Re: Olber's Paradox?
- From: "Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 6 Jan 2007 17:53:59 -0800
mr_bumpkin wrote:
I don't see how this paradox adds up to a paradox. Anything emitted
by stars is also absorbed by other stars eventually, if it travels far
enough.
The question of finite or infinite energy density is also kind of wierd
to me. Whatever the density we observed was, we'd wonder why it
wasn't greater. Even if it was infinity, someone might wonder why it
wasn't infinity plus one.
What I mean is, things like energy density are only percieved relative
to what you compare it against.
Sort of like how if every woman on earth was a supermodel, the least
beautiful one would seem ugly to us.
"Supermodels" are mostly overrated products of media hype.
Olber's paradox in truth seems rather silly, but I suppose it is a
necessary stepping stone. If we suppose that the stars burn forever,
uniformly distributed in infinite space, we have some explaining to do.
Perhaps photons burn out eventually in flight, like flaring match
heads.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Olber's Paradox?
- From: Ken S. Tucker
- Re: Olber's Paradox?
- From: Sorcerer
- Re: Olber's Paradox?
- References:
- Olber's Paradox?
- From: Ken S. Tucker
- Re: Olber's Paradox?
- From: mr_bumpkin
- Olber's Paradox?
- Prev by Date: Re: What do you make out of this paper?
- Next by Date: Instantaneous radius of a rotation
- Previous by thread: Re: Olber's Paradox?
- Next by thread: Re: Olber's Paradox?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|