Re: Mass vs distance
- From: helbig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)
- Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 21:54:38 +0000 (UTC)
In article <43e89096$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Ian Macmillan"
<iandmac@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Could it be excluded that the Hubble red shift and the greater than expected
rotation rate and implied increased mass of distant galaxies could be
explained by mass decreasing with time?
No. Note that the "greater than expected rotation rate" is observed for
essentially ALL galaxies, regardless of distance. Also, you need to
provide a mechanism for "mass decreasing with time" in order for it to
be a scientific hypothesis. Otherwise it is no different than saying
that galaxies are rotating faster than expected since angels are pushing
them along.
Evidently a large amount of the mass of the universe must have been
converted to radiation over the aeons, but although every photon is
presumably absorbed eventually, there must be a huge amount of energy in
transit in the universe, representing a considerable mass.
What is the evidence that "a large amount of mass" must have been
converted to radiation? Stars convert at most a few per cent.
If this
represent a mass density distributed throughout the universe, is it a
significant factor in cosmology?
No. Using E = mc² to calculate the mass of the radiation in the
universe leads to an amount much, much smaller than that of normal
matter.
Note also that as the universe expands, the mass-energy--density of
radiation drops faster than that of matter. Thus, radiation gets
relatively less important as time goes on.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Mass vs distance
- From: paulaireilly
- Re: Mass vs distance
- From: paulaireilly
- Re: Mass vs distance
- From: Cl.Massé
- Re: Mass vs distance
- From: Ian Macmillan
- Re: Mass vs distance
- References:
- Mass vs distance
- From: Ian Macmillan
- Mass vs distance
- Prev by Date: Re: Excited states of the hydrogen atom
- Next by Date: Re: "P not equal NP" as a physical principle?
- Previous by thread: Mass vs distance
- Next by thread: Re: Mass vs distance
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|