Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Galaxies don't fly apart because their entire frame is rotating
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2024 11:57:46 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <uu9cpt$135in$1@dont-email.me>
References: <3pqdnTzZ85-dG2X4nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com>
 <l6kfnuFjqknU1@mid.individual.net> <uu32p3$3ddn0$2@dont-email.me>
 <l6n9udF2ac2U1@mid.individual.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2024 15:57:49 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6a4e17a5371ed9f235886225d5e13a27";
	logging-data="1152599"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18oLWz304NJ6mc+p6/fJDP2"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:tsW+s9h1dmAOCKs4S1WEuqfme8Y=
In-Reply-To: <l6n9udF2ac2U1@mid.individual.net>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 2509

On 3/29/2024 3:51 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 28.03.2024 um 07:29 schrieb Volney:
>> On 3/28/2024 2:12 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>> Am 18.03.2024 um 19:20 schrieb Ross Finlayson:
>>>>
>>>> A hypothesis ....
>>>>
>>>> ... filling the space that is the agglomeration of what was their jet.
>>>>
>>>> So, are there gravitic singularities in the middle of galaxies?
>>>> Maybe not.
>>>>
>>>> Are there gravitic filaments holding it all together?  Maybe not.
>>>>
>>>
>>> My personal view on this problem:
>>>
>>> galaxies are not held together by gravity and there is no need for
>>> gravity, because the galaxies are not rotating in their own frame of
>>> reference.
>>>
>>> It is OUR !!! impression from a remote position, that galaxies rotate.
>>>
>>> But seen from a comoving position from within that galaxy, the
>>> galaxies (of course) don't rotate.
>>>
>> Rotation is absolute. If a galaxy is rotating, that it is rotating can
>> be detected either from within or without the galaxy.
> 
> 'Absolute' is a dangerous term in cosmology, because relativity says, 
> that space itself is not absolute.
> 
Rotation is absolute in that a rotating frame has a pseudoforce, and 
Newton's Laws don't hold. This cannot be compensated by assuming the 
frame is not rotating and the rest of the universe is rotating in the 
opposite direction.