Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Galaxies don't fly apart because their entire frame is rotating
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 16:04:23 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <uv4hhn$gafg$6@dont-email.me>
References: <l6kfnuFjqknU1@mid.individual.net>
 <l6n9udF2ac2U1@mid.individual.net> <3%vNN.18429568$ee1.7376856@fx16.ams4>
 <l6ptnhFee5eU1@mid.individual.net> <uu9je5$14o7k$1@dont-email.me>
 <l6se1pFpvelU1@mid.individual.net> <uub83k$1k226$1@dont-email.me>
 <l79nppFq93mU1@mid.individual.net> <uuoc92$191kf$1@dont-email.me>
 <l7k68tFdc15U1@mid.individual.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2024 23:04:24 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1e0154287d270c974cd6798ddf950547";
	logging-data="535024"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/2mOXqp9MDMucJU37xmHOdjtcW2eaLFVM="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:tIjTYoTxhScYIRb35+zxz4D1NJ8=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <l7k68tFdc15U1@mid.individual.net>
Bytes: 3243

On 4/8/2024 11:47 PM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 05.04.2024 um 10:20 schrieb Mikko:
> 
>>>>> In this case a vortex is actually a structure of significant depth,
>>>>> where stars are stacked in distance, hence also 'stacked in time' (in
>>>>> the image).
>>>>
>>>> Why would you want to explain someting that is never seen?
>>>
>>> Theoretical physics does not require visibility.
>>
>> Study of phantasies is not physics of any kind.
>>
>>> Interesting are phenomenons which exist, whether they are visible or 
>>> not.
>>
>> They are interesting only if they are observed to exist or there is
>> a good reason to expect that they can be observed.
>>
>>> E.g. a ship on the other side of the planet cannot be seen from here
>>> or the other side of the Moon.
>>
>> Both can be seen.
>>
>>> But both do exist.
>>>
>>> Visibility, usefulness or other categories of this kind, which reflect
>>> a connection to the observer, are irrelevant in physics.
>>
>> Everything in physics has a connection to an observer.
>>
> 
> This is a totally idiotic requirement.
> 
> Many things cannot be seen, even if they are real.
> 
> Seeing is limited to light of a very small frequency band, limited to 
> direct visibility and also limited by scale, time of existence and 
> illumination.
> 
> We also need somebody to watch.
> 
> But many things real do not fall into these categories.
> 
> 
> E.g. very short lived particles are very hard to see.
> 
> Also invisible are radiowaves, the inside of planet Earth or of black 
> holes.
> 
> But would you like to shuffel all things under the rug, which are hard 
> to see?
> 

Also, perhaps our current state of the art technology wrt observing the 
universe from our little earth is damn near pre embryonic wrt the grand 
scheme of things... ;^)