ALMA sees old galaxies before they merged. two ways to look back into the past?

Here we are going at it Bigtime, reaching down deep, 13.8 billion years, flat out to infinity, which after all exists, just look at all the bothersome lazy 8s in serious equations, right? -- or?
I heard a famous scientist ( forgot name) that any calculation which yields infinity as an answer is flawed or at least not usable in physics. So, I looked it up in Wiki and it seems that while infinity may be used in certain calculations, a result which yields infinity would present a problem in offering a justifiable working model.
Physics
In physics, approximations of real numbers are used for continuous measurements and natural numbers are used for discrete measurements (i.e. counting). It is therefore assumed by physicists that no measurable quantity could have an infinite value,[citation needed] for instance by taking an infinite value in an extended real number system, or by requiring the counting of an infinite number of events. It is, for example, presumed impossible for any type of body to have infinite mass or infinite energy. Concepts of infinite things such as an infinite plane wave exist, but there are no experimental means to generate them
and
Theoretical applications of physical infinity
The practice of refusing infinite values for measurable quantities does not come from a priori or ideological motivations, but rather from more methodological and pragmatic motivations[disputeddiscuss][citation needed]. One of the needs of any physical and scientific theory is to give usable formulas that correspond to or at least approximate reality. As an example, if any object of infinite gravitational mass were to exist, any usage of the formula to calculate the gravitational force would lead to an infinite result, which would be of no benefit since the result would be always the same regardless of the position and the mass of the other object. The formula would be useful neither to compute the force between two objects of finite mass nor to compute their motions. If an infinite mass object were to exist, any object of finite mass would be attracted with infinite force (and hence acceleration) by the infinite mass object, which is not what we can observe in reality. Sometimes infinite result of a physical quantity may mean that the theory being used to compute the result may be approaching the point where it fails. This may help to indicate the limitations of a theory.
and
Logic
In logic an infinite regress argument is "a distinctively philosophical kind of argument purporting to show that a thesis is defective because it generates an infinite series when either (form A) no such series exists or (form B) were it to exist, the thesis would lack the role (e.g., of justification) that it is supposed to play."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity#Complex_analysis

Last edited:
will answer later, but here is an interesting link to your doughnut model try. I love pulsations, worry about inflation, but do not think it affects the EMS model the way it stands now, but here it is:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/images/2018/04/180419141533_1_540x360.jpg

View attachment 1935

Thanks for that link. I feel a little reassured that my imagination does not produce complete Woo. Apparently the torus model is being considered by others (per sciencedaily) as well......

The picture reminds of blowing smoke circles, which also inflate with distance. A cone shaped progression.

Last edited:
The picture reminds of blowing smoke circles, which also inflate with distance. A cone shaped progression.

The torus model might have to do with the chamber that they did these experiments in.

I am particularly fond of the smoke circle picture, because vertically, it is the shape of a thermal, with warm air rising strongest in the middle, and friction causing the outside to be slow, see also mushroom cloud. As a sailplane pilot, it was always the goal to center on the inner "chimney" of the torus to get maximum climb from energy that ultimately had to come from the BB energy entry. Linking up with feeling to be at one and in harmony with the infinite cosmic energy. Feeling it in the seat of your pants[flying]*,
I obviously champion the shere expansion model, rather than the torus, the radial, non-rotating movement fits better with our view.
Flight of fancy forgoing formulae.

Last edited:
infinity may be used in certain calculations, a result which yields infinity would present a problem in offering a justifiable working model.

In the Expanding Sphere membrane model, infinity is never thought of in connection with the universe, but the pre -BB and future condition, and of course not with infinite mass, which is what appeared in limited amount only in the BB, - a finite movement through time ago.
Infinite timespace, or energy dispersed into infinite energytime, would appear to be all beyond the horizon, and could be classed as "useless" , but helps us to avoid the agonizing about origin, and the feelings that become so heated when different deities are inserted into the ultimate "source" slot, which is really beyond our ken.

The torus model might have to do with the chamber that they did these experiments in.

I am particularly fond of the smoke circle picture, because vertically, it is the shape of a thermal, with warm air rising strongest in the middle, and friction causing the outside to be slow, see also mushroom cloud. As a sailplane pilot, it was always the goal to center on the inner "chimney" of the torus to get maximum climb from energy that ultimately had to come from the BB energy entry. Linking up with feeling to be at one and in harmony with the infinite cosmic energy. Feeling it in the seat of your pants[flying]*,
I obviously champion the shere expansion model, rather than the torus, the radial, non-rotating movement fits better with our view.
Flight of fancy forgoing formulae.
I know what it feels like when sailing a sailboat, especially when tacking to actually zig zag upwind.

The principle there also is "lift" except that "lift" from the wings of an sailplane is vertical, whereas sailboats use horizontal lift to sail upwind.

Tuning the sails to the precise angle which creates greatest lift is exhilarating when you feel the boat actually surging ahead to reach its maximum speed which actually exceeds the actual wind speed coming at you.

One must admire the skill of eagles to seek and find thermals which allow them to stay high in the air with just an occasional flap of the wings to hold or adjust their position in the thermal.

The principle there also is "lift" except that "lift" from the wings of an sailplane is vertical, whereas sailboats use horizontal lift to sail upwind.
There are 4 mechanism with which lift is generated on an airfoil (The fastest sailboats use foils rather than cloth). One of them is the suction created on the curved upper side.
The ESM has a distant analogy to Bernoulli, as it suggests the daring possibility that some of the forces present outside the membrane's future, have a negative value, like the outwardly attracting gravity of slope #2, in Post 677 page 34, annotation by dave c426913 .
The universe being not only pushed out into the future by the energy residue of the BB (Newton) but by being drawn out into the future (venturi)

Tuning the sails to the precise angle which creates greatest lift is exhilarating when you feel the boat actually surging ahead to reach its maximum speed which actually exceeds the actual wind speed coming at you.

yeah, like that surge in my snark or omega 14, with no lead below to combat heel. Einstein was an avid sailor, doubt though, that he tried to live longer by hull speed related time dilation.

One must admire the skill of eagles to seek and find thermals which allow them to stay high in the air with just an occasional flap of the wings to hold or adjust their position in the thermal.

bird brains. using their ears like an variometer (happens even to us, pop your ears when climbing). We can not imagine how sensitive birds must be to what happens with solid feeling air tugging at their feathers. Not to speak of the extended sex drive urging them north right now into their northern mating arenas. matingtime
We too, constantly having a sense how time is tugging on us, forward, in youth up, later down.

Last edited:
I heard a famous scientist ( forgot name) that any calculation which yields infinity as an answer is flawed or at least not usable in physics. So, I looked it up in Wiki and it seems that while infinity may be used in certain calculations, a result which yields infinity would present a problem in offering a justifiable working model.

I will dare to disagree with that. to the contrary, the inclusion of infinity for time and energy is a nice tie-in to the assertion of the ESM model that the future holds great potential, similar to the pre-BB condition.
If gravity on the exterior of an object's outside never gets to zero, because infinity is so far away, out of reach, over the horizon, then by virtue of the slope 2 shown below, Time and Energy must be infinite, even if the universe is not. The two are fundamental, not emerging.
energytime and timespace affirmed in the model.
1 the level of zero gravity at infinity
2 areas traced by the depressing ball , showing depth, strength of spacetime warp
3hollow spherical mass
6 areas where 0 g occurs

This illustration above shows accurately (not to size) the forces situation inside (the past ) and the outside (the future) of the expanding sphere universe.
Note that the gravity is at the zero level in the interior #6. It falls steeply inside the membrane, vertical lines #4 (thank you dave c426913 for your hint),
Lines #2 show the gradient of any f/d^2 forces, such as gravity stretching to eternity. in all directions of course not just "horizontally "as here.
PS: Example how a subject in amateur "astronomy", here "Is there more gravity inside or out?" can shed light on another, Cosmic Question.

Attachments

75.6 KB · Views: 2
Last edited:
expanding on the universe expanding through time:
nebel said now: post:709; member: 280178 said:

consider the line
4-5 the time axis, the radius, and
3 or 8 the space spheres membrane in which matter resides. then, using the Max speed c,
Space expanded 300 000 km for every second of outward movement from BB 4.
Assuming a constant movement through time, along radius 4 to 5, that ratio 1/3000000 has not changed, and even today, the universe in the model, every second of expansion, adds only roughly the Earth to Moon distance to its gigantic girth.
while the membrane at 8 or lower, doubled in size in the first second or so of its existence, now the growth is flat, imperceptible. therefore
The early growth per time unit would be considered hyper inflationary, if measured by today's meager standards.
When looking at the expansion rate along the line 4 to 7 to 5 , and assuming to look back from 5 toward the horizon 9, or galaxy 6, we do not see in reality a linear expansion, stretching of space, while the movement through time is constant, and
This simplified, not to scale sketch suggests.
time the radius, space the sphere.
Inflation explained by the model through geometry alone.

Last edited:
If energy too creates gravity, and energy is thought to be infinite before the BB and now, then it is easy to see in the model, that the universe, or any object in it would have a gravitational field leading out into infinity. Nothing new here, because with energy fundamental, so would be associated gravity.
There would have been a spike of gravity around the BB singularity, but then leaving behind a mass-, gravity- void zone of the past, the interior of the expanding membrane.
The interesting speculation is:
How does the universe, ES model's the membrane interact with the infinite condition of future time that it is moving into, moving through, moving over?

I hope time hasn't existed forever. ☺

is that a death wish? I hope not, asking, because, likeing -, or hoping - or not, the ESM model, universe expanding through time, shows that:
1) for us to be here, there had to be energy (which is indestructible) turning itself into mass ( now in #3), to start and feed the BB (at point in time#4).
2) if energy is indestructible, she* has to be infinitely old, have had time (#1) to exist in, therefore
3) time must have existed forever, infinitely long ago, and into the future (#1)too, lucky for you. Because, there would not be any future for us [who are inside universe #3] to move into. Surprise: We are doing it as it happens, right now, as we communicate! therefore,
4) time has to be indefinite into the future (#1) too. so:

a) It is time to make space for forever time, so proposed: -- timespace and

b) there must have been a time when there was no mass, but indestructible energy only: energytime. At present though,

c) since the BB, we live in mattertime, aka spacetime.*
Frogger!, time matters, even if we do not personally have her* forever.
*nice to think of time and energy both as females, Einstein did!
Females forever!

Last edited:
Here is another ALMA image,/ saxton taken from BBC article, about massive galaxy group, 2 billion years after the Big beginning. so what happened? why can we not see it now.?
The diagram on page 35, post 681, shows a trace of a an object 1/3 back to the BB, how it would appear, although it is now at the limit of our horizon.
The object in the linked pictures, are from a universe that was 1/7 the present size. while ALMA and others can still get images from objects that where membrane that was 1/2 the size of #8 shown, if they fall outside the horizon #9 and have moved outside the 120 degrees light cone, like position # 10, we can not see what they are doing now.
Hope they are having a great time just like us, seeing their past, never their present.
The ESM model indicates, that there are limits to what we can see about the present, and that we can see greater portions of the universe in it's past, it's smaller past, 1/7 its present size even, as above. .

Last edited:
Thank you sweat pea, a better, though artistic picture.
If this glorious assembly had merged and still be visible, coming to us from a later time. where is it? the whole shabang swallowed by a black hole?

The ESM model suggests, that coming from a smaller past universe, only ~14% its present size,(1/2 0f #8, ) from an antipode position to #5, namely moving toward #10, and a spiral path rather than direct radiation timeline #0, --
Those merging clusters , like the one in the OP, are now (or subsequent developments) beyond our horizon #9. We can see these objects' radiation only coming at us in expanding membrane #3/#8
We can see the whole universe's big bang leftover all around us, but not beyond our present horizon.
hindsight is easier, than foresight, near sight.
PS: bad illustration, looking up, or east, you could see the whole half moon, 1.3 light second into the past, but near things along the surface, only ~ 30 km away to the watery horizon. These galaxies must be beyond the horizon, near #10, otherwise we should see them, the aftermath by "changing the focus"of our instruments, to what "age " size of the universe to focus on. to aim at

Last edited:
from the BBC by sweatpea, additional comment on the image above, repost from pseudo.
this is a prime example of look back time. photons from 12 Billion years ago, but the objects are now gone, moved beyond the horizon. The next image post 712 (real photons) in the article is by the ALMA array.
If some one exists on planets in this cluster now, they can gawk at images of our neighbourhood too, perhaps only gas cloud), what it looked like 2 billion years after the BB too. (glad they cant see us now, the mess we are making), because we are beyond their horizon too.
a mutual admiration society. separated in time only be the speed of light component. .

I don't know what you are asking could you expand upon your opening post. Bold added for Bang.
Alex
The universe has expanded through time since its pinpointed start at the BB, -- for 13.7 yers in all direction, reached a point ~27 billion light years away from us in diameter ( #10 top of page 35),-- if you consider it happening through time with all matter confined in an Expanding Sphere Membrane model. .
Since all signals, like the radiation from all happenings, must travel in that sphere membrane, The universe for all practical purposes is the size of the circumference of that sphere, presently, ~ 86 billion light years in around. We can see only ~ a quarter of it.

Still expanding into timespace, possibly being affected by the constant move into energytime, the infinite past and future.
nave1947, thank you for introducing the term "expanding" early into the #2 post. 12-8-1917.

Last edited:
if you consider it happening through time with all matter confined in an Expanding Sphere Membrane model. .
But it does not have to go through time, it creates it.

But it does not have to go through time, it creates it.

W4Y, you are giving the universe extraordinary powers, the ability of creating time. In the ESM model, we have concluded, that time, in its pre BB form, energytime , in timespace is infinite, over our comprehension horizon.
let me walk you through the process:
1) we do have gravity, caused by energy and mass. Inside an entity gravity falls to zero, outside it falls to zero at an infinite distance onl. In other words never. therefore the source of gravity, energy must be infinite too. to confirm:
2) energy can be converted, but not be created or destroyed, so it must be infinitely old.
3) infinite energy in any form can not exist without having time to exist in, so: time must be infinite, fundamental, beyond the comprehension horizon too.
So: time was, and is not created by the universe, or us, but it is the realm we are moving through into the future.
energytime = infinite time before mass's appearance at the BB
timespace = the non-dimensional realm in which energy acted out it's supposed virtual popping ins and outs.
masstime or mattertime, aka spacetime, the period since the BB, when some of the infinitely old energy converted into mass, matter, as we enjoy it. ( the expanding sphere, where we are here)

Last edited:
Light has been travelling for 14 billion years in all directions and the universe has been expanding. That is where the 92 billion light year diameter comes from (for the observable universe). The universe expands faster than the speed of light from our perspective and therefore there are parts of the universe that we could never see thus the distinction between the observable and non-observable universe.

Now, XelasNave 1947 has upped the ante to 95 billion. fine.
The ESM model as it was defined, registers the time, radius it moved through, so it is linked to "c" when considering size in space.
3/4 of the universe in the model is not inaccessible because of faster than light, hyper-inflationary expansion, but simple geometry. we look along the circumference, not back into the radius. and that 13,7 billion years look-back-time has only a 1/4 horizon area of the total expanded surface.

But I do think "mainstream" has a diameter of approx 95 billion light years.
I gather your model has something different.
Thats ok with me but I will check for myself with a ruler.
Alex

nobody knows for certain how big the universe is. imho. The model shows it expanded through timespace in a 13.7 billion year radius, giving it a theoretical model surface with a great circle measurement of ~86 billion years. Doubling in size every second at the beginning, now only adding a comparative pittance. If matter exceeded that expansion speed (could it even?) is inflation theory conjecture.
The model assumes a steady movement, expansion through time, and
having the universe double every second in the beginning is good enough to reach near the 90 billion year mark, sans inflation.

Last edited:
Doubling in size every second at the beginning,
I think the model has the doubling much faster than every second.
Off the top of my head I think it went from something very small to the observable universe in and I roughly quite Neil De Grasse in "a trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second" however I will leave it up to you to familiarie yourself with the theory.
Alex