Anonymous at Wed, 2 Apr 2025 18:54:10 UTC No. 16635308

>>16635307
Literally no idea what you are trying to say but yes it's all accounted for, try to learn some elementary physics or astronomy or something first.

Anonymous at Wed, 2 Apr 2025 19:10:29 UTC No. 16635312

>>16635308
>yes it's all accounted for
>all
how can you be so sure??

Anonymous at Wed, 2 Apr 2025 19:47:54 UTC No. 16635362

>>16635307
Most galaxies have their distances measured via measuring their redshift, and calculating the distance from a cosmological model.
The change in distance from lensing is really small, because the deflection in gravitational lensing is tiny. A really big deflection is about 10 arcseconds, 0.0027 degrees. The change in distance would factor would just be 1/cos(theta). For 10 arcsec the correction is 1E-9. Tiny. And such a large deflection is rare. Light travels very straight in universe.
So it's not something you can have to account for, most of the time. Astronomers do assume a constant speed, if needed they will account for lensing. Most galaxies don't require it as it's completely negligible.

Anonymous at Wed, 2 Apr 2025 23:58:42 UTC No. 16635549

>>16635312
i did the math. it all checked out.

Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 07:18:49 UTC No. 16635783

>>16635549
>i did the math. it all checked out.
I reviewed his post, he is right

Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 15:33:41 UTC No. 16636123

>>16635307
>I mean, everything seems to "age" with time, shouldn't that also include light?
Light does not age with time, it is unaffected by time because it has no mass. Only objects with mass can be affected by time.

Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 15:46:24 UTC No. 16636133

>>16636123
the fatter you get the more time effects you. anorexics live almost forever

Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 15:46:35 UTC No. 16636134

Yep they assume light speed is constant and has never changed in any time or place.
When light speed was found to drift in experimental measures they reframed all of physics to rely on a mathematical constant for the speed of light, thereby making it unmeasurable and impossible to ever notice a change, by definition.
Thus astronomers closed themselves into a mathematical simulacra of an idealized outer space and mess around with the math inside of that under the pretense of studying space.
The big bang theory is based on the circular assumptions and reasoning that:
>redshift in distant stars means there is more expanding space between us and them
>this redshift is used to calculate the distance

Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 15:56:30 UTC No. 16636144

>>16635307
>does astronomers calculate with a constant speed for light when determinating how far away some galaxes are
Yes. The speed of light is constant.
The speed of light is a useful tool in physics and astronomy because it's always the same for all observers no matter what.
This might sound weird for people who don't understand General Relativity, but while Space and Time (spacetime) can bend and warp, the speed of light remains constant or absolute if you will.

>or do they acknowledge certain graviational bends or whatever it's called?
It's called Gravitational Lensing. Close enough.
But yeah, when we encounter gravitational lensing, we can account for the slight detour light would take to go around an object.

>I mean, everything seems to "age" with time, shouldn't that also include light?
No, not really. Light doesn't "age".
Photons, which make up light, are said to not even experience time. Why? Because light/photons go at the speed of light, and time becomes meaningless when you're going the speed of light.
Time dilation occurs when approaching the speed of light, and when you are going at the speed of light, the time dilation effect becomes infinite.
So in a sense, light / photons do not experience time. From the photon's point of view, everything happens instantaneously.

So no, light does not "age", in the most literal sense possible.
However, there is the Red shift effect, that happens because of the expansion of the Universe. So in a sense, "old light" that has been emitted a very long time ago, very far away, has been shifted towards red.
So that's the only thing that does equate somewhat to "old light", the red-shifting that occurs over very large distances.
Hope this helps.

Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 17:14:05 UTC No. 16636204

>>16636144
>From the photon's point of view, everything happens instantaneously.
WRONG.

see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHY-E0xIb7Y

Anonymous at Thu, 3 Apr 2025 17:47:25 UTC No. 16636246

The Speed of Light is the equivalent of a flat-earth theory. As a post-babylonian phluxasopher I find it amusing our current science-academics hasn't mature beyond the falsefying thought of dealing with fundamental axioms based on generic constants. They're mathing eyes wide shut. I mean, look around you fools, the world is right in front of you and by it's own existance it's acknowledging your misconceptions.