Chapt17 Telescope experiments as distance tool #1576 ATOM TOTALITY5th ed

Since Doppler redshift is a refraction/diffraction phenomenon and has
no relevance for distance measuring, but rather measures curvature of
space, that we need a new distance measuring tool. That tool in 2010
was the telescope itself.
What I found is that the instrument of the telescope itself is the
finest tool to
measure distance. In a previous post where Mr. Wright's website at
UCLA was
referred to:


http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/distance.htm


Mr. Wright fails to mention the world's finest astronomy distance
measuring tool.


So I am going to devote an entire chapter to how the TELESCOPE is the
finest
and best measure of distance in astronomy.
Light is very
much different from sound waves. In sound waves we can have Doppler
shifts
with small or large speed. But light is very different from sound
waves and trying
to attach a Doppler shift to the speed of light, is, well, like
saying
that Special
Relativity is not true. So unfortunately a Doppler redshift of light
is merely the curvature of Space, not distance.



Some 60 years ago, what should have happened in the 1950's, was that
the
astronomy
community should have summoned a meeting where the centerpiece of
the
meeting was
to calibrate the Telescope as the best and only reliable distance
measure. Now I realize
that 1950 was a time of a primitive understanding of astronomy.


In this metaphorical meeting of 1950, what should have been done was
bring in the
best and brightest physicists of Optics to hammer out the analogous
Lower Limit
length in a Microscope with the Upper Limit of distance in the
Telescope.


We all know that a light-microscope cannot see a virus because it is
too small, but
it can see large forms of bacteria. In the same analogy to
astronomy,
we know that
at some distance from Earth, the very best telescopes have an upper
limit to distance
as to seeing astro bodies whether stars or galaxies.


In the old days, astronomers thought that the Great Walls and quasars
were billions
of light years away, for they used the fakery of Doppler redshift on
speed of
galaxies and speed of
expansion of Space.


But they never used the best measure of Cosmic distance of the
telescope itself.
So what this chapter is all about is to hammer out that distance
measure.


If one looks in Wikipedia for "light intensity" one finds a plethora
of various different
definitions.


I am going to define light intensity as merely the inverse square of
distance. So that
a light source of a flashlight beam at 3 light years distance is 1/9
as intense.


I am going to need to define resolution and magnification of the
telescope and what I
am going to do is define it in terms of a "laser light" versus a
regular light. We all
know that a laser light is confined to the outline of the light
source
itself. So that if the
Sun were a laser light emitter, we would see it very distinctly as a
disc at a far distance,
and much further in distance than as a general emitter of light.


Now I need to look up the mathematics of laser light and its
intensity
with distance.


But in the meantime, I ask these questions of the Hubble Space
Telescope HST:


(1) Given a flashlight in the total dark of Space, how far away can
this flashlight
be such that the HST can still resolve the image of the light
source?
(2) That distance I am guessing is the distance at which the number
of
photons
in the flashlight make a coherent beam. If the flashlight has 10^20
photons emitted
per second and where 10^10 of them are coherent to laser light, then
the HST
distance that can resolve the flashlight depends on this number of
coherent
laser photons.
(3) I then extrapolate up to stars, galaxies and quasars.


Example: The galaxies of the Sloan Great Wall are alleged to be a
billion light years
away. We can see those galaxies in HST images. The light intensity
of
those
galaxies is 1 / 10^18 intensity. The light from a Perseus galaxy is
only a million
light years away and its intensity is 1 / 10^12 intensity. The
number
of photons in
a galaxy that is "laser light coherent photons is about 10^12
photons.
Thus, the
HST can see only galaxies of a 1 million light year distance. And
since HST
sees the Sloan Great Wall and sees quasars as images, means that the
distance
to the Sloan and quasars is not billion light years but rather
instead
only
million of light years distance.


Summary: what I am doing is using the Microscope optics to measure
length
and using that to measure distance for the Telescope in astronomy.
Both have
a limit of distance. All I need to do is define precisely the
resolution and magnification
ability of a telescope and I have used the "coherence of laser
light"
to make that
definition. I use the inverse square of distance law for intensity.
Then I estimate
the number of coherent laser photons of a shining body such as a
star,
galaxy or
quasar. What I end up with is the idea that the observable universe
through a telescope
is much smaller than what the astronomy community of the past said.
I
come up with
a Cosmos that is measured in millions of light years and with an
upper
limit of 400
million light years distance. The old aberrant astronomy community
thought that
they were seeing bodies out to the billions of light years away. I
say
they were
ridiculously wrong and that they were so daft by not using the
finest
and very
best of distance measuring in all of astronomy-- the telescope
itself.


In May 2010
Enrico wrote:


I found this while fishing for interstellar laser analogs, thought
you might get a laugh out of it.


In 2001, a group of summer students at the National Radio Astronomy
Observatory used the VLA to observe a brown dwarf,


even though they had been told by seasoned astronomers that brown
dwarfs are not observable at radio wavelengths.


Â*Their discovery of a strong flare of radio emission from the object
surprised astronomers and the students' scientific paper on the
discovery was published in the prestigous scientific journal
Nature.


The title is suggestive:
Brown Dwarfs: A New Class of Stellar Lighthouse
http://www.nrao.edu/pr/2007/browndwarfbeams/


Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Enrico

Nice to see students making a science discovery. And I thought that
no
astro
body was a laser emitter.


But I am trying to string together a Methodology and definitions of a
telescope
as a measuring tool for distance. Some methodology and perhaps some
theory.


Enrico, did you see anywhere of a equation for the intensity of a
laser beam
whether it relates to an inverse square of distance?


First off I need to use the Microscope for analogy and the lower
limit
of the microscope
for length measure is dependent on the wavelength. If the wavelength
is as large or
larger than the object to be seen then the lower limit is reached.


Now how do I form a basis or foundation for the Telescope for
distance
given that the
wavelength for the Microscope? So it is not the wavelength that sets
the upper limit of
distance for a specific telescope such as the Hubble Space
Telescope,
HST, but rather it is
the influx of enough photons to make out an image.


So for a Microscope the lower limit of length is the wavelength of
light. For a Telescope
the upper limit of distance is a given influx of photons of the
source.


Here is where I want to bring into the theory or methodology the
laser
light. So that at some
distance from the Sun if we had the HST pointed at the Sun, we can
see
the Sun provided
the Sun is having enough photons of laser-quality impacting the HST.


Now I pick on laser light because the source is well marked out and
because of the diffusion
of normal light with the intensity as inverse square of distance.


Let me call the intensity diffusion as the sphere of diffusion of
light and what is working against the telescope from seeing a image.
So at what distance from the Sun would HST
be unable to see the Sun because the photons from the Sun are all
diffused upon this
sphere of diffusion since it is an inverse square with distance. Is
the distance 100,000 light years?
Maybe a 1,000,000 light years at which HST no longer has the Sun
with
an image? Let me work
with 100,000 light years and call it the limit of seeing the Sun by
HST. So at that distance
the HST looking at the Sun is not able to gather or collect enough
photons from the Sun
for they are diffused into this sphere of diffusion of the photons.


And here enters the laser photons. I am going to call an image in a
telescope as a laser image
in that there were enough coherent laser photons from the source at
which the image of the
source was seen by the telescope. If a source is not seen then there
were not enough laser
photons at that distance and that they had mostly diffused out.


So now, if we had a flashlight of regular light, the sphere of
diffusion would be at a small distance from the source, but if that
same flashlight were wholly laser, the source can be
seen for a much further distance. And so I want to find out a
equation
of how many
coherent laser photons is emitted by a wide variety of light sources
such as the Sun,
Cepheid variables, Supernova etc.


So I have two things working against one another. I have the sphere
of
diffusion of the
intensity of the light source and then I have the number of laser
photons emitted by the
source which provides a sharp image of the source.


So that the theory would go like this for the Sun seen by HST at
100,000 light years.
We still see the Sun at that distance by HST because there are the
minimun number
of the coherent laser like photons that can make an image of the Sun
at that distance.
But any distance further, and the Sun no longer has an image by HST.
So if the distance
of the minimum number of laser photons is 100,000 light years than
at
110,000 light
years the HST would no longer be able to see the Sun for there are
not
enough coherent
photons from the Sun impacting at that distance away.


Now I doubt that Microscope limits of viewing length has anything to
do with coherent
laser photons, for the issue of resolution of a bacteria is tyed up
with the wavelength.


Now the reason I am guessing that the upper limit of distance by the
HST is 400 million
light years is because in Jarrett's mapping of the 3rd layer, there
appears the P-P supercluster
and the P-I supercluster of a RING like structure, and although
Jarrett and others
say they are unsure of what this ring is. I take the Ring at face
value and say it is
intrinsic. And because it is a Ring, signifies the end of "seeing in
the telescope that
was used." Perhaps a newer, better telescope will push the Ring out
further in Space.


But it also means that everything thought to be further out than 400
million light years such
as the Great Walls and the quasars were actually shorter in distance
from Earth than the
Ring. Why is that? Because the telescope can see the quasars and
Great
Walls.


Now I do not know if my above methodology is going to work. It sounds
reasonable
and logical. It asks of someone to figure out how many laser photons
a
source emits
so that a telescope at a large distance can still see an image.
Enough
coherent photons
over a distance allows an image.

--
Approximately 90 percent of AP's posts are missing in the Google
newsgroups author search starting May 2012. They call it indexing; I
call it censor discrimination. Whatever the case, what is needed now
is for science newsgroups like sci.physics, sci.chem, sci.bio,
sci.geo.geology, sci.med, sci.paleontology, sci.astro,
sci.physics.electromag to
be hosted by a University the same as what
Drexel
University hosts sci.math as the Math Forum. Science needs to
be in education
not in the hands of corporations chasing after the
next dollar bill.
Besides, Drexel's Math Forum can demand no fake
names, and only 5 posts per day of all posters which reduces or
eliminates most spam and hate-spew, search-engine-bombing, and front-
page-hogging. Drexel has
done a excellent, simple and fair author-
archiving of AP sci.math posts since May 2012
as seen
he

http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies