonna try it as a draft and copy it here, and see if that
works.

On Mar 25, 1:23 am, "Painius" wrote:

It is not the
least bit easy to envision any change in the nature
of time.

But what about the very real and proven variations in the 'tick of
time' observed in the Shapiro effect, the Pound-Rebka experiment, the
precession of Mercury's orbit, etc.?
oc

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

I've given this a lot of thought, and i guess it's difficult
for me to see how we can have it both ways. I mean,
there is the measured velocity change for example, in
the Shapiro effect. However, you say above that it is
variation in the "tick of time". From the simplest point
of view, there is distance, time, and rate of speed. If
distance is constant, and velocity is decreased, then
time must increase. Is this what you're contending?

The clock rate or 'tick of time' must decrease concomitantly (or
covariantly) with lightspeed. Remember that space also expands
volumetrically with thinning density. F'rinstance, looking Sun-ward
from our FoR here at Earth, space *expands*, stretching, as it
accelerates Sun-ward. At Mercury's orbit, space is expanded and
therefore less dense than here at Earth. So at Mercury's orbit, the
clock rate is slower, lightspeed is lower, and we see the artifacts in
the Shapiro effect and Mercury's precessing orbit. And all the while,
c and the clock rate are normal 'there' locally just as they are
constant 'here' locally.

Conversely, looking out in the 'other direction' from Earth to the
outer fringes of the Sun's gravity well, space is denser, more
'compactified' volumetrically, and lightspeed and clock rate are
higher than here at Earth. And we see artifacts in the Pioneer
spacecraft lagging behind where they 'should be'. And all the while, c
and the clock rate are normal 'there' locally just as they are normal
'here' locally.

Remember that the variable `volume` of space is part of the equation
along with density, lightspeed, and clock rate.

Now extrapolate back to the farthest limit of visibility such as where
the Hubble Ultra Deep Field is now able to see. At such extreme
distances, closer in to the BB event, there's what Gordon Wolter
called the 'cosmological density gradient', climbing exponentially the
further back you look. 'Playing the tape backwards', space will
concomitantly *decrease in volume* while lightspeed and clock rate
increase concomitantly with density. And all the while, c and the
clock rate are normal 'there' locally just as they are normal 'here'
locally.

And what might we see as artifacts of the cosmological density
gradient? Most prominently, we would see light from the earliest
epochs *losing amplitude*, dimming, as it propagates from that denser
space into 'our' less-dense space. We would see the 'standard candles'
of luminosity, 1a supernovae, appearing dimmer than they 'should be'..
exactly as is observed.

And if we are under the Standard Model which recognizes no
cosmological density gradient, we would interpret the anomalous
dimming as "ever-accelerating expansion" of the universe.

So the question of whether space is a universally-isotropic 'Nothing'
or a very real 'Something' full of density gradients has enormous
bearing on the biggest questions in cosmology.. like the ultimate fate
of the universe.
oc

On Mar 26, 10:58*am, jughead wrote:
Well the !@#$%^&* thing bounced again. The freaking GG "times out" and
bounces it. Gonna try it as a draft and copy it here, and see if that
works.


When it times out on me, usually just clicking on "send" a second time
submits it. However to be safe, if I've spent a long time on a post,
I simply copy the whole thing onto my scratch pad before sending.
That way if it doesn't get sent, it is easy to copy it right back onto
a new post.

Double-A

On Mar 26, 11:11*am, Double-A wrote:

When it times out on me, usually just clicking on "send" a second time
submits it. *However to be safe, if I've spent a long time on a post,
I simply copy the whole thing onto my scratch pad before sending.
That way if it doesn't get sent, it is easy to copy it right back onto
a new post.

Yeah, in addition to 'timing out', the problem also seems to be
related to there being a s**tload of extraneous NGs in the address
header. When they are knocked out, the damn thing refuses to send.
oc

On Mar 26, 6:11*pm, jughead wrote:
On Mar 26, 11:11*am, Double-A wrote:

When it times out on me, usually just clicking on "send" a second time
submits it. *However to be safe, if I've spent a long time on a post,
I simply copy the whole thing onto my scratch pad before sending.
That way if it doesn't get sent, it is easy to copy it right back onto
a new post.

Yeah, in addition to 'timing out', the problem also seems to be
related to there being a s**tload of extraneous NGs in the address
header. When they are knocked out, the damn thing refuses to send.
oc


I haven't had that problem, however some newsgroups Google won't send
to and have to be removed before Google will accept the post.

Double-A