Questions of Light and Space (Introduction)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Sunday, October 10, 2010, 05:30 (5136 days ago) @ David Turell

No. The curvature is based on objects in the way such as galaxy lensing which is used all the time to make observations that would otherwise not be available. Mass bends space and light. In looking at the CBWR 300,000 years after the Big Bang, there are all sorts of bodies between us and the point you want to fix. So, over that distance, there would be left-handed and right-handed curves that need not cancel out. One would have to account for each one to have a valid fixed point, which would be moving all the time. George is right. Euclidean geometry doesn't work out there. Everyone accepts that, and you need to.-Yes, you have to take curvature, rate of change, and other variables into account when mapping in space. There was NEVER any argument about that. Hell, even here on earth when mapping areas many kilometers beneath the sea floor we have to take into account density, temperature, pressure, salinity, the makeup of different geological layers, porosity, reflective etc etc etc. Please don't be insulting to my intelligence. My point is that they either CAN account for it, or they CAN'T. Secondly, the term 'Euclidean' geometry has not once escaped my lips in this conversation, nor was it even implied other than in the context of defining a spatial origin from which to start. Even when kicking this idea around over coffee I never dreamed that it would be a simple straight line measurement. There IS limited linear movement in space, but that has nothing to do really with the matter of defining a set of spatial coordinates.