Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: decimon

Let me see if I got this straight.

There is a lot of stuff out there and it is far away. But then there is a lot of nothing out there that we think should be out there but we can’t see it. We give it a name. We measure the movement of the space we can see based on light and surmise that the stuff that we can’t see (but are sure it must be there) must affect what we are seeing or the measurement of movement we have concluded.

Since this theory doesn’t fit anything that we understand, we must be in a bubble of space that has less stuff in it than anywhere else and what we are seeing outside of the bubble is a condition of the bubble.

Now I get it.


14 posted on 09/30/2008 3:51:16 PM PDT by Tenacious 1 (Democrats are for Change - Let's run through a mine field at night wearing clown shoes!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Tenacious 1

You’ve got the right stuff.


18 posted on 09/30/2008 3:58:14 PM PDT by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson