if the age of the universe is less than 14 billion, then how do they find objects that are 42 billion light years away?... the math doesn't really add up...

i'm thinking that some of theories may be flawed, or that red shift is not a "good" way to measure distance... if gravity affects light, then the light particles would be bending around galaxies and black holes, not making a straight line...

You seem to think that gravity acts on matter, and that gravity cannot act on space that is devoid of matter.

If that's how you interpret the statements made in this thread, there is little more I can do for you.

...and you ask the wrong questions.

Understood. There is little more you can do for me.

Therefore I reject your (and metalwing's) claim that a black hole can suck in empty space and time.

You cannot explain it or back it up by describing the properties of empty space (void of matter and energy) and/or how gravity can affect it.

You have also failed to explain the material properties of time that allow gravity to have any affect on it.

These are extremely basic and simple questions.

JB, if you can't understand the basics, the act of making up new theories based on your misunderstandings is pretty silly, not to mention arrogant.

"As you look at galaxies further and further away, they appear to be moving faster and faster away from us. And it is possible that they could eventually appear to be moving away from us faster than light."

As you know, most of the galaxies in the Universe are expanding away from us because of the Big Bang, and the subsequent effects of dark energy, which is providing an additional accelerating force on the expansion of the Universe.

Here is a simple explanation of one concept that you seem to be completely unable to grasp.

Gravity cannot act on empty space.

Gravity can only act on matter and energy.

Gravity can not act on space devoid of matter and energy.

That is my claim.

The reason being is this: There is no such thing as space that is devoid of matter and energy.

That is my claim.

If you think that empty space is a "thing" that gravity can affect then describe the attributes of empty space.

Gravity cannot act on time.

That is my claim.

Gravity acts on matter and energy and matter on energy affects space and time.

That is my claim.

To say that a black hole could suck in only time and space is incorrect.

There are no black holes in existence that only suck in time and space.

That is my claim.

Black holes suck in energy and matter.

Time and space do not exist in the absence of energy and matter.

You cannot prove otherwise.

That is my claim.

but light does not always travel in a straight line.

You know so much!

This is not a "new theory" at all. This is the way it is.

Again your own arrogance causes you to speak to me as if I am ignorant or stupid. I am not.

And I do not "misunderstand" basic physics or science.

The link you sent me to explains it very well and simply and it is very easy to understand.

It also does not say that galaxies are moving faster than the speed of light. It says that they APPEAR to be moving away from us faster than light.

It does not say that they are actually moving faster than the speed of light. It says that they only appear to be.

Quote Below:



The "appearance" of something is not an indication that they are actually moving faster than the speed of light. The article also said this:

"You could use up all the energy in the Universe and still not be traveling at light speed."

The article also states that dark energy (not empty space) is providing an additional accelerating force on the expansion of the universe.

Dark energy.

As quoted below:



And you continue to insult my intelligence with condescending comments like this:


I am perfectly able to grasp that concept - as written in that article.

What I can't grasp is your ridiculous claim that a black hole can suck up empty space/time in the absence of energy and matter.

Energy and matter are always involved with warped space and time. There is no black hole in the universe that can or does suck in empty space or time because space and time do not exist without the presence of energy and matter.

Here is how it works:

The universe is first and foremost energy.
From energy, comes matter.
From matter comes space/time.

Matter and energy effects (creates) spacetime.

This is NOT a new theory.

This is fact. This is simple logic and common sense.

You speak as if there is a material entity called "space" and "time" that gravity can have some affect on. This is not true.

Gravity can only affect energy and matter. Energy and matter effect (create) spacetime; and affect (warp and change) spacetime.

That is my claim.

That is fact.

Where do you get that from? Nothing, anywhere, that anyone said implies that scientists can't be wrong.

Science is all about finding out the ways that you've been wrong, and making it better.


Really, Moe. Why would you say such a thing?

This is a real question.

How do you arrive at that?

This is not a "new theory" at all. This is the way it is.

Again your own arrogance causes you to speak to me as if I am ignorant or stupid. I am not.

And I do not "misunderstand" basic physics or science.

The link you sent me to explains it very well and simply and it is very easy to understand.

It also does not say that galaxies are moving faster than the speed of light. It says that they APPEAR to be moving away from us faster than light.

It does not say that they are actually moving faster than the speed of light. It says that they only appear to be.

Quote Below:



The "appearance" of something is not an indication that they are actually moving faster than the speed of light. The article also said this:

"You could use up all the energy in the Universe and still not be traveling at light speed."

The article also states that dark energy (not empty space) is providing an additional accelerating force on the expansion of the universe.

Dark energy.

As quoted below:



And you continue to insult my intelligence with condescending comments like this:


I am perfectly able to grasp that concept - as written in that article.

What I can't grasp is your ridiculous claim that a black hole can suck up empty space/time in the absence of energy and matter.

Energy and matter are always involved with warped space and time. There is no black hole in the universe that can or does suck in empty space or time because space and time do not exist without the presence of energy and matter.

Here is how it works:

The universe is first and foremost energy.
From energy, comes matter.
From matter comes space/time.

Matter and energy effects (creates) spacetime.

This is NOT a new theory.

This is fact. This is simple logic and common sense.

You speak as if there is a material entity called "space" and "time" that gravity can have some affect on. This is not true.

Gravity can only affect energy and matter. Energy and matter effect (create) spacetime; and affect (warp and change) spacetime.

That is my claim.

That is fact.

She makes Einstein look the fool! He was so wrong!

And [metalwing] continue[s] to insult my intelligence with condescending comments like this:

There is no incident of any black hole sucking in empty space or time without involving matter and energy.

Space/time does not and cannot exist without energy/matter.

This is fact.

You cannot prove otherwise. Einstein agrees.