Jah Kable

Thinker ready to be unleashed upon the world,

This conversation is closed.

The majority of things in the sky are illusions. More precisely they are light that has traveled the cosmos and returned their image now.

I was reading about space-time compression and things related to it and i thought:" If light can bend around gravitational fields whats to say that what we see is not just Us (for lack of a better word) being seen by us in the future (This could be thousands, millions, billions for all i know). I know that everything we see can't possibly be Us but what if some of these little glints in the sky are light from our planet bouncing and curving in space until one day the beam return. For instance in small scale, as ironic as that is talking about space) we can see stars that we KNOW are behind the sun for certain and should not be visible to our line of sight. Yet we see them because the sun bends light around it. This could also be a reason the universe seems infinite. Its very large but it may just be a finite loop created by the giant masses in space!

  • May 31 2013: Welcome to the Twilight Zone.
    Okay you are sincere but go with the simplest explanation.
    Do you want to reject all of physics and astronomy?
    • thumb
      May 31 2013: No i don't reject anyone's ideas or beliefs. I just believe some of the things we see in the sky CAN possibly be our light reflection being bent around so many stars it comes back later and we mistake it for a star. Maybe our suns rays that don't come towards us are bent around other stars only to appear to be coming from somewhere else when in all reality it is our suns rays that took, lets say, 1,000,000 years, to come to us instead of 8 minutes. To us that would appear to be a different star because the light is coming from the completely opposite side of the planet that the sun is on. Honestly i hope this sparks someones mind that has the knowledge and tools to intelligently investigate it. I don't think that this would disprove any physics. This would simply show that some of the things in the sky are constant beams of light from something nowhere near where the light 'appears" to be. I used illusion in the way you look at a spiral of black and white and it appears to spin. Its really there and we know that but we know its not spinning no matter what it looks like. I guess i should have said optical illusion. I guess this is simply coming down to the pictures of the sky we see can be completely misinterpreted because this bending of light is not fully appreciated and put into the equation. The only way we can truly tell i think is to look from space in an area where stars are not distorting our line of vision. Then we can truly tell what is where. Unless there's a black hole somewhere nearby. They ruin everything.
      • Jun 1 2013: Okay - Just some I didn't understand just some. Could be.
        • thumb
          Jun 1 2013: Yeah i know i said majority but even just one case of this would satisfy me.
  • Jun 3 2013: Compared with other animals, human being is proud of their brain, but not their eye. In the nature, long-distance eyes of eagle, 360 angle-eyes of dragonfly are examples that some animal has better eye than us. What we see, even through advanced tools, may not be what things really are. So when light travles this long and through air or other thing, we cannot point and say for sure that 'the star is there'.
    Also in the light spectrum, only small area we can call it visible.So maybe many thing is beyond our sight, just like something dog can smell, but we cannot.

    But why you think the universe is a finite loop. In my opinion, there is no evidance from what you said above.
    • thumb
      Jun 3 2013: Really i don;t know. It just came to mind with the spasm of this light thought! LOL
  • May 31 2013: Hi Jah,
    what a coincidence! I was talking with a friend yesterday about the International Star Registry. I simply don't understand how they have the audacity to charge money for a star that is no longer in existence, like you say, an illusion!
    • thumb
      May 31 2013: I completely and utterly hate the idea of selling stars. How can you sell something you did not create? This goes along with the patents on life and corporations trying to own all of a countries water. You are not god nor do you have the right to play god. The planet is all of ours along with everything in it and on it. Believing that you can own that is simply dumb and one of our greatest flaws. But back to the stars. You're completely right! That's like showing someone a house and asking if they want to buy it, so they do because they are super mega uber rich and don't care to see it first. Then they get there and there's no house. I think its awesome that people care that much that they want to buy a star but really giving someone money doesn't make a star yours. Just think its yours and it is. Who can take it from you? They are just taking your money to write something down in a book that will be lost when we destroy ourselves which is going to happen if we keep up all this petty "this is mine. No its mine (shoot shoot shoot)" bullcrap.
      Sorry for ranting but that really pisses me off when people sell things they have no right to sell or even claim ownership of.
      • May 31 2013: I couldn't agree more, Jah. Two big 'no-no's' going on here - selling something that you don't own, and selling something that doesn't exist.
        Like you say, when will everyone understand, the world belongs to everyone, and no one.
        • thumb
          May 31 2013: Im a big believer in The Zeitgeist Movement and The Venus Project. I've always felt like that but now i have a organization to associate it with. If you don't know about it check it out. It seems like the world could really use it or something like it right now.
      • Jun 1 2013: Jah, I had never heard of The Zeitgeist Movement, and am very happy that I do now!
        Thanks so much!
        • thumb
          Jun 1 2013: That's what i do Liz :D Find things that make sense to me and try to share them with people to improve the world. I'd rather see every persons life improve over only my life improving.
  • thumb
    May 31 2013: In the sky we see real images of the old universe.

    Even the image of the Sun which we see now is 8 minutes old.
    • thumb
      May 31 2013: Yeah i know that. :D Imagine the sun rays that don't come toward us. How would they be interpreted coming from Sirius' direction? for example purposes. People would most likely believe they see a new star or a different star, not the sun.
  • Jun 2 2013: Thinks Jah I got it now.
  • thumb
    May 31 2013: There is no universal simultaneity. There is a shift in time for a shift in relative location. The only way I can share a common "now" with you is if I share a common location with you. If you move away from me and we receive information from a common source, we will not receive it simultaneously. Whichever of us is closer to the source will receive the information first. There are two different "nows" when observed from the source. Light, aka information, travels at a constant 186,000 mps (in a vacuum), so trips to more distant locations require more travelling time than trips to less distant locations. The folks at each of the locations will say "now" when the light arrives at their location, but their "nows" are separated in time when observed from the source. Now add the fact that space is not a vacuum and matter influences the path light takes in its journey. The force of gravity applied by masses can divert the light from its straight path which causes a delay in arrival at any destination. So now the difference between "nows" at two locations becomes even greater depending on what masses lie between them and the source. Proposing a finite universe automatically triggers the question, "What lies outside the boundary of the universe?" And we have now entered the world of Philosophy and Metaphysics. Farewell to Science!
    • thumb
      May 31 2013: Wow you lost me at simultaneity.... and i honestly don't see how this relates to my idea. Can you make this more understandable for a high school graduate like me. I would really appreciate it! Looking forward to understanding what you truly mean and how it relates to my idea!
      • thumb
        May 31 2013: Your idea is that the universe might be finite, that It might have measurable boundaries which can be thoroughly documented on a map. This does not allow for a constantly expanding universe (which is the prevailing idea today). If every location in the universe was connected to a common intercom, messages from the base station would take longer to arrive at more distant locations because it takes time for information (electromagnetic waves or particles) to travel. For light to travel full-circle as you suggest and arrive back at its origin is not thought to be possible. That would be "travelling back in time" which Einstein theorized was impossible. There is also the problem of the earth not being a source of light. I am not a scientist. Please do not take anything I say as factual. My opinion has no more validity than yours. But I do enjoy vigorous discourse such as yours.
        • thumb
          May 31 2013: No no no. The idea is that light can arrive here at earth from somewhere that would be impossible drawing a straight line and that would be traveling forward in time, we are just looking back in time due to the delay because of distance. We are still in the present time or "now". The finite universe thing is just something that COULD go along with that since if light could be bent in such a way it would look infinite because were looking all the way around a loop. That wasn't the main idea though. And yes i think the universe is infinte because if the light goes straight it should never stop and for us to get past that light and see what is out there we would have to travel much faster then the speed of light to reach the edge of the expansion in a reasonable amount of time considering its been going outward for 13+ billion years! And as for the earth being a source of light i agree, we dont make light but we do reflect and refract it as Lamar said, which would mean in space we appear lit. I'm not sure about any of this either and my idea seems very confusing even to me but i Thank You for you insight on the matter and I'm going to keep looking into this and try and learn about it! Feel free to share more thoughts. If it seems like I'm saying you're wrong, I'm not. I just have the feeling that what I mean and what you're getting from it are slightly different and it's hard to explain and it came from my brain. I'm trying man bear with me!
    • thumb
      May 31 2013: I kind of understand the different "nows" but when it comes down to the speed of light we are all in the same "now" give or take a few nanoseconds. But on an intergalactic scale everything changes or so I've been led to believe it does.
      I sincerely do want to know what you mean though. Its just a little beyond my comprehension but i think you can help me get past that.
      • thumb
        May 31 2013: Those "few nanoseconds" you mention add-up when traversing astronomical distances. For example, in a journey of 9.5 trillion Km those nanoseconds add-up to a full year! We are NOT all in the same "now". Each location has its own "now". Sure, across the room the difference is imperceptible, but across the span between us and our sun the difference is 8+ minutes!
  • Comment deleted

    • thumb
      May 31 2013: And that force would be a black hole but then the light most likely wouldn't escape. I'm saying light being bent by multiple stars larger than our sun (there are many that we know of that are exponentially bigger and have stronger gravitational pull than our sun) only to return to us appearing as if it was a star or we see the star but we are looking towards the moon when in all reality it is a star that is completely behind us. We can see it because the light is being bent around so many objects it appears where its not. Its really hard to explain and i want to draw a picture but this is all still so confusing to me but make sense logically. I don't know though i guess i'll give my artsy side a shot and try to draw something worth posting to explain it better. Wish me luck.