Quote:
Originally Posted by renormalised
That's why you need a survey to be done by a large space telescope (maybe the JWST or a derivative thereof).
Why is this??.....I answered that question in my previous post. Conservation of Angular Momentum....any object, no matter what it is, if it's undergoing rotation, it must therefore also have angular momentum. If you take the present universe to be spinning at X and with an angular momentum of Y, since that present angular momentum is large due to the size of the present universe (radius=Z), if you decrease the radius Z by a factor of 2 and therefore decrease the value Y correspondingly, in order to conserve the angular momentum for that smaller universe, you must spin it up faster, so X becomes larger. If, as they say, the rotation of the Universe is affecting the handedness of the rotation of the galaxies such that there's an asymmetry to that rotation, if you increase the rotational velocity to conserve the overall angular momentum, it would mean that in any given volume of the universe, there would be more galaxies showing that asymmetry because the volume of space occupied by galaxies in the smaller universe is, of course, smaller and there are more galaxies crammed into that space due to that reduction in size. It may have also meant that the actual % of galaxies showing an asymmetry was greater, as the faster rotation imposed itself upon the formation of those galaxies. Although, there may have been a cutoff point where the amount of rotation stopped affecting the rotational symmetry of the galaxies to the extent that most of the galaxies after this were of the typical handedness seen. The original "kacky handed" galaxies would still be influenced by the rotation, though, as they would appear to congregate in the flow in whatever direction the universe was still rotating.
That's why you need much larger sample sizes than the ones either study chose. They're really too small to actually calculate what the real % of handedness is and whether there is a predominant direction for "kacky handed" galaxies showing a rotation of the universe. What they're both doing is giving only a very rough approximate (either 0% or X%). However, you also have to take into account what the Zoo team said about observational bias.
|
Hmm .. its almost impossible to have a conversation about this without some clarity in the model underpinning it all. The assumptions are critical. For example, if the model is a Godel solution to Einstein's field equations, then there would be no expansion, so I don't know what to make of an increasing z radius over time
Cheers