It's because we stink😮

I think it's because we are a carbon based being that destroys everything we touch. I don't want to have anything to do with the human race half the time.

Bleep vlorp, poopoo stik, dsa n Utica. Fchff. Gucci to tu if👽

Absolutely hilarious

🤣🤣🤣

It was more civil than today's debates.

From what I hear it isn't the easiest to convey new ideas in the upper echelons of your scientific discipline, Evolution has had some big holes that have not been commonly recognized until recently. Money is also a factor, so fewer people are interested in the expansion of the Universe than the expansion of their bank account, so when news about the expansion happens fewer people have an interest in Reality Objectively as apposed to Reality Subjectively. So we have less comprehension as a sum of all the comprehension of the minds on our planet. I agree we are more civil today, although we still have skins to shed it seems.

want to bet? anyone that dares questions the false unproven assumptions of cosmology gets excommunicated.

I Don’t Think it’s off the Table 😂

You obviously haven't been keeping up with the literature.

"Crisis"? WtF! How about a facinating mystery or energizing contradiction? Or just science at it's best?

Most people's biggest problem: " How will I pay Rent" Scientist biggest problem: "How fast is everything moving away from us, Exactly" Such wildly different lives we live.

It's just an expression😂

Science clearly has a good definition of itself 🤗 Pseudo Science defines everything ✨Not Understood Yet ✨ 🤯

@@ESL-O.G. "It's just an expression" is also just an expression.

Do not worry, you will implode again.

you're a man.

I’m boundless.

Sounds like something my MIL has shown me over time.

I wonder if there is a ‘universal equivalent’ of the ‘middle aged spread’? I can only confirm that it is constant and persistent here on earth!😂

All based pm Theory and it is in reality "so called science"

We know more than yesterday

Bo?

And didly is expanding at a faster rate than expected.

The main problem is that redshift is mostly an intrinsic function based on atomic density or magnetic flux density, not doppler. The expanding model is based on the sci-fi model of Einstein.

​@@JoeDeglman Yes Joe is correct! For those looking to advance their knowledge beyond the standard (blinkered) view of cosmology, the best sources are Ray Fleming, Eric Learner, and Pierre-Marrie Robitaille. Good luck truth seakers!

*For the people not understanding the problem/crisis framing of the new cosmological evidence that's coming up:* Cosmology is like a "house" of complex interconnected theories that not only explain observation, but also predict phenomena. This prediction aspect is an essential element of science. Theories must predict phenomena accurately if they are to be valid. When actual observations conflict with theoretical prediction (the prediction is wrong), then the theory has a problem. If significant observational challenges to theories keep accumulating, the problem keeps growing and can eventually be labeled "crisis". A crisis would mean that essential foundational theories are challenged to the extent that their validity would be suspect. Once the foundations of your house are shaky, the whole house could come tumbling down. This is basically called a "paradigm shift" (Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions). From the perspective of a lay person interested in science as a hobby or even a scientist that is not in physics or astronomy, this is not a crisis. It's just inevitable evolution of scientific understanding. It's actually exciting. However, for the people from the scientific fields whose careers are built around science which becomes obsolete, this is indeed a potential crisis. Shaking up the foundations of cosmology and related science could turn into a period of chaos for the people involved. For some scientists a paradigm shift would be a blessing, but for many it would be a curse for a number of reasons. A paradigm shift in science can negatively impact scientists by rendering their expertise obsolete, diminishing the relevance of their research, and complicating efforts to secure funding if their work aligns with now-questioned theories. Additionally, their professional reputation can suffer if they are closely associated with discredited theories, potentially stalling their career advancement. The psychological toll is also significant, as adapting to new paradigms can be challenging for those who have invested heavily in the old ways of thinking, causing emotional and psychological distress. These factors contribute to the entrenchment of existing scientific paradigms because they create a significant inertia against change. Scientists, whose careers, reputations, and emotional investments are tied to established theories, may resist new ideas that threaten their professional standing and the validity of their past work. This resistance is compounded by institutional mechanisms, such as funding priorities and publication biases, which favor established paradigms. Consequently, the scientific community can be slow to accept paradigm shifts, despite the foundational principle of science to continually test and revise its theories based on new evidence. This entrenchment is a natural human response to the risks associated with fundamental changes, reflecting a tension between the ideal of objective scientific inquiry and the practical realities of career-driven scientific research.

Bang on.

Irene, alas, that is highly unlikely. Cosmology is well and truly stuck in a rut, and all tenured professors steadfastly refuse to re-examine the foundational assumptions.😢

Irene, alas, that is highly unlikely. Cosmology is well and truly stuck in a rut, and all tenured professors steadfastly refuse to re-examine the foundational assumptions.😢

@mikehannan8206 maybe not in our lifetime but can't eliminate the possibility entirely. We must not be ignorant of the fact, that time plays a pivotal role in shaping up such unlikely thoughts into reality.

you mean not a limit

I think that what was said, is what was meant to be said.

I'd like to clarify, are you under the impression that the universe is only expanding when we observe it? If so, what do you mean by "observe"?

I believe they're referring to when we observe atoms via our eyes on a microscope they are more likelier act out of the ordinary. Same goes with telescopes with this theory.

yes and before humans it was expanding because dinosaurs used to observe it.... and before that... alien dinosaurs used to observed it, till we get as far back to the big bang.

Write your paper. Let the world know you figured it out!

Yes, an expanded form of the heisenberg principal!

I think you have mistaken this by some religious video. This is a science page, scimce is a tool we use to learn our reality. We'll never know everything, and the video itself mentions many disputing theories which is literally saying "we dont know that yet"

​@MsPabloRms Science can only scratch the surface of reality, which is beyond our comprehension. We need to accept our limitations, and the limitations of our tools.

@@johnmichalski5981 Sure, no problem. Science doesn't claim to explain everything in the first place. That doesn't mean that religion is an answer - for anything, really.

Who's we? I certainly don't act like I know everything, nor do I know anyone who does.

@@MsPabloRms I have heard very few scientists say WE DON'T KNOW IN ANY FIELD. You are so naive to believe that SCIENCE TODAY is not one of the biggest scams in the Universe. Not that real science is not being done but it is so hidden in the pure crap it is hard to find.

Yup. Universes are just groupings like galaxies. They affect each other gravitationally and merge. There are “big bangs” constantly happening in the cosmos. Probably caused by universes merging. It would explain why the expansion is not the same in all directions and also the mystery of stars or galaxies that appear too old to be part of our universe. Everything they keep finding out points to this. Humans have a problem with scale. It’s infinite both ways.

@@motleyh9427 Yes, this universe must be a local event. Its more logical when we accept infinity.

to my mind "the universe" is all encompassing. the one song that contains everything. there cannot be more than one everything. talk of other universes is nonsensical . there can be only one "all".

@@sceptic33 Yes, language put us(me) on the wrong foot. Better; ¨Infinite bigbangs in universe¨.

Those far away galaxies would have the same problem and one of those problems is that our solar system didn't exist yet and what we see far away maybe don't exist anymore. All we can say is that the expansion is faster the longer time we look back, in other words, it may slow down.

@@birrextio6544 Hmmm , you have me thinking. Thank you for the reply

I agree, dark energy works at different rates at different times and places. They should study the rate of expansion in a place such as Bootes Void and compare it to the expansion in a super cluster.

I'm not drunk but now I can't unsee it lol

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Time to put the illicit items down buddy. You've had too much.

Put a needle in your finger and say it again.

@@Johan-rm6ec And thus the humor was missed.

@@asmith1711 And thus, as always, the ignorant, are ignorant of the humor.

You would be correct in stating that. Alton Arp, astrophysicist, stated in his study on red shift that the spectrographic evidence revealed an intrinsic variation.

🤣🤣

Absolutely you got a very basic fact in the logic line, there. If you look back in the past where the universe was in a tumble, is it worth measuring for now? Congratulations for being reasonable. I appreciate you very much.

Ding ding! Logic champ! Gratitude. Reward insight: looking outside the being is always a measure of the past, the future can only be seen within

Looking at close objects will only give you the current expansion rate, but looking at both near and far will help you see the change over time.

Perhaps the assumption is incorrect. Light speed is affected by the medium through which it travels. Perhaps the medium of space varies with distance? Remember the images we're shown are not actual but created by software which interprets electromagnetic waves or frequency and converted to visual representations. And electromagnetic waves do interact, canceling and enhancing and radiate spherically in all directions. Viewing the universe as spherical it's impossible to find it center from where we currently reside. We can only be on the outer edge of the supposed bang, the center or somewhere in between. We can rule out the outer edge. If we were the center then there would be no way to determine which direction of the outer sphere was the exact center in the past. Lastly if we're in between there is no way to determine where the center of the sphere originated. That diagram of the expansion is a nonsensical representation of an explosion, it would be spherical not funnel shaped. Then it's closed, open, positively curved or negatively curved. It might even be static.

How does something appear in and move through nothing?

In an email response from an Associate Professor of Astronomy, she said “Yes.” It should read Hubble-Lemâitre Law, Hubble-Lemâitre Constant, and Hubble-Lemâitre Tension.

Good question. Money would be better spent improving agriculture in poor countries.

@@rb368370 I'm still looking for a university that offers a program in the applications of cosmology. Put differently, what is the practical benefit of all this cosmology stuff? --Old physicist

This guy's illiterate in the beet possible way. Go learn from godly scriptures, 😂😂

Are you implying that time isn't constant and can speed up or slow down due to many variables?

These are just reference numbers it doesn't matter what value you use as long as you apply it to everything

No...he just had a thought that popped into his head...thought it was clever and posted it...he's not thinking past that first thought...​@itsrobby3487

I agree. Unless there is something headed towards us this kind of exploration likens itself to shooting at a moving humvee to see what happens 😂. 🤔 uh oh running will not help 😊

Nobody hates science. Some of us just don't prefer the science fiction genre.