The disappointment of James Webb

[sealybobo]

You do have to wonder though....quantum mechanics and the spooky effect.... It seems plausible that even time itself is a slave to gravity..

Time is slower on the moon than it is on earth. Time is so relative. You think it's a constant but it's not. Time flies. Time dragged on. That took forever. That was quick.

On the moon I'm a better lover. I last longer. Put me on Mars and watch out.

 

[justoffal]

Time is slower on the moon than it is on earth. Time is so relative. You think it's a constant but it's not. Time flies. Time dragged on. That took forever. That was quick.

On the moon I'm a better lover. I last longer. Put me on Mars and watch out.

Do you suppose we can sense the difference?

 

[sealybobo]

Do you suppose we can sense the difference?

Yes. Look at people who go crazy in Alaska because the days are so long.

You mean on the moon? No. It's only a fraction of a second for every day different.

 

[ReinyDays]

Time is slower on the moon than it is on earth. Time is so relative. You think it's a constant but it's not. Time flies. Time dragged on. That took forever. That was quick.

On the moon I'm a better lover. I last longer. Put me on Mars and watch out.

That's only true when we're on Earth ... for those on the Moon, time passes slower on Earth ... time is what's relative in Relativity ...

Do you suppose we can sense the difference?

It's easiest to see along the jet coming out of the external galaxy M-87 ... using Earth seconds, this is traveling 4 to 6 times the speed of light ... but using M-87 seconds it's only traveling a modest 0.99 times light speed ... time is relative to speed in Modern Physics ...

In Classical Physics ... the passage of time is absolute ... F = m dv/dt

 

[justoffal]

That's only true when we're on Earth ... for those on the Moon, time passes slower on Earth ... time is what's relative in Relativity ...



It's easiest to see along the jet coming out of the external galaxy M-87 ... using Earth seconds, this is traveling 4 to 6 times the speed of light ... but using M-87 seconds it's only traveling a modest 0.99 times light speed ... time is relative to speed in Modern Physics ...

In Classical Physics ... the passage of time is absolute ... F = m dv/dt

I always found it fascinating that an object moving toward us at high speed still emits light at the very same speed...the speeds do not combine. So while light reaches the speed limit... So to speak...it might be faster if not impeded by the laws of physics such as they are.

 

[ReinyDays]

I always found it fascinating that an object moving toward us at high speed still emits light at the very same speed...the speeds do not combine. So while light reaches the speed limit... So to speak...it might be faster if not impeded by the laws of physics such as they are.

Not so much a "speed limit" but rather time stops passing ... and without the passage of time, there is no motion ... oh, and mass is infinite ... works hell on energy equations ... pure Satan ...

I think we've run a bit afoul of our OP ... perhaps Webb is disappointing to cosmologists ... but fundamentally, it is an infrared telescope ... these wavelengths never reach the Earth's surface, there's the whole of the universe within 13.8 billion light years we have yet to explore in IR ... let's give her a few decades before we judge her worth ...

 

[justoffal]

Not so much a "speed limit" but rather time stops passing ... and without the passage of time, there is no motion ... oh, and mass is infinite ... works hell on energy equations ... pure Satan ...

I think we've run a bit afoul of our OP ... perhaps Webb is disappointing to cosmologists ... but fundamentally, it is an infrared telescope ... these wavelengths never reach the Earth's surface, there's the whole of the universe within 13.8 billion light years we have yet to explore in IR ... let's give her a few decades before we judge her worth ...

Very good point indeed. I think what I was most afraid of is that we would refocus on empty spots beyond the reach of Hubble only to find an identical pattern. While I found it spectacular that a formerly unpopulated segment of cosmic observance had suddenly sprung to life with a new (Webb) image showing literally millions of galaxies that were previously invisible<>at the same time I was seized with a gargantuan case of claustrophobia believe it or not.

Jo

 

[sealybobo]

Very good point indeed. I think what I was most afraid of is that we would refocus on empty spots beyond the reach of Hubble only to find an identical pattern. While I found it spectacular that a formerly unpopulated segment of cosmic observance had suddenly sprung to life with a new (Webb) image showing literally millions of galaxies that were previously invisible<>at the same time I was seized with a gargantuan case of claustrophobia believe it or not.

Jo

I hate it when people refuse to believe there is something out there beyond our observable universe. Or that our universe is the only universe. Usually they are religious types so I ask them how they can put god in a box.

 

[ReinyDays]

Very good point indeed. I think what I was most afraid of is that we would refocus on empty spots beyond the reach of Hubble only to find an identical pattern. While I found it spectacular that a formerly unpopulated segment of cosmic observance had suddenly sprung to life with a new (Webb) image showing literally millions of galaxies that were previously invisible<>at the same time I was seized with a gargantuan case of claustrophobia believe it or not.

Jo

Yeah ... some would say the universe is on the large side of things ... but then it's said that it will take a trillion years before white dwarf stars cool ... so really our universe is just an infant, teeny tiny like an 8-week old puppy ... all eager and full of energy ...