Well I guess you wouldn't notice anything. If time slows, so does everything related to it.

So while an external observer may notice our "minute" takes one of his minutes now, 1mm years from now our movements/passage of time could take a lot longer. He'll take credit for discovering a race of sloths.

Bill, an interesting point that article makes regarding the speeding up of the expansion of the universe is that it may NOT be accelerating, rather it may just be that our time dimension is slowing down relative to the dimension of the remote objects we are viewing. Makes sense to me.

I've had employees being affected by this for years.

I bet it wouldn't slow down this enterprising fella. ;)

http://www.myspacecomedy.com/images/...-beer-loot.jpg

when time space runs out
you just took to much lsd
and you'll be riding it out for better or for worse

When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.

I'm pretty sure the answer is 7. SmileWavy

But....

What was the question?

No Big Bang, no Big Crunch, time will not end or go backward.



KT

The bible told him so. :rolleyes:

Sammy -- The answer is 42. The point is: What's the question???

Frogger; Before you pick on Trekkor too much, the latest information (see my post on the first page regarding the Gravitational Constant) is that he's more right then anyone who's expecting a "big crunch". The universe is expected to expand and cool forever as a result of the Gravitation Constant being "just right". Read the data!

http://www-supernova.lbl.gov/public/...wwposter2c.jpg

I'm not sure about his "Big Bang" comment since the opening verses of Genesis (to discuss the subject in his preferred Biblical terms for a moment) sure sound like a broad description of the "Big Bang". But the who and why of that subject belong on another thread that's trying to get to 10K postings(!).

Lord John Whorfin: later...

Orderly: Lord John Whorfin:

Aren't all the very distant observations being made today, just the light finally reaching the viewer millions/billions or more years ago? You know, looking into the past.

You can't view *anything* in real time.
The light must travel. That takes time.

There are visible objects in the night sky that may not really be there anymore.


KT

No kidding.......

"Way to go, Obviousman!!" (to quote a current commercial)

I'll take that as a compliment, as there are a multitude of people that are not able to see the obvious at all.


KT

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml;jsessionid=AR2NIXXKMIPYLQFIQMFCFFWAVCBQ YIV0?xml=/earth/2007/10/10/scitime110.xml
I owe myself some overtime pay I think, I've been working double time.:cool:

trek..It is not necessarily a compliment. When the scientists speak of "light years", I would guess that there are a considerable number of people who understand the concept. Besides, if the concept of "light years" is valid, then how does that square with the age of the universe?

The age of the universe is unknown, as I've said all along.

People say they understand the universe and light years and all the other interesting things.
But, I'm not buying it. Mostly unkown with guesses flying furiously. ( Agian, the obvious )


KT

I dunno...just seemed to fit..in a time/space sort of way.SmileWavy

Want the other half of it?

I have never spoken to or read of or heard of a scientist who claims to understand the universe.

A light year is not only understood, it is a unit of measurement that is universally accepted by rational folks; Like an inch or a foot.

FYI, it is the distance light travels in a vacuum in a year, typically a Julian year: 9,460,730,472,580.8 km. This is known because the speed of light can be measured and directly observed with exceptionally high precision in a laboratory.

Respectfully, because you cannot accept or comprehend a light year does not make it any less understood than a "meter" or a "mile".

Best,

Kurt

Life long amatuer astronomer here. Kitt Peak visitor as well. Never have I met another astronomer, professional or amatuer who has said they "understand" the universe. In my own case, sometimes I just empty my mind of facts and theories and just look up, saying: "WOW!!"

Who is it that said: "The universe is not stranger than we imagine it to be, it is stranger than we could ever possibly imagine it to be."

And, yes....the "speed of light" is measurable and quantifiable; not just a "guess".

It happened once. All I had to do was put a new battery in my watch & everything was fine.

Yes, the "light year" has been established as a "unit".
Doesn't mean man really understands it, though.
Be honest.

It's only observational at this point, and only from our point of view.
Maybe, and I mean maybe if man advances to speed of light space travel, then there will be some absolutes on the subject.

And any relationship it may or may not have regarding time perception to the traveler.


KT

Trek: Light is photons; we know how fast these photons travel in a vacuum.

This is "really" understood.

Best,

Kurt

Wow. Now THERE is a statement that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever,and I have been willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.

BTW...The speed of light was measured IN THE LAB!!

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/relativity/SpeedOfLight/measure_c.html

I thought this discussion was about time and space, not light speed.
I don't disagree with the findings of actual time it takes for light to "travel" from one place to another.

And, make up your mind fellas, man knows or he doesn't.


KT

Once again, trek..you astound me with your capability to obfuscate a simple concept.

Why would you say that? I think you could have just said you don't agree with my opinion.
I think you GOT what I was saying.

I have been willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.

Why would you do that? I'm just a man.
No man will give you all the answers. You need to make sure of all things for yourself.

It's the guys that claim to "know it all" that scare me.



KT

Time clearly is slowing down. I read the last two pages of this thread, felt like 5 minutes but the clock told me it was only 1. :D

No one here has claimed to "know it all" and you are fully aware of that. ANother strawman type of argument, way off the topic and meant to (once again) obfuscate. I wash my hands of ever getting a cogent comment from you. Up until now, I have hoped something would come through that I could accept as rational thought. No more.

Now, now, Bob!

I have not refuted the speed of light details as observed on earth.

What are you saying, exactly?

Possibly that if I don't submit to the current theories presented to the public as absolute fact, I'm naugty? :D


KT

Trek's failed to get traction with his JW rantings on the god thread, so he's hoping to reverse his fortunes here. Somehow, I doubt a breakthrough is imminent. :)

Yes, that is true.
If you read/watch the news they sure come off that way. At least in my opinion.


I'm sorry my posts trouble you so, Bob.

I'm just "some guy", try not to get so worked up. :D


KT

Make it 10 minutes, seems it's getting worse. :)

Personally I like the big bang -big crunch theory, seems quite neat and tidy in some respects, the other part I like about that is you could easily suppose that after the big crunch you would have another big bang and everything starts again and goes on ad infinitum.

The idea that you have a big bang then the universe just expands for ever until everything fizzles out is a tad depressing although to be fair I won't be there when it all goes dark so why should I care? I just do ok!

Damn this beer tastes good! Has anyone seen my watch?

We need a PPOT Theory of Everything.

The answer is Leffe Brune.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/suppo...s/beerchug.gif

Tenzing Norgay?

Where ever you, there you are.