Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: Chapt16.12 Limits of distance that light can travel and be seen;
Experiment ; recent asteroid and Russian meteor #1244 New Physics #1364 ATOM

Replies: 3   Last Post: Feb 20, 2013 9:43 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]

Posts: 11,305
Registered: 3/31/08
Chapt16.12 Limits of distance that light can travel and be seen;
Experiment ; recent asteroid and Russian meteor #1244 New Physics #1364 ATOM

Posted: Feb 19, 2013 7:27 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Chapt16.12 Limits of distance that light can travel and be seen;
Experiment ; recent asteroid and Russian meteor encounter

Now I am rather angry with the astronomy community and the word that
comes to mind is bonehead, as in boneheaded scientists rather than
logical scientists. I have often said that one of the worst science
communities that has a thousand assumptions for every fact the arrive
at, is astronomy. For example, you ask an astronomy how far away a
quasar is, and they confidentially give you a factual answer of 10
billion light years, and they are so confident as they would be of
saying how far is Seattle from Boston. What they do not tell you, and
why they are so much boneheaded scientists is that in the measurement
of 10 billion light years, you omit to tell you of the hundreds if not
thousands of assumptions they applied to get 10 billion light years.
Whereas the distance from Seattle to Boston had no spurious
assumptions. So that if astronomy were to clean up their house and to
tell how many assumptions go into their reported facts that pretty
much of current day astronomy would be thrown on top of the garbage

I am going to need a full chapter on just the idea that light as a
measure of distance in astronomy has an upper limit of distance. If
the Observable Universe is 14 billion years old, then we cannot expect
to see galaxies at a distance of 14 billion light years away. We can
only expect to see galaxies a fraction of 14 billion light years away.
What is that fraction?

Well, we all know in physics that light waves dissipate from a source
as they travel in Space. We know that a flashlight beam cannot travel
14 billion light years and remain the same beam. So how far can a
flashlight beam travel before we can no longer see it. Here is the

Obtain a lantern type flashlight and a regular flashlight with its
reflector to concentrate the beam and finally obtain a laser light.
Hopefully all three are white light, and my laser is a red light so I
need to find a white light laser. And hopefully all three are run on
the same batteries as power source. Now the Experiment asks you to go
out on a dark night with the three lights fixed and asks you to travel
away from those lights until you can no longer see them visually. How
far will you have to travel? Will you have to travel a 1 kilometer to
no longer see the lantern and 1.2 kilometer to no longer see the
flashlight and 1.5 kilometer to no longer see the laser?

What happens with distance is the coherence is destroyed and with
distance the light waves have dissipated apart and no longer coherent.

So there is a physics equation that relates intensity of light with
distance, yet the boneheads of astronomy seem to never have understood
that. And that implies that there is an upper limit for seeing stars
and even galaxies.

So if the Cosmos, the Observable Universe is 14 billion years old and
given our most powerful star or galaxy at what distance would we lose
sight of it? Would we lose sight at 3 billion light years? So that all
the galaxies that Jarrett and Juric have mapped and all the galactic
atlases to date, are they a mapping of galaxies no more than 3 billion
light years from Earth?

Now I bring up the recent topic of a asteroid that went traveling
inside the orbit of a Earth satellite.
This asteroid was large and would cause considerable damage to Earth
if it collided into Earth. Luckily it just passed by Earth and exited,
but around the same day of the asteroid, a meteor did smack into Earth
and landed on some Russian city causing glass to break and people
injured. So, here is the questions. Our telescopes can see asteroids
of the size that passed by, but sizes smaller than that are not
seeable, for about the same but opposite reasons that light has an
upper limit of traveling distance. At some measure limit of size, our
telescopes cannot see meteors, likewise, what limits the seeing of
meteors or asteroids, is the same physics limitations on light waves
travelling from a source, for there is a limiting distance to which
the light waves have dissipated so much that they can no longer tell
anyone at that distance or beyond what the source of that light was.
We can no longer see the source.


Google's archives are top-heavy in hate-spew from search-engine-
bombing. Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and
fair archiving of AP posts for the past 15 years as seen here:


Archimedes Plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum 1994-2015. All Rights Reserved.