Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Relativistic aberration
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2024 12:08:45 +0200
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <lfus9bFfohpU7@mid.individual.net>
References: <QsysQnpetTSlB_zDsjAhnCKqnbg@jntp>
 <1b0910c819bb031839b21557a19c75be@www.novabbs.com>
 <_hiIkN_NB6Jm2XOJZeHK7Fy9L2E@jntp>
 <1f081cbe82f7c86f1463b0bf5ad957a9@www.novabbs.com>
 <9mrYetkghLXwIcwZUl4c8b3LTKI@jntp>
 <f21b77862f36ab6a27fd237fda9661f8@www.novabbs.com>
 <Rsj9fwaYx7xWTx_LjgnuDLRLG0M@jntp>
 <6f498e8663ec0b05b9cd9e03df9b4de4@www.novabbs.com>
 <tWsKauuW6XViPa1OVHe8GAFt0pY@jntp>
 <0cb92f486425b83cdc71dbdea3093427@www.novabbs.com>
 <2EXLnr_H9bJJ03uqOqvAke2Stu0@jntp>
 <40a7f3651fa003ba04b12ddd79ee55b1@www.novabbs.com>
 <lfp8pbFkr1mU1@mid.individual.net>
 <277d12ea32119cb16056773223fe1a45@www.novabbs.com>
 <lfrr9lF22urU4@mid.individual.net>
 <18c8d977437847653002c00e44c19d15@www.novabbs.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net udtf8odOERHQGhdBxEz+7gdXViOD3L+uLwtLFJtbdn320kU1cI
Cancel-Lock: sha1:0pizdz4bGIq2ePOc28oV4f4qcPY= sha256:DCWYKHoTceNk/2LbXvYHGK9YBtNez0LX04BBxK2mKIA=
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: de-DE
In-Reply-To: <18c8d977437847653002c00e44c19d15@www.novabbs.com>
Bytes: 3370

Am Donnerstag000018, 18.07.2024 um 15:02 schrieb gharnagel:
> On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 6:33:27 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>
>> Am Mittwoch000017, 17.07.2024 um 14:05 schrieb gharnagel:
>> >
>> > On Wed, 17 Jul 2024 7:05:15 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote:
>> > >
>> > > What we see in the night sky is actually our own past light-cone.
>> >
>> > Ah, but if we can develop tachyon astronomy, that will not be true!
>>
>> Well, if light would speed up somehow in remote corners of the universe,
>> we would still see what we see in the night sky, if this phenomenon
>> would not change in observable timespans.
>>
>> Possibly there are tachyons, but those are invisible anyhow, because we
>> can see only light and light moves with light speed and tachyons don't.
> 
> "See" is an interesting verb and "light" is an interesting noun.  We use
> them to describe situations where we don't actually use the band between
> 0.7 and 0.4 um.  We now can "see" gravitational waves and interstellar
> neutrinos, as well as IR and UV astronomy thanks to scientific advances.
> PTOLEMY may expand the field to "relic" neutrinos (which may be
> tachyonic).

Well, to see is what people actually do, when they look into the night sky.

With a telescope we could look further, but that was also based on human 
perception of light.

Today we have other means and can 'see' more or less the entire em-spectrum.

But our methaphysical intuition is based on the visual impressions of 
our ancestors, because that is how mainstream physics works.

Therefore I refer to seeing in connection with cosmological modells, 
because our intuition is based on light and vision.

To include non-em waves or other frequencies into cosmology would allow 
other intuitions, but that is something, which our mainstream does not like.


  ...


TH