TERRIBLE Nobel Prize for Accelerating Universe

On Oct 5, 9:46 am, PD wrote:
On 10/5/2011 10:34 AM, wrote:

Hey PD before you try to teach anybody you need to read the papers. An
accelerating universe means that the more distance galaxies are the
MORE redshifted than the current theory expected.

At a specific z (redshift), they found that 50 supernovae were *dimmer*
than expected. Since these are standard candles, this means they were
further *out* than expected by the Hubble law.

The whole business of accelerating expansion of your universe is
believe in the Chandrasekhar limit which itself is made up of several
dubious assumptions.

You got to be nuts to believe in all the assumptions that manifest the
Chandrasekhar limit.

You are out of your mind to dictate how your universe behaves by
believing in the Chandrasekhar limit.

On 10/7/11 3:53 PM, Koobee Wublee wrote:


The whole business of accelerating expansion of your universe is
believe in the Chandrasekhar limit which itself is made up of several
dubious assumptions.

You got to be nuts to believe in all the assumptions that manifest the
Chandrasekhar limit.

You are out of your mind to dictate how your universe behaves by
believing in the Chandrasekhar limit.


There are a number of independent measures that confirm accelerated
expansion... nothing to do with supernovae, Type Ia or otherwise.

On Oct 7, 7:22*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 10/7/11 3:53 PM, Koobee Wublee wrote:

The whole business of accelerating expansion of your universe is
believe in the Chandrasekhar limit which itself is made up of several
dubious assumptions.

You got to be nuts to believe in all the assumptions that manifest the
Chandrasekhar limit.

You are out of your mind to dictate how your universe behaves by
believing in the Chandrasekhar limit.

* *There are a number of independent measures that confirm accelerated
* *expansion... nothing to do with supernovae, Type Ia or otherwise.

BULL****!!!

On 10/8/11 12:27 AM, Koobee Wublee wrote:
On Oct 7, 7:22 pm, Sam wrote:
On 10/7/11 3:53 PM, Koobee Wublee wrote:

The whole business of accelerating expansion of your universe is
believe in the Chandrasekhar limit which itself is made up of several
dubious assumptions.

You got to be nuts to believe in all the assumptions that manifest the
Chandrasekhar limit.

You are out of your mind to dictate how your universe behaves by
believing in the Chandrasekhar limit.

There are a number of independent measures that confirm accelerated
expansion... nothing to do with supernovae, Type Ia or otherwise.

BULL****!!!

Here's some what you call "bull****" for you, Koobee--

Dark Energy Measurement Sheds New Light on Universe's Expansion
http://www.physorg.com/news198431059.html

"Clusters of galaxies, the largest gravitationally bound objects in the
universe, began forming about 10 billion years ago. Because it takes a
long time for light from the farthest reaches of the universe to arrive
at Earth, the most distant clusters appear as they did when they were
much younger, while the closest ones look more their actual ages. By
looking at clusters both near and far, researchers were able to study
the evolution of clusters and deduce how changes in the universe over
billions of years helped shape their growth. The results offer insights
into the forces that made the universe we see today.

"As space expands faster and faster, it becomes more difficult for
gravity to pull matter together and form structures such as galaxy
clusters," said lead author Adam Mantz, a researcher at NASA's Goddard
Space Flight Center and former graduate student at KIPAC. By observing
clusters at a range of distances, the researchers found that the
present-day universe contains fewer clusters than would be expected if
the expansion of the universe weren't accelerating.

"At the same time," Mantz said, "whatever is causing the acceleration
leaves a distinctive fingerprint on the resulting cosmic structure."
Searching for a match to that fingerprint, the researchers compared
their observations of galaxy clusters with various models of dark
energy, a form of energy theorized to permeate all of space and drive
the universe's accelerated expansion. Although the general idea of dark
energy is relatively well accepted, there are a variety of models that
try to explain what it is and how it works, and a detailed understanding
remains elusive".

On Oct 8, 5:35 am, Sam Wormley wrote:

Here's some what you call "bull****" for you, Koobee--

Dark Energy Measurement Sheds New Light on Universe's Expansion
http://www.physorg.com/news198431059.html

Sam, lay off the occult **** for a change, would you?

** FAITH IS THEORY
** LYING IS TEACHING
** NITWIT IS GENIUS
** OCCULT IS SCIENCE --- Sam
** PARADOX IS KOSHER
** FUDGING IS DERIVATION
** BULL**** IS TRUTH
** BELIEVING IS LEARNING
** MYSTICISM IS WISDOM
** IGNORANCE IS KNOWLEDGE
** CONJECTURE IS REALITY
** PLAGIARISM IS CREATIVITY
** MATHEMAGICS IS MATHEMATICS

On 10/9/11 1:32 AM, Koobee Wublee wrote:


Sam, lay off the occult **** for a change, would you?


Did you read the article, Koobee? Dark Energy Measurement Sheds
New Light on Universe's Expansion
http://www.physorg.com/news198431059.html

On Oct 7, 10:22*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 10/7/11 3:53 PM, Koobee Wublee wrote:



The whole business of accelerating expansion of your universe is
believe in the Chandrasekhar limit which itself is made up of several
dubious assumptions.

You got to be nuts to believe in all the assumptions that manifest the
Chandrasekhar limit.

You are out of your mind to dictate how your universe behaves by
believing in the Chandrasekhar limit.

* *There are a number of independent measures that confirm accelerated
* *expansion... nothing to do with supernovae, Type Ia or otherwise.

In the ASOVAC's convention (Caracas 1982) I presented my thesis that
the near universe have an accelerated expantion. And that acceleration
is
mesured by Newton's Gravitation Constant. (Nobody then gave any
attention)

That constant mesures the acceleration of expanding tridimensional
space by unit
of mass. With the Hubble Constant one can determine the mean density
of our near universe and viceversa.
Ludovicus

On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 03:21:58 -0700 (PDT), Ludovicus
wrote:

On Oct 7, 10:22*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 10/7/11 3:53 PM, Koobee Wublee wrote:



The whole business of accelerating expansion of your universe is
believe in the Chandrasekhar limit which itself is made up of several
dubious assumptions.

You got to be nuts to believe in all the assumptions that manifest the
Chandrasekhar limit.

You are out of your mind to dictate how your universe behaves by
believing in the Chandrasekhar limit.

* *There are a number of independent measures that confirm accelerated
* *expansion... nothing to do with supernovae, Type Ia or otherwise.

In the ASOVAC's convention (Caracas 1982) I presented my thesis that
the near universe have an accelerated expantion. And that acceleration
is
mesured by Newton's Gravitation Constant. (Nobody then gave any
attention)

That constant mesures the acceleration of expanding tridimensional
space by unit
of mass. With the Hubble Constant one can determine the mean density
of our near universe and viceversa.
Ludovicus
I am sure we'd be interested in more specific details.
John Polasek

On Oct 7, 1:53*pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
On Oct 5, 9:46 am, PD wrote:

On 10/5/2011 10:34 AM, wrote:
Hey PD before you try to teach anybody you need to read the papers. An
accelerating universe means that the more distance galaxies are the
MORE redshifted than the current theory expected.
At a specific z (redshift), they found that 50 supernovae were *dimmer*
than expected. Since these are standard candles, this means they were
further *out* than expected by the Hubble law.

The whole business of accelerating expansion of your universe is
believe in the Chandrasekhar limit which itself is made up of several
dubious assumptions.

You got to be nuts to believe in all the assumptions that manifest the
Chandrasekhar limit.

You are out of your mind to dictate how your universe behaves by
believing in the Chandrasekhar limit.

At best the expansion theory is only outdated by 13+ billion years.
So there is really no honest way of telling what's happening way the
hell out there.

BTW; eventually, if given 100 billion years, those galaxies should
burn out.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On 10/8/11 5:30 PM, Brad Guth wrote:


At best the expansion theory is only outdated by 13+ billion years.
So there is really no honest way of telling what's happening way the
hell out there.


When we look at the moon we see is as it was 1.3 seconds ago.
When we look at the Sun the delay is 8+ minutes.

Because of the finite speed of light we can observer what has
happened in the very distant past and the early universe. Quit
complaining.