/sci/ - Science & Math

>>14604837
c is how fast the Universe expands. time expansion implies space expansion. But there is also non-locality(descriptive relations instead of topological), thus we being able to move towards a goal without being selfless p-zombie automatons.

>>14604837
Be patient. We have some millions of years till we need to move out from Earth, or even the Solar system. Unless we fuck up.

>>14604851
>c is how fast the Universe expands
No it is not.
> time expansion implies space expansion.
That is so vague you are correct depending on how one chooses to interpret what you just said
>But there is also non-locality(descriptive relations instead of topological), thus we being able to move towards a goal without being selfless p-zombie automatons.
Huh?

>>14604864
we have 50 years at most to flatten the curve or we're doomed. please don't spread misinformation on /sci/ of all boards.

>>14604837
The real problem is the energy cost of accelerating objects near light speed. If you ignore this (and problems with collisions with space dust) then due to time dilation there is no speed limit for cosmological frame distance divided by the traveler's proper time.

>>14604837
The speed of light isn't real
Just accelerate bro
Lol

>>14604837

The speed of light is 1.

>its another homosexual comic book larper ftl thread

>>14604911
>- No it is not.
>then agrees with the second statement
Lmao, at least you bitched about it. Time is measured by oscillating change. Saying time expansion requires space expansion implies change in state requires more space relative to previous states. Non-Euclidian yet obvious within Relativity, correct? Tis why Einstein called it his "biggest blunder" to set the cosmological constant too low. Thus if one wants to shake their booty on tik tok for millions to see and then cry about abortion not being legally defended anymore, in other words if one wants to move at all, one needs space to expand. Expansion rate is what is setting the limit for movement.

>>14604851
>>14605736
Not him but space certainly doesn't expand at c.

>>14604837

Its worse than that. Not only you need exponentianilly more energy to reach C, but you are likely to get blown up by a random grain of dust.

>>14605755
Unlikely. On the other hand, very close to light speed travel exposes you to strong x-ray or gamma or stronger radiation.

>>14605749
Do you even know how to measure space expansion? How dark energy is calculated? etc?

>>14604837
just compress spacetime in front of you and you can move your spacetime wherever you want as fast as you can compress the spacetime around you.

>>14606325
I do. And not only is c the wrong value, it's also the wrong unit altogether.

>>14604911
>trying to interpret prime schizobabble
you must be extremely bored.

>>14604837
just add a turbo or nos retrd

>>14604837
I unironically believe that God wouldn't have made the universe so large without some mechanism that makes interstellar travel possible.

why would you make a theme park but give all the NPCs the ability to travel anywhere in the park?
you WILL stay in your allocated star system

>>14606545
You do? Go ahead and tell us, otherwise how do I know you aren't just using intuition without doing work

>>14605764
Automated Seed ships which turn in their decades long deacceleration phase into generation ships. You just need reliable artificial wombs and a way to indefinitely store sperm and egg cells. And of course robotic teachers and knowledge databases to educate and train those kids as they mature to become a crew and later settlers and generations of terraforming engineers. You wont even need to travel fast that way. I was reading this 60s eastern german novel called andymon describing such a mission. It was implied that each seed ship reaching its destination had its former crew building one or more of their own to spread humanity even further, and that the ship in the book did not even originate from earth. Heck, it was even suggested that it was built by humans from a long line of many ships before it which have been seeded onto other planets aeons ago before the andymon ship was even built. Earth and the sun might not even be relevant anymore in such timeframes since no ship had any records of its original origin.

this thread kinda makes me want to post about my rather unique interpretation of special relativity.

>>14606634
Why would I entertain you? It's you who's convinced that expansion of space is expressed as a speed. What would that even mean?

>>14604851
The universe isn't expanding

>>14606676
explain why and even how there is a doppler redshift we are observing, why the frequency changes of this redshift even suggest an accelerating expansion , and that stuff measurable moves away from a singular area if there is no expansion?

>>14606676
this is bait. i..just sit down and watch

>>14606587
meds

>>14606691
Explain how the universe conveniently only expands between galaxies and nowhere else
Why isn't space expanding in our solar system when it's supposed to be doing so at c?
Why isn't space expanding inside stellar objects tearing them apart?
Because space isn't expanding, any perceived motion is probably leftover momentum from whatever chaotic events preceeded our arrival in the universe

with constant acceleration one could reach the end of the known universe in less than 40 years
c might be the speed limit but you can still fuck with the time perspective

>>14606697
More convincingly: if the space expands, the dome that holds it would crack.

>>14606697
>space
>lays it out as spacetime itself expanding

he doesnt know.
space is not expanding, the universe is expanding into space. a solar system or a galaxy are enclosed gravitational systems, they are held together by its local gravity, they wont expand. the distance between galaxies is increasing, suggesting an expansion, even an accelerating one, thats why it is NOT momentum bleeding off, since we can measure that objects accelerate away from us and do not move at a steady rate or slowing down since the light reaching us gets more red when measured repeatedly, thats where all that dark matter and resulting energy talk which is supposed to cause this acceleration comes from.

>>14606697
Not him but
>Explain how the universe conveniently only expands between galaxies and nowhere else
It expands everywhere. Galaxies are just bound together by gravity and they are small enough that the expansion doesn't affect them enough to take them apart.
>Why isn't space expanding in our solar system when it's supposed to be doing so at c?
It's not "expanding at c". Whoever told you that, lied. Expansion is not expressed as velocity but as velocity per distance.
The expansion within the solar system can be calculated by multiplying the Hubble's constant by the diameter of the solar system. Which comes up to a few tens of micrometres per second of expansion between two objects at two extremes of the solar system. Not noticeable at this scale.
>Why isn't space expanding inside stellar objects tearing them apart?
If those objects are very large and only loosely bound by gravity then they would. It would just take a while.
>Because space isn't expanding, any perceived motion is probably leftover momentum from whatever chaotic events preceeded our arrival in the universe
It is expanding and it can't be "leftover momentum". If that was the case it wouldn't be accelerating.

>>14606697
i was hoping for more bait, but this reads like imbecile drooling

>>14606725
>universe is expanding into space
Prove it, please provide me a quantity of matter outside of the boundaries of the universe
Oh right, there isn't any, because space is infinite and not expanding

>>14606812
you are a fucking retard lacking basic reading comprehension.

space time is infinite.
our universe is expanding into that space

>>14606727
>If that was the case it wouldn't be accelerating.
A body remains at rest, or in motion at a constant speed in a straight line, unless acted upon by a force, galaxies are accelerating because they were always accelerating

>>14606812
u wot m8

>>14606939
Prove it then, please remove a chunk of the universe and show me the "space time" underneath, I'll wait

>>14606952
>please remove a chunk of the universe and show me the "space time" underneath


not that anon. but what are you even asking for? want some bread sticks with that? this is not how an argument works. its like asking your creationist dumb ass to show me proof for your infinite flat earth by removing the firmament dome to reveal it. there is no basis to even argue about. you just requested that someone please remove a junk of the universe

>>14606943
A-Are you serious?
Do you understand what you just wrote? And you even brought Newton's first law of motion and you still said that?

>cringey flaming narcissists demanding that they have omniscient godlike total understanding of how the entirely of the universe operates
>their ridiculous assertions are all rendered transparently false by the fact that these same self identified geniuses invariably rely on nondisprovabilty and avoidance of investigation to generate their belief and by the lack of tangible benefit the self identified science deities are able to derive from their universal total knowledge

>>14604837
Wrong, the fastest speed is the speed of expansion.

>>14606986
Exactly, you can't do it because there is nothing else but space and matter, space is infinite, otherwise please tell me where it is expanding to and what lies outside of it.
>>14606993
>no argument
That's not how science works, anon

>>14607146
>A body remains at rest, or in motion at a constant speed in a straight line, unless acted upon by a force
>galaxies are accelerating because they were always accelerating
Please explain, anon. Hopefully, you just mispoke.

>>14606943
Did you mis the part in your own post where you said "constant speed"?

>>14607151
The matter from the theoretical big bang is still accelerating, it just clumped up into galaxies

>>14607234
So what force is acting on those galaxies then?

>>14607249
Who knows, but things don't move unless they are acted upon, thus that acceleration had to come from somewhere, but it certainly isn't space expanding.

>>14604837
wtf why did they put this sign in the space?

>>14607273
So they do accelerate. And why wouldn't it be the expansion of space?

>>14607302
Because space is not made of anything, it is the lack of matter, all observations we have done of the universe are matter dependent.

>>14606676
Sure it is, if you have the DLC installed

>>14606584
Stickers work as well.

>>14606642
It really doesn't make sense though. A huge investment for no reason, just to have "people" inhabit other planets.

>>14606725
All of this could easily be explained if the speed of light is not actually a constant. Considering it being a constant violates all laws of thermodynamics it really makes more sense than hypothetical dark matter.
"Dark matter" is a fucking grift.

>>14607907
>the speed of light is not actually a constant

well, it is not, it depends on the medium it travels through, it can always be slower, but never exceeds the speed it can reach in a vacuum considering unbent spacetime. even gravity can slow down photons to some degree

>>14607648
Doesn't matter if you believe the mechanism is wrong, but the universe is expanding. And the expansion is not caused by "leftover momentum" or anything.

>>14604837
c is relative and not absolute constant
otherwise we'll see c divergences when measuring different directions on earth

thus light can be travel at max of 2c which makes all this completely retarded

>>14607274
just break the law, its written by retards

>>14608155
We already have good theories which don't require aether to exist.
Besides, if the speed of light was different to match a specific speed for a specific observer then different observers would observe them travelling at a different speed.
Your hypothesis only works for a single observer.

>>14604837
>We are fucked, aren't we?

In the sense that we will never be able to explore more than 0.000001% of the universe because everything is moving away from us ?
Yes, we're fucked. But we should still be able to travel a bit in the Local Group.

we have to downgrade dimensions to travel great distance

>>14606642
Space won't be colonized by humans. Our needs are too great, our bodies too fragile, and our minds too unstable. Rather, our future lies in entrusting our legacy to automatons

>>14604837
Yes, we are fucked.
On the other hand, its not like shit is very different far away, stars, galaxies etc its all the same.

Sure, you won't meet reptilians and their unique culture 28288292 light years away, big deal, whatever.

>>14604851
>expansion
*conspansion

if the speed of light is relative to your position, why cant you just keep going foward? You will have a speed of light in front of you thats under the limit anyways at all times so whats really stopping you?

>>14611992
>t. midwit
with the number of galaxies out there, it's virtually guaranteed there is at least some other planet that has life on it.

>>14604837
Pretty crazy that even a faster than light spaceship, aimed at another galaxy in a different “Local Group”, would never be able to reach its destination. Just totally insane when you think about it.

>>14612591
>muh infinity fallacy
>give infinite tests, the impossible is bound to occur eventually
terrible rationalization, you should just give up belief in your ridiculous space aliens fantasy life instead of embarrassing yourself and damaging your intellect with fallacious beliefs

>>14612668
>>muh infinity fallacy
who are you quoting? where did i say anything about infinity?
the only fallacious belief is yours that they don't exist because...because they just don't okay?!?!

>>14606634
>you

>>14612748
GOD MADE 9999 BILLION PLANETS BUT ONLY MADE LIFE ON THIS ONE BECAUSE MY MOMMY TOLD ME IM SPECIAL ALRIGHT NOW BUZZ OFF WILL YOU

>>14612668
Prove that the universe is of limited volume or mass

Why is it 299,792,458 m/s

But 300,000 km/s?

Why is it so close to 300,0000,000 but not?

Is this because the unit of a second is slightly off kilter with the unit of a 'm'?

Why is it so close to being two numbers headed by 300, in the family of 'm' (m and km) only to be off by the relatively smallest of amounts?

>>14613160
Cos it looks like a big intimidating number just >trust the science bro

>>14613160
>>14614016
But I thought by definition m go into km smoothly and purely.

1 and 1000?

>>14613160
>>14614425
Someone sort out this connundrum please

>>14604851
That makes no sense, the expansion has to do with a third unknown something called dark energy that most likely predates physics as we know it since this dark energy is the very reason there was a big bang.

I've always wondered, even if we somehow invented FTL travel. Is it even possible for humans to travel at that speed? Like isn't anything more than 5 g's likely to kill us? Because I don't know how the human body is meant to withstand something going that fast without turning into a puddle of red goop

>>14604851
I read it expands exponentionally. Surely it end up faster than light?

>>14604837
That wasduring the epoch of inflation, during the first split-second of the Universe's existence, when the expansion of the Universe occurred at a rate that was effectively far faster than the speed of light."""""

It broke the limit

>>14604851
And faggot can go to bed.

>>14613160
>>14614425
If you will

>>14613160
>Why is it 299,792,458 m/s
>But 300,000 km/s?
>Why is it so close to 300,0000,000 but not?
>Is this because the unit of a second is slightly off kilter with the unit of a 'm'?
>Why is it so close to being two numbers headed by 300, in the family of 'm' (m and km) only to be off by the relatively smallest of amounts?
>>14614425
>I thought by definition m go into km smoothly and purely.
>1 and 1000?
Why why why why why why why why why

>>14614425
>>14616258
Was guessed in miles per hour written as feet per second converted to metric