gamma ray blast spotted from 12.2 billion light years away

[[XC] riptide]

No, and no.
Both are just theories (atleast Boyle's law is, 1st example is certainly false) that appear to converge our observations.
Our corner of the universe is just as out there as any spot. We don't necessarily have to go anywhere to make observations and come up with theories about how things work.

Boyles law is not a theory. its... a "Law". Theory =! Law. Like i said,... it can be proven form 1st principles. It can take a long time for a hypothesis to become an accepted Law.

[[XC] riptide]

Generally accepted as true, BUT . . .

It's possible that the speed of light is not the same everywhere. Relativity requires that it is, but there is no hard evidence of that AFAIK.

It's like the cosmological constant. It has changed over time. At one time the universe was expanding at a decreasing rate, now it is at an increasing rate.

Only when travelling through a dense medium... or altered space. For the purposes of looking at gamma ray bursts it can be taken as c. For the vast majority of the distance from here to there is utterly empty space.

[Spawne32]

Generally accepted as true, BUT . . .

It's possible that the speed of light is not the same everywhere. Relativity requires that it is, but there is no hard evidence of that AFAIK.

It's like the cosmological constant. It has changed over time. At one time the universe was expanding at a decreasing rate, now it is at an increasing rate.

also true

[Spawne32]

Only when travelling through a dense medium... or altered space. For the purposes of looking at gamma ray bursts it can be taken as c. For the vast majority of the distance from here to there is utterly empty space.

well utterly empty space as far as we are concerned, im sure there are many phenomena we have yet to discover that light from that far away could have passed through

[[XC] riptide]

well utterly empty space as far as we are concerned, im sure there are many phenomena we have yet to discover that light from that far away could have passed through

Ya... but nothing that will change the estimate of 12billion light years.

[STEvil]

other than maybe a "dense" cloud of near absolute zero material

[largon]

Boyles law is not a theory. its... a "Law". Theory =! Law. Like i said,... it can be proven form 1st principles. It can take a long time for a hypothesis to become an accepted Law.

How is Boyle's law different in principle from, say, Newton's *cough* law of gravitation? It's "a law" only as long as we are not aware of any exceptions to it. Indeed, "Theory" =! "Law". But, also; "Law" can never be nothing more than a "Theory" because, in the end, there is no way to declare something as an absolute truth.

Logic is the only law that cannot be broken.

PS.
Ironically, Boyle's law is a theoretical principle that only applies to ideal gases. In reality it is nothing but a tool of approximation. There are exceptions to it.

[Speederlander]

I think these scientists just make this up
They throw a load of astronomical equations out there which too most is just like "Oh yeah for sure i get it", and hope no one comes along and s on their theory which usually does become the case weather it be tomorrow or 100 years from now, they go what the hell were you thinking this is what it means then another 100 years later the same crap again... Lets just say , it was really far away a long time ago , I'd be more ept to buy that than 12.2 billion light years and all the other bull they throw out there.. Just my 2 cents but hey who am I...

How about you tell us exactly what about the observations you disagree with and specifically why? So we know, what is your scientific background?

[Freonor]

Well.. Saying that something has been around and accepted for decades doesn't really mean anything. I'm sure the scientists were absolutely sure of the 7 crystal skies and that the earth was flat. Which was widely accepted for a lot longer than the newer theories have been.

Theories are only theories and a good physicist will never say "I know" only "I think". Lots of theories are hard to grasp, but most of them fit. Does it make them true? Not really. We just haven't found the instance where the theory is wronged yet.

Gravity is a silly theory in my opinion. Gravitons travelling inbetween.. I mean wtf... We all know that gravity exists, we just don't quite know what it really is.

And sceptical people who don't understand it is fine, but don't come complaining before you've understood the theories and physics behind the science. It's like saying a computer isn't real because you don't understand how it works.

[twilyth]

not quoted

It's hard to take the middle of the road on these things because we become invested in our beliefs. So +1 on your comments.

Dismissing things out of hand, for whatever reason, and giving science more credit than it deserves are equally inappropriate.

There was a great book called "The structure of scientific revolutions" that really pinned this phenomenon down. Every new, successful theory eventually becomes the orthodoxy which is in turn dethroned by a newer theory. And every time you have the same battle between new ideas and established wisdom.

Experimental validation is generally a good sign but it is still a very long way between that and universal truth.

Having said that though, at least in the US, we seem to have encouraged a culture of scientific ignorance. Instead of scientists being heros like professional athletes, they often labor in relative obscurity for meager compensation. It's almost considered "cool" to be oblivious to basic scientific knowledge.

From that point, it is a short jump to questioning all science - especially if it happens to conflict with one's beliefs.