this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2025
41 points (95.6% liked)

science

20550 readers
578 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
m3t00@lemmy.world
Joleee@lemmy.world
laverabe@lemmy.world
DeadPand@midwest.social
laverabe@lemmy.zip
41
Is Earth inside a huge void? 'Sound of Big Bang' hints so (ras.ac.uk)
submitted 2 weeks ago by RegularJoe@lemmy.world to c/science@lemmy.world
14 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world -3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Exactly why I mention the RED SHIFT that we use to detect the age of distance between objects visually.

If this article is true, that means we can't rely on red shift to determine the distance or age of anything.

[–] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

And exactly what I already said: The shift we see IS NOT from light traveling through a void.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Okay, so that's still the same question:

  1. this report seems to have evidence of a void
  2. redshift observation would be impacted if true
  3. ge er gravitational relationships between galaxies would be kind of a huge thing considering our limited view of their

So you're saying this article is all bullshit, or what?

[–] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I'm saying the article is absolute clickbait trash and the assumption of a void's effects would be miniscule compared to the effects of dark energy. ... presuming something like MOND is still incorrect, which is closer to the truth as far as we have evidence for. (MOND models do not match observation)

The density of the void we're in is not like some mystical lack of particles for light-milenia. It's just less dense to the point where the assumed distribution the Cosmological Principal would make most probable doesn't match observation exactly. It's been known about for years. Note I said most probable, not possible. It doesn't even break the MANY assumptions made that create the cosmological principle.