←back to thread

First images from Euclid are in

(dlmultimedia.esa.int)
727 points mooreds | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.212s | source
Show context
lefrenchy ◴[] No.41910562[source]
It's just so crazy to me to see a galaxy 420 million light years away. That is so much time for what we're seeing to have changed. I presume life can form within that window given the right conditions, so to some degree it just feels a bit sad that the distance is so great that we can't actually see what may exist in this moment that far away
replies(4): >>41910744 #>>41911556 #>>41911815 #>>41911840 #
gary_0 ◴[] No.41911815[source]
Given that the speed of light is the speed of causality, technically it's not really 420 million years in the "past" in any meaningful sense. The present is relative, not universal. The collected light we see in our telescopes is a lie about a particular universe that will never be, at least in any tangible way. On a cosmic scale, every spot in the universe sees its own unique sequence of events going on around it, all of it rendered virtually immutable by the relative slowness of c.

It's a beautiful nightmare, isn't it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativity_of_simultaneity

replies(3): >>41912116 #>>41912241 #>>41913283 #
conductr ◴[] No.41912241[source]
I’ll admit I’m severely undereducated in this stuff, probably less than an average high schooler these day but nevertheless I feel like I’ve considered this before and never knew it had a name. Which makes me feel not completely stupid.

> whether two spatially separated events occur at the same time – is not absolute, but depends on the observer's reference frame.

But What I don’t understand about this is why is “time” framed as observer based? In my mind, the events do happen at the same time and just are unable to be observed as such. I feel like time is a figment of our imagination, it’s just a measurement. In my pea brain time makes sense more as a constant and the other things are something else that impacts the latency of observance

replies(2): >>41912512 #>>41913348 #
1. satvikpendem ◴[] No.41912512[source]
If not for observation, what does "happen" mean? Keep in mind observation in the physics sense doesn't mean conscious observation but rather that anything experiences something at all.