🧵 THE UNIVERSE IS EXPANDING AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 15:25:35 UTC No. 16222025
yet.. time "slows to zero" at the speed of light.
therefore, our experience of time is the retrograde effect of the universes' expansion.
we observe particles' interaction with the quantum field by sampling relative change.
light is not a thing, it does not move. it's relative change in charge.
time is not a thing, it does not happen. we represent changing state as a horizonal nomenclature on graphs.
there will be no heat-death of universe; as it expands and thins out, the resistance decreases ("electromagnetic viscosity")
if spiral galaxies were the product of coalescence, they would be slightly denser around their edges at the accretion boundary,
then thin out before becoming maximally dense at their centers. however… that is not the case.
they are a continually thinning density from center outward.
thus, galaxies are emitting the material they are comprised of from their centers.
galaxies are white holes.
the one-and-only black hole, is the universe itself, into which all the whitehole light spills.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 15:28:37 UTC No. 16222035
>>16222025
Sorry, I'm not good with English language descriptions of physics. My native language is math. Can you try to translate what you wrote?
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 15:29:32 UTC No. 16222039
A white hole?
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 15:31:12 UTC No. 16222044
>>16222025
Is there an question there seeking an answer or you want true/false answers for all the premises you proposed?
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 15:32:13 UTC No. 16222047
>>16222039
>A white hole?
yes, a while hole.
look it up
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 15:32:24 UTC No. 16222049
>>16222025
Listen, I stopped reading at your topic, cause it's completely wrong and illustrates a common misunderstanding of how the universe works. The expansion of the universe is quantified in a way most people aren't familiar with: a distance per unit time per unit distance. In other words, if you fix two points some distance apart X, the rate at which the distance between those points increases will be proportional to X. In OTHER other words, you can pick any rate of expansion you want and then find a pair of points that are apparently receding from each other at that pseudo-velocity. It makes no sense to say the universe is expanding at any particular speed because the rate of expansion between points depends on the distance between those points.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 15:33:59 UTC No. 16222059
>>16222047
What happened a while ago?
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 15:35:52 UTC No. 16222066
Black holes steal time?
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 15:45:46 UTC No. 16222104
>>16222066
A black hole takes time and matter out of the universe, a white hole returns it.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 16:00:30 UTC No. 16222137
>>16222049
OP here, thread was originally posted in >>/pol/470540510 with a much better image, but posted here on /sci/ by some memeflag.
some additional context/responses:
>>/pol/470540803
imagine a rubber sheet with dots on it regularly spaced.
now stretch the sheet. the dots get further apart.
the speed of light (an otherwise magical constant) is actually the rate of that stretching.
now.. "time slows to zero at light speed"
this is actually because at less than light speed, the stretching is getting away from you. but at light speed, you catch up.
like when in your car you go the same rate as surrounding cars. thus what we experience as time is really retrograde; the universe "getting away from us".
electrically speaking, however, nothing is really changing in the math no matter how far apart everything gets in some higher dimensional space. the resistance decreases, propagation increases, all in proportion. relative change rates, damping, all appear the same.
>>/pol/470541249
because of how we measure "time" at an atomic level; as atoms pass through fluctuation nodes (intersections of multiple waves) in the (stretching) quantum field, they charge up and emit high energy particles, which we can detect. this also increases the wavelength of those fluctuations, causing red shift.
>>/pol/470541774
the nature of blackhole radiation is different than we think. we try to visualize it from outside a black hole, but we're really inside it.
thus, "getting sucked in" is really the product of entropic loss, which is the fading away of information "through the screen"
at that point, maximum chaos, it spaghettifies, zips around the outer surface until it finds holes in the screen (galactic centers) where it slips back into our view as concentrated energy.
>>16222044
it's a list of premises stated in my most mundane way, where the question is solicitation of your responses.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 16:02:32 UTC No. 16222141
>>16222137
>>>/pol/470541895
I'm saying that at any given moment, we will determine "speed of light" to be exactly equal to the rate of the universe's expansion. that rate can change, and so to would have our measurement of propagation.
>>>/pol/470541914
>Speed of light is the speed of wave propagation in the ether.
>>>/pol/470542851
thanks, but A. using degrasse basically shits on the the thread, and B. boards without id's are virtually unusable, and C. the CIA
>>>/pol/470543273
atoms emit more particles at the nodes in the waves. the stretching is OF those waves, thus the nodes get further apart. so if an atom is moving at or near light speed, it will remain fixed in the mesh, receiving a continuous charge rate thus continuous emission rate. but if it is moving slower, then the wave-mesh is "slipping underneath it" .. at some velocities/vectors (harmonics) this will result in more-than-less excitation as each wavefront passes by. at minimal velocity, the mesh is passing fastest by, resulting in maximal unpredictability (noise); this low-energy state will cause that atom (particle, whatever) to drop out of existence.
from the outside of the universe, this appears similar to hawking radiation
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 16:21:44 UTC No. 16222205
Is this what we call multi board schizo posting?
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 16:23:19 UTC No. 16222212
>>16222205
no, your post is what we call "useless namecalling" . if you want to be useful, you will have to get past my terminology and address the mechanics being described as best they can be, or provide better ways to describe them.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 16:24:59 UTC No. 16222219
>>16222212
Sorry I posted my response in /tv/ consider yourself blown out
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 16:27:04 UTC No. 16222226
>>16222219
i don't consider anything you've said yet to be important, useful, or interesting and am likely to just abandon the thread because without ID's i can't filter your obnoxious and timewasting trolling which will no doubt continue since you lack the self control to overcome the lack of consequences for your misanthropy.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 16:30:42 UTC No. 16222239
>>16222035
c=Δd/0
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 18:35:28 UTC No. 16222478
>>16222025
Seriously, what contributions has Chocolate Einstein made for modern science?
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 03:52:03 UTC No. 16223661
>>16222478
He fills a DEI quota