Re: Relativistic aberration

Am Donnerstag000018, 18.07.2024 um 15:02 schrieb gharnagel:

On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 6:33:27 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote:

>
Am Mittwoch000017, 17.07.2024 um 14:05 schrieb gharnagel:

>
On Wed, 17 Jul 2024 7:05:15 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote:

>
What we see in the night sky is actually our own past light-cone.

>
Ah, but if we can develop tachyon astronomy, that will not be true!

>
Well, if light would speed up somehow in remote corners of the universe,
we would still see what we see in the night sky, if this phenomenon
would not change in observable timespans.
>
Possibly there are tachyons, but those are invisible anyhow, because we
can see only light and light moves with light speed and tachyons don't.

 "See" is an interesting verb and "light" is an interesting noun.  We use
them to describe situations where we don't actually use the band between
0.7 and 0.4 um.  We now can "see" gravitational waves and interstellar
neutrinos, as well as IR and UV astronomy thanks to scientific advances.
PTOLEMY may expand the field to "relic" neutrinos (which may be
tachyonic).

Well, to see is what people actually do, when they look into the night sky.
With a telescope we could look further, but that was also based on human perception of light.
Today we have other means and can 'see' more or less the entire em-spectrum.
But our methaphysical intuition is based on the visual impressions of our ancestors, because that is how mainstream physics works.
Therefore I refer to seeing in connection with cosmological modells, because our intuition is based on light and vision.
To include non-em waves or other frequencies into cosmology would allow other intuitions, but that is something, which our mainstream does not like.
  ...
TH