Ashmore's Paradox

"Lyndon Ashmore" wrote...
in message ...

Greetings,
How do you know that your paradox will occur? Either you or Mars may not be
here in 4 years time (though I truly hope you both are). My paradox is
happening now.

You mean Mercury? Anyway, it appears that you're missing
the meaning of "paradox." Apparently, you are seeing this
as a paradox because it happens to be happening in the
age in which you live. May i ask... what happens tomorrow
when the mass and radius of the electron and the Planck
constant have not changed but the Hubble Time *has*?

But say you are correct. Say that there actually *is* some
significance to this coincidence. Can you describe this
importance? this significance?

Also apart from yourself and the rottation of Mars both being in a spin,
they are not related.

Unfortunately, i cannot see how the Hubble Time is related
to the electron's mass and radius and Planck's constant.
What are you seeing that i can't?

Consider this:
Just forget, for a moment, what these Big Bang Codsmologists have been
telling us and lets look what the experimental evidence says.
The Hubble constant is found by measuring the redshift in light from distant
galaxies.
The redshift is found by measuring the shift in absorption lines in the
spectra of this light.
These absorption lines are caused by electrons in atoms in the space around
stars etc. taking this light and absorbing photons of certain energies.
The energy of these absorbed photons is proportional to their frequency and
the constant of proportionality is the planck constant.
Ashmore's paradox tells us that measured values of H are exactly equal to
the (planck constant)x(radius of electron)/(mass of electron) in each cubic
metre of space.

So if i hear you correctly, you are saying that as the Universe
gets older and H decreases, there is something on the other
side of the equation that must also change? that either Planck's
constant and/or the radius of electrons must also decrease, or
that the mass of electrons must increase?

Where do all these bangs and expansions come into it?

"Intuitive extrapolation" as the Old Coot, Bill Sheppard, calls it.
This enables us to deduce what has happened based upon
our observations of the Universe around us.

Can you give some detail as to how you believe your paradox
changes things and gets rid of the need for a Big Bang-type
beginning followed by inflation and expansion of space?

Please remember that it helps if you can explain why all the
observations made thus far, which point to "bangs and
expansions," point instead to something different based
upon your "paradox."

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Do you have yourself a dream?
Are you burning with desire?
If no dream, you have no steam
To fan your ember into fire!
Do you have yourself a dream?

Paine Ellsworth