|
njlauren -> RE: End ABSTINANCE "education"! ( Since it's not science and all... ) (1/2/2014 2:43:41 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:
ORIGINAL: njlauren
quote:
ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:
We do have proof of the acceleration at the fringes of the universe, radio and light from distances indicating they were from the early years of the big bang show tremendous red shifts, which is proof. It is why continuous creation was blown out as a theory, the red shift from radiation from the early time of the universe disproved it...
Lauren;
We differ on epistemology. What is proof and what is evidence? The acceleration is an excellent interpretation of the excess red shift. If you wish to call that 'proof' I won't argue but I will remain wary, remembering the Ptolemaic interpretations of observations of movements in the night skies. [:)]
Vincent-
I get your point, but the phenomenon of light shifting into the red end of the spectrum is not just an observation, it has been tested in labs and has proven out as a fact. When a light source is moving away from the viewer, the spectrum is shifted into the red if it is moving away, and the more it is in the red zone, the faster it is moving away..what also has been observed with distant galaxies is not only do they move faster the further away they are, their rate of speed (the red shift) increases with the same light source when tracked over time (if I recall correctly), which means it is not just moving away from us, but accelerating. What that also indicates is that further away bodies must be accelerating as well, since if they weren't nearer objects would overtake them....though obviously, when talking on a galactic scale, or universe scale, we are talking billions and billions of years, so changes are going to be subtle I would guess.
You points is well taken, however, the concept of proof is a tough one, there might be an explanation that is different than what we believe....the ptolemaic system was a bit different, in that it didn't come from observations and was not a scientific theory at all, it was more about Greek philosophy that placed the earth at the center of the solar system (even in Greek and ROman times, people already were postulating the sun was the center)....and the RC took the ptolemaic system because it fit their beliefs, not because there were observations to prove it, so it was a philosophy point that had no backing at all..
Lauren,
Yes, in the laboratory we have proved that light shifting further into the red spectrum is associated with an acceleration of the light emitting object and since the laws of physics are taken to apply equally everywhere in the universe it seems true that the farthest galaxies are flying away at a faster rate. But I dislike the word 'proof' here. Mainly, I dislike the word when applied to any Theory (Model) in science but especially in astrophysics. The concept of rapid acceleration pushed by dark energy at constant density seems very counterintuitive. I know I should not be surprised that it is, but it seems open to challenge.
You might wish to read more about Ptolemy and the Almagast I think you will find that the Planetary Theory was more scientific than philosophical.
Vincent-
Not being an astrophysicist, I probably would get a mouthful from anyone who knows something about it, to call something proof..prob more like strong evidence.
I'll have to read about Ptolemy, but I seem to recall that he never really made any kind of observations that led him to believe the earth was at the center of the solar system, but rather that Greek metaphysics with the nature of the earth made it attractive..been many years since I read about it in any depth. I do know with the RC they supported it because they promoted the idea that the earth was above all, blessed and made by God special, so the Ptolemaic system appealed to them, was consistent with their theology, and then when it was challenged dug in their heels, not because they rejected Copernicus, but rather that they saw their power being eroded if they admitted they were wrong, it is one of the reasons the ptolemaic system wasn't dropped until the 1920's by the rc (kind of ironic, given that the big bang not long after was proposed by a belgian monk...:)
|
|
|
|
