>How do they know the planets and galaxies are moving away? The same way you can watch a race and see who won.
Joshua Harris
Explain? There are a number of theories
How do we know it? Because galaxies are moving away from us, and unless we are the center of the universe, that tells us that space is expanding, so everyone feels that everything is moving away from them
How does it make sense? It's an observation. It's a fact. You make sense of it.
The essence of time is that time is merely delta entropy.
Look some YouTube video of relativity if you want to understand it. It's easier than in words. But in short, time is not some absolute value in the whole universe. It's relative to your speed.
We know that the great boom happened because of cosmic radiation. Yes. It could be eternal going forwards. But since time is delta entropy, when heat death happens, there won't be more time because nothing is moving.
Luke Bailey
So, they compare the image "size" of the planet? Is this the same method which they use to affirm the galaxies are accelerating?
>The essence of time is that time is merely delta entropy. I don't understand. >Look some YouTube video of relativity if you want to understand it. It's easier than in words. But in short, time is not some absolute value in the whole universe. It's relative to your speed. It just shows an atomic clock moving at a high speed, showing that the trajectory the photon follows, is larger than the trajectory of a "static" atomic clock. That's the experiment they show. This experiment doesn't assure the time depends of velocity. It just demosntrates that atomic clocks measure "less" time at high velocities.
>We know that the great boom happened because of cosmic radiation Can there be another source of the cosmic radiation? Eternal=no-beginning,no-end Infinite=no-end
>delta entropy >there won't be time if nothing moves So time is movement? How does it work?
Zachary Davis
Yes, time is movement
It's the difference of movement
Robert Stewart
But how does gravity affects movement then? I'm not talking about trajectory.
Ayden Young
>how does a force that's inherent to every point in space effect movement
Jose Garcia
You said time=movement If time is "ralentized" by gravity, is the movement ralentized too?
Elijah Anderson
the weaker the gravity, the faster time passes since gravity constrains movement
Christopher Moore
How does gravity constrains movement which has the same direction and sense as the gravity vectors?
Hunter Mitchell
We are talking about atomic clocks and the Earth
the farther away from the source of gravity, the faster time passes
James Cook
Are you in the same inertial frame, or are you trying to enter the inertial frame of the source of gravity? This is important
Blake Lee
But you didn't answer my question.
How does the "atomic clock experiment" demonstrates the link between "velocity" and "time dilation"? I can't understand the conclusion. I thought it demonstrated the link between "atomic clocks" and apparent time dilation.
So, does the time dilation actually occurs between different gravity field values?
Jack Rogers
>How does the "atomic clock experiment" demonstrates the link between "velocity" and "time dilation"? It doesn't. It demonstrates the link between gravity and time dilation.
There are other experiments that demonstrate the link between speed and time dilation.
Angel Perez
Trying to understand physics without actually looking at the formulas is a waste of time.
Luis Morris
gravity is deceleration, that's how it is related to velocity
Dylan Barnes
>inertial frame I mean, if time is dilated by the G.field value, then the movement is too, right? I suppose it's in the same inertial frame. How would it follow the gravity vectors if the object is not in the same inertial frame? I don't understand :^=)
I studied the formulas at highschool and it seems that the velocity-"time dilation" is actually apparent. But the gravity-"time dilation" is not just apparent.
Can you tell me some names? I looked for it and google showed me the atomic-clock experiment. :^=( Can it be acceleration, if the velocity vector shares the same sense and direction as the gravity field vector?
>speed and time dilation. I thought general gravity showed the link between gravity and "time dilation", however the special gravity explained the apparent time dilation of a high-velocity object.
Brayden Nelson
entropy is a measure of the number of microscopic configurations that correspond to a thermodynamic system
time equals delta entropy a.k.a. the difference of entropy between two states a.k.a. the difference of movement
within the same inertial frame, time is slower near higher gravity (negative acceleration) because there's a lower degree of freedom and therefore lower entropy
within two different inertial frames, time is slower in the frame that's moving faster relative to the one that's moving slower because logically there's a higher number of configurations
Dominic Hughes
Thank you. Now I remember that interpretation.
But how does velocity makes "time dilation" possible? Gravity restricts movement(time is measured by movement a.k.a.time is movement), so gravity restricts time. But how can a high-value speed make the time dilation fenomena happen?
Daniel James
Can someone pls explain mw how dark energy contributes to the expansion of the universe
Justin Bennett
Protip: You are being trolled / being lectured by someone who doesn't understand what he's saying.
Entropy and time are not related.
Carter Long
It happens when you accelerate to exit your original inertial frame
Isaiah James
>entropy I don't remember the chemistry part, but I think time is mesured by Delta-movement=displacement. So the constriction of gravity which affects movement, actually affects time too.
So it's actually an apparent time dilation?
Ethan Rivera
delta-speed*
Kevin Wright
the dark energy is a sphere shaped cake. Humans can only see until the first layer, which contains the observable universe.
The reason why humans can perceive in 3d is because they are distorting space all the time. Most humans cannot see behind, front and side of a not transparent object all at once. Therefore, their perception of any not transparent variable object is essentially 2 dimensional.
Gabriel Green
...
Lincoln Bennett
>How do science explain the expansion of the universe? How do they know the planets and galaxies are moving away?
Read Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time. I did and it explains that very well
Grayson Hill
No.
Tyler Taylor
>it explains it very well >but i can't explain it
Luke Green
>some random user on an indonesian fishposting board cant explain the universe as well as a famous scientist and pop-sci author >I'm baffled by this
Gabriel Wilson
OPs first question >Expansion of Universe Layman's answer DOPPLER. Red Shift. The shift of observed received light toward the red end of the spectrum indicates something is moving away. AND everything (large scale) is moving away.
Have a blessed day Glad /x/ could help
Hudson Mitchell
>how does science enxplain the irregularity of chemistry
There's kind of an understanding among chemists that chemistry just does what it wants sometimes. In reality its probably some weird fucking chance impurity from some crazy place you would never expect, but minor details that are of no reasonable fault of your own can fuck everything up. chemistry is very frustrating sometimes.
Daniel Fisher
I thought it was based on empirical evidence and induction. That's why it's so irregular but effective, right?
How do they know it's a red-shift change? The "photon-doppler" effect needs two events to be demosntrated. One where the EM-wave's receptor is moving, and one where the EM-wave's receptor is not moving, which I don't understand how is that possible in that frame of reference.
Is the speed-based time dilation actually apparent?
Jack Ramirez
Doppler. If you know f0 (f sub zero - base freq of the emitted light), which we do (one galaxy is the same as another), you plug received frequency into the Doppler equation. Everything in the far field is shifted toward Red.
We know what it is supposed to be (if no expansion) and we know what we actually see. It's all shifted toward red (far field). It is all moving away
Angel Taylor
>going with Doppler effect rather than CMB
pleb
Hudson Smith
>one galaxy is the same as another I didn't know that, thanks.
Can it be that the EM-waves frequency actually decreases as they travel proportionately? But they already disproved that hypothesis, right?
Also, is the speed-based time dilation actually apparent?
Gabriel Collins
>How do science explain the expansion of the universe?
It started to expand because of the Big Bang.
>How do they know the planets and galaxies are moving away? Not all planets, and galaxies are moving away.
>How do science explain the irregularity of chemistry? What does this even mean?
>How does it make sense to have a universe expanding at higher speed each second? Technically the universe doesn't expand at a certain speed, because it is not a physical object. But the rate of the distance increasing between our Earth, and certain places beyond a certain distance is increasing.
>How do science explain the essence of time? It doesn't. The meaning of the essence of time is not a scientific question. At best it is a linguistical/philosophical question.
>How does the velocity of an object changes its "time"? This question makes no sense. The velocity doesn't have a "time." It is not even a physical object.
>How does gravity changes its "time"? It doesn't. Gravity isn't a physical object.
>How does science explain the great boom? You mean the Big Bang? The most popular explanation in the scientific community is that the energy came from a false vacuum.
>Is it supposed to be logical? If by "logical," you mean non-contradictory, then yes, the explanation is supposed to be logical.
>How is it logical to be in a non-eternal universe? If the possibility can be expressed without contradiction, then it is logical.
Zachary Lee
I work at Berkeley lab, we used type IA supernovae extinction curves to determine this
