![]() |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 10/20/2012 7:10 PM, Painius wrote:
Hubble never "came around". "Hubble believed that his count data gave a more reasonable result concerning spatial curvature if the redshift correction was made assuming no recession. To the very end of his writings he maintained this position, favouring (or at the very least keeping open) the model where no true expansion exists, and therefore that the redshift "represents a hitherto unrecognized principle of nature."[23]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Hubble Good catch, AA! So I guess I'm guilty of doing what most people have done? I have endowed Hubble with a discovery and belief that he did not make nor possess. Here Painus uses the "But MOM, everyone is doing it" defense. I guess the old tricks are the best tricks? -- "OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo .. å˜äº® http://www.richardgingras.com/tia/im...logo_large.jpg |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Lemaître’s Hubble relationship | Sam Wormley[_2_] | Amateur Astronomy | 4 | August 4th 11 01:38 AM |
AIDAN...GEORGES ' TWIN ? | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 9 | March 3rd 08 08:14 AM |