| |
|
Article: <[email protected]>
From: [email protected](Nancy )
Subject: Re: GRAVITY - the Zetas Explain
Date: 13 Jan 1997 01:51:00 GMT
In article <[email protected]> Robert Welch
writes:
>Nancy ([email protected]) wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]> Greg
Neill asks:
>>> In a flat space-time, as Einstein imagined
>>> space to be before Hubble noted the expansion, the
constant
>>> would vanish (be equal to zero).
>>> [email protected] (Greg Neill)
>>
>> (Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
>> Regarding the amusing human notion that space/time
curves.
>> This theory arose recently as humans have been able to
track
>> cosmological events more closely with the Hubble, and
noted
>> that the perimeter of an explosion curved slightly as
the event
>> progressed.
>
> Nancy, when you refer to "the Hubble" above, you
seem to think
> that that is the Hubble Space Telescope. As usual, you are
wrong.
> The "Hubble" referred to by Greg Neill is of
course Edwin
> Hubble, whose research showed that the further away a galaxy
> as, the faster it was receding from the Earth. He concluded
in
> 1929 that the universe was expanding.
> [email protected] (Robert B. Welch)
Well let me rephrase the concept the Zetas were giving me, "This theory gained credence recently as .."
Well, it was actually Riemann, was it not who came up with the idea of a curved space/time. That's the subject under discussion here. First Riemann concluded that space/time curved, Einstein adopted that into his general theory of relativity, Edwin Hubble made actual observations that our universe was expanding at the perimeters, Einstein concluding that space/time did NOT curve (as someone noted was his final conclusion) and now the Hubble actually allowing extensive unclouded views of the universe. Right?
My Britannica states:
The gigantic step of extending this geometry from two dimensions to three (or more) was taken simultaneously (in the latter half of the 19th century) by .. and Bernhard Riemann in Germany. .. This means, as Riemann remarked, that the unboundedness of space does not necessarily imply infinitely long lines. A sufficiently powerful telescope could theoretically enable an astronomer to observe the back of his own head .. This idea, that space could be unbounded without being infinite, was adopted by Einstein in his general theory of relativity.
So this has been a THEORY until, as the Zetas have stated, the Hubble afforded images that seemed to support this theory. Is this true? I don't know! The Zetas have NEVER been wrong. They're saying Hubble pictures show what seems to be a curving perimeter. True?