Summations Only

Inadequate, you can easily verify the physics of what the cat says here. Get a balloon and marker pen or something.
In another analogy used by the quacks to sell the mathemagic to the masses of gullible apes, the snake oil peddling clowns are talking about points on the surface of a balloon representing the galaxies in the putative expansion of the universe. They claim that the points on the surface remain stationary while the distance between them all is increasing. Not so in the physical reality of real balloons painted with real dots. Unless the dots are assumed to be abstract 0D points, that is. If not it is easy to see that the paint is stretching in proportion to the dots' physical size relative to the rest of the dot-free surface of the balloon. Try it, Inadequate, if you don't believe the cat and you will see the quackademic sham easily exposed by a simple experiment.

I suppose you think that meant something.

I think that you are demanding too much from the analogies. They are an approximation. I suspect that the contradictions disappear when you replace the analogy with actual knowledge.

That is hilarious. A little harsh but hilarious.

No, crypto-creo Dogma. The actual knowledge may only expose the inherent contradictions further. Hit the actual sources of confusion. Read first what Minkowski intended by time-axis in Raum und Zeit and then compare that to the naive interpretation by Friedmann in his book with a similar title. Friedmann did not get any of it. In the first case time axis is an arbitrary vector that may point to any relative to a plane direction, in the second case the axis is naively reified into a single direction to which is attributed an absolute universal physical significance. Friedmann is explicitly talking about the time since the creation of the world and suchlike. Einstein did not quite get it either. When presented first with Friedmann's mathemagic Einstein intuitively felt it was just a fancy concept but he never had any clear idea why. If he did he would have crushed the concept like a bedbug which he did in the case of Schwarzschild's singularities.Try Minkowski:
Space and Time - Wikisource, the free online library
Find Friedmann translated yourself as the cat can read the original and does not know a link to such. Edited by Alfred Maddenstein, : No reason given.

Hi Oni, You wouldn't live long enough to reach Andromeda traveling at the speed of light.But expansion is based upon:

quote:

---

The night sky presents the viewer with a picture of a calm and unchanging Universe. So the 1929 discovery by Edwin Hubble that the Universe is in fact expanding at enormous speed was revolutionary. Hubble noted that galaxies outside our own Milky Way were all moving away from us, each at a speed proportional to its distance from us. He quickly realized what this meant that there must have been an instant in time (now known to be about 14 billion years ago) when the entire Universe was contained in a single point in space. The Universe must have been born in this single violent event which came to be known as the "Big Bang."

---

The Big Bang | Science Mission DirectorateThus expansion is based upon the assumption of all galaxies outside our own Milky Way moving away from us.If everything was in one place at one time and expanded to where it is today there could be no blue shifted galaxies out there if expansion and the BBT is correct.As far as distance between the Earth and Andromeda it is around 2.5 million light years. 2.410¹⁹ km Are you saying expansion of space between objects is not taking place? So you are saying that space is not expanding.Andromeda and the Milky is getting closer together.That being the case they did not originate in a central point, as demanded by the BBT. So the Milky Way and Andromeda are moving through space like our space ships do when they go to the space station, is that what you are saying?If so what is the mechanism for such movement? So if the BBT is correct Expansion never took place because it had no grand scale to take place in.That is unless space is what is expanding and separating the different entities in the universe.But that can't be as there are some that are blue shifted.God Bless,

The two galaxies are in orbit around each other, ICANT. The mechanism is something called gravity, which is involved in other orbiting things, like the Earth and its moon. As there are at least a few dozen galaxies, three of them of comparable size, in our Local Group, the orbits are more chaotic than the ones in our Solar System. This is why an eventual collision is in the works.2,500,000 light years is pretty dang close on the scale of the observable universe. I personally have seen an object, 3C273, that's about a thousand times as far from us as the Andromeda galaxy is - and that with my 6-inch reflector. On that sort of scale, galaxies/clusters of galaxies are moving apart. On local scales, like a piddly 24,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 meters, gravity can dominate that overall expansion.

If you don't want to learn that's ok, but don't pretend to know something you don't. You're sounding quite silly at this point. And yet it's still considered close to us by comparison. It's in our Local Group.Not all, but most. Those in our Local Group can be seen moving toward us because they are close enough to observe their motion. The farther the galaxies are from us the only thing we can observe is their red-shifting. Blues Shifting Galaxies

quote:

---

So, in a nutshell, if a galaxy's peculiar velocity is toward us and larger than its Hubble recessional velocity, then its light will appear blueshifted. This is possible for galaxies that are nearby like Andromeda, but as galaxies get farther away, their Hubble velocities dwarf any peculiar velocities they might have. As such, it's better to study far away galaxies when you're interested in how the universe is expanding.

​

Almost all the galaxies are red shifted; they are moving away from us, due to the Hubble expansion of the Universe. There are a handful of the nearby galaxies that are blue shifted. In addition to the apparent motion due to Universal expansion, individual galaxies also have their own intrinsic or peculiar motions; i.e. each galaxy is in motion irrespective of the universe's expansion and has its own unique velocity.

​

The velocities are in the order of hundreds of kilometers per second and in regions close enough to our own galaxy where the Hubble expansion results in less outward expansion than this, the galaxies' peculiar velocities (if they are large enough and sufficiently towards us) can overcome that expansion, resulting in a blue-shift.

​

There are about 100 known galaxies with blueshifts out of the billions of galaxies in the observable universe. Most of these galaxies are in our own local group, and are all in orbit about each other. Most are dwarf galaxies among them include the Andromeda Galaxy, M31, etc.

---

Yes, but not using rockets or any method of propulsion like those found on space shuttles. Gravity, ICANT. The gravity between the two galaxies is drawing them together, ICANT.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.

Hi Oni, So how did they get separated in the first place?God Bless,

Don't change your questions to go deeper into confusion.Do you understand everything I wrote above?Do you get that gravity is pulling them together?- Oni

They each formed from collisions of protogalaxies that had formed from clouds of gas. Likely all the whole mess were gravitationally linked to each other. I can't find a link at this moment, but I don't think Andromeda and the Milky Way have yet had time for more than a couple of do-si-dos around each other.

The Hubble law is ever defied by the gravity drawing the simian towards its blue shifted stupidity. That's why the ape is blessed with BBT

Hi Oni, I understand that you and others believe that.I also understand that there are others that don't believe that.If space between the two is expanding at the speed of light how can they get closer together?I know we will invoke gravity and space ceases to expand. between the galaxy's as it does in the galaxy. Thus we say the galaxies are gravitationally bound. That being the case why is the Milky Way and Andromeda not gravitationally bound to a larger group which is bound to a larger group etc. Then what is expanding?God Bless,

Hi Coragyps, There are 17 satelite galaxies orbiting the Milky Way, and Andromeda is not one of them.There are 23 satelite galaxies orbiting Andromeda and the Milky Way is not one of them.God Bless,The Milky Way and Andromeda are on a head on collision course.

Space between the two is not expanding at the speed of light. The Hubble parameter is about 70 km/s per Megaparsec. The Andromeda galaxy is 0.8 Mpc away from the Milkway so space between the two galaxies is expanding at about 60 Km/s. On the other hand the radial velocity of the Andromeda is about 300 km/s towards us. Hence we see a blue shift.No, gravity is not stopping the expansion of space between Milky Way Andromeda galaxy. No one has made such a claim. If things worked as you suggest no astronomical objects could ever approach each other.