Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Non-Mainstream and Controversial Science
Has Geocentrism become less popular?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mark Quayle" data-source="post: 77391681" data-attributes="member: 410020"><p>Not meaning to disparage, nor even saying I'm right, but that sounds like simple double-talk to me. And what is a static object? I mean, how can you say that any object in space is actually static? It's only a comparative statement, no?</p><p></p><p>One (to me) seeming-implication though, raised by your description, is that if space is expanding the objects in space should also be expanding, the very smallest particle expanding also, which expansion would be undetectable <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite44" alt=":laughing:" title="Laughing :laughing:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":laughing:" />. But either way, it still sounds like the objects on the 'surface' of the expansion are nevertheless moving away from each other, at some speed relative to each other, and therefore (as we suppose) A may move relative to B at more than the speed of light and thus be invisible to B.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mark Quayle, post: 77391681, member: 410020"] Not meaning to disparage, nor even saying I'm right, but that sounds like simple double-talk to me. And what is a static object? I mean, how can you say that any object in space is actually static? It's only a comparative statement, no? One (to me) seeming-implication though, raised by your description, is that if space is expanding the objects in space should also be expanding, the very smallest particle expanding also, which expansion would be undetectable :laughing:. But either way, it still sounds like the objects on the 'surface' of the expansion are nevertheless moving away from each other, at some speed relative to each other, and therefore (as we suppose) A may move relative to B at more than the speed of light and thus be invisible to B. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Non-Mainstream and Controversial Science
Has Geocentrism become less popular?
Top
Bottom