I was looking at the moon this morning, predawn, and remembering many imaginations I had several years ago during a Lunar eclipse about the reflected light of the sun from the moon. Now as a child my Dad would take me out star gazing, not that he knew anything more than what he had just read in the star chart books that fascinated me. Actually both my parents encouraged me without much comprehension even though they were accomplished in their fields. But I digress, so this first lunar eclipse was purely by chance as the moon lost its light on a clear night. We weren't even star gazing that night, I just noticed and we spent the time watching, trying to see the 'cloud'. It wasn't until the next day that my Dad had excitedly explained that he had heard on the news that it was a lunar eclipse.
There are some very interesting facts about Lunar and Solar eclipses, and yet they are not what I'm writing about today, may be later. But as a note if there was any real notion of setting up camp on another planet, the moon would be a good start, a handing launching site or test facility, and a first try will turn up what is truly necessary for such future ventures. Now that's getting closer to what it was I was thinking about. There is the necessity of imagination and the willingness to put aside ideas that do not line up with reality.
If I recall correctly, Einstein called this process "mind thought experiments" which is the precursor of actually writing it down and such. There isn't anything new about taking an idea and applying it to a known set criteria. Much like a simple equation/formula (mind) and seeing if it performs in a known situation/quantities (thought) and if so then how will it performs in an unknown situation (experiment). The idea is itself intuitive, and then the rest is analytical. Therefore if the intuitive thought is grounded in reality and the reason is sound, then any speculated conjecture that is associated directly with the intuitive thought should be able to be solved. If the conjecture is only partially associated then only a partial solution is established, but this partial solution should indicate what is necessary for the conjecture to be solve.
This idea is echoed in algebra with its use of variables and constants, its known and unknown quantities. However in the 'mind thought experiments' the quantities are ideas which might be represented as equations or how equations interact and such, so forth, and further on.
So why would I go on about this? It has to do with developing critical thinking. It is the only thing that distinguishes the scientist from the layman. A serious problem with the BBT is that it is accepted without plausible explanation. I remember years ago there was a bunch of hubbub over the echo of the Big Bang, however everyone knows that an echo is produced by the reverberation, to cause to vibrate again, ergo reflected back from an event. However if there is nothing before the Big Bang then there can be nothing to reflect off of, therefore no echo. Instead of revising the incorrect hypothesis numerous, even more erroneous conjectures are added. Adding sloppy thinking to sloppy thinking just makes a mess. Even though three lefts make a right, three wrongs do not.
In general I view this background static as matter of fact, like background radiation, not anything to be concerned about, but aware of when making observations with equipment that maybe effected/detecting said interference patterns. They are of interest, however from the perspective of the Earth and this solar system the actual application of such data as far as astrological data is very little. Without the perspective of looking into this star system or galaxy, the understanding of its spatial density has no appraisable value. It is highly likely that there is a 'surface' between this start system and a space between the next and even a mark difference of 'density' of different star systems reflecting the composition of matter as in star(s), planets, moons, asteroids, and any other matter which can be recognized as being 'local'. Since I haven't made a specific demand on the 'beginning' of the Universe the general theory of unified fields with gravity does not have fixed presumptions of Space to Matter, but it has a clear perspective of matter, energy, and spatial interactions defined by Relative variances of qualities of Space and Matter. So Energy, Space, and Matter are described in Relative quantities and their vectors and other qualities are similarly solved as such.
Stephen A. Halkovic III