![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Painius writted :
...there is still no possible way for us to sense either an expansion or a contraction of space-time. *No way. But it is possible to read telemetry from denser, *contracted* space, transposing the readings onto local space which is not only expanded but stretched Sun-ward. This has been done routinely with the Pioneer spacecraft, with the discrepancy between the readings being interpreted as an "anomaly". The PDT gradient of the Sun's gravity well has never been recognized to exist, much less acknowledged as causing the anomaly. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
oc I have it as the space between galaxies is doing all the expansion.
Space between the stars? Space between molecules? I don;t thin the space between atoms is getting any bigger. i don't think the space between electron and nuclei is getting bigger. I don't think quarks are moving apart. I think the universe's horizon is getting bigger and that's all Bert |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"oldcoot" wrote in message...
... Painius writted : ...there is still no possible way for us to sense either an expansion or a contraction of space-time. No way. But it is possible to read telemetry from denser, *contracted* space, transposing the readings onto local space which is not only expanded but stretched Sun-ward. This has been done routinely with the Pioneer spacecraft, with the discrepancy between the readings being interpreted as an "anomaly". The PDT gradient of the Sun's gravity well has never been recognized to exist, much less acknowledged as causing the anomaly. "Artifacts"... "telemetry"... "denser, *contracted* space"... Again i say, logic dictates that there's no effin' way. If your 12" rule is the artifact, and you look at it far away in denser contracted space, it will still look the same. Spatial expansion is undetectable by its very nature... across the street or across the Universe. happy days and... starry starry nights! -- Indelibly yours, Paine P.S. Thank YOU for reading! P.P.S. Some secret sites (shh)... http://painellsworth.net http://savethechildren.org http://eBook-eDen.secretsgolden.com |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Painius Its that redder and redder the further out we go that
indicates galaxies are all moving away from us and each other. Our eyes give us this sense. Edward Hubble had no trouble convincing Einstein. Bert |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jun 4, 6:29*pm, "Painius" wrote:
"Artifacts"... "telemetry"... "denser, *contracted* space"... *Again i say, logic dictates that there's no effin' way. If your 12" rule is the artifact, and you look at it far away in denser contracted space, it will still look the same. *Spatial expansion is undetectable by its very nature... across the street or across the Universe. Well, look at the Pioneer situation. The spacecraft aren't going 'straight out' from us, but are on a curved trajectory giving them 'proper motion' against the starfield that our radiotelescopes can accurately track. The onboard clock registers the number of 'ticks of time' elapsed since launch. We receive that data back via telemetry. OK, we know the number of 'ticks' that have transpired on board. We look at where the spacecraft *should be* against the starfield based on the number of onboard 'ticks' that have transpired. And lo and behold, the spacecraft position is lagging behind where it 'should be'. So what's going on? It's pretty dadburned obvious-- the spacecraft have traveled into denser, more compacted space and so naturally appear to lag behind where they 'should be'. There's no mystery to it. But the mainstream has no concept of what's behind the perceived "anomaly". The PDT gradient of the Sun's gravity well can never be recognized under their 'no medium' doctrine. So now extrapolate 'waaay on out to deep cosmological distances where the 1a supernova 'standard candles' are beginning to appear dimmer than they 'should be'. Obviously there's no telemetry coming back.:-) But the *cosmological PDT gradient*, unrecognized by science, is begining to steepen exponentially. And we see its artifacts in the SN1a data. Light that began its journey in that denser, 'hotter' space, then propagated into our less-dense, 'cooler' space naturally loses amplitude (brigntness) just as is observed. That's the *visible*, prima facie artifact of the cosmological PDT gradient. Now transpose mentally to the 'outside' referance frame (the vantage point of Wolter's 'c-dilation'). Obviously the clock rate or 'tick of time' AND the speed of light have slowed concomitantly with the PDT drop, gradually leveling out to their present values. Yet from here 'inside', the speed of light and clock rate are constant *here* locally, just as they are constant *there*, locally. The invariance of c is never violated `locally` nor is any other constant. The sole variable is the PDT value of space, whether across a 'tiny' gradient like a star's gravity well or across the deep-past, exponentially- steepening cosmological PDT gradient. SR recognizes c as constant in all inertial frames. But it has yet to recognize PDT gradients and the constancy of c `locally` in all PDT frames as well. And GR recognizes a drop in lightspeed the deeper you go in a gravity well. But it doesn't recognize WHY the drop. Recognizing PDT gradients will upgrade both SR and GR from their present 'flat' status. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"oldcoot" wrote in message...
... On Jun 4, 6:29 pm, "Painius" wrote: "Artifacts"... "telemetry"... "denser, *contracted* space"... Again i say, logic dictates that there's no effin' way. If your 12" rule is the artifact, and you look at it far away in denser contracted space, it will still look the same. Spatial expansion is undetectable by its very nature... across the street or across the Universe. Well, look at the Pioneer situation. The spacecraft aren't going 'straight out' from us, but are on a curved trajectory giving them 'proper motion' against the starfield that our radiotelescopes can accurately track. The onboard clock registers the number of 'ticks of time' elapsed since launch. We receive that data back via telemetry. OK, we know the number of 'ticks' that have transpired on board. We look at where the spacecraft *should be* against the starfield based on the number of onboard 'ticks' that have transpired. And lo and behold, the spacecraft position is lagging behind where it 'should be'. So what's going on? It's pretty dadburned obvious-- the spacecraft have traveled into denser, more compacted space and so naturally appear to lag behind where they 'should be'. There's no mystery to it. But the mainstream has no concept of what's behind the perceived "anomaly". The PDT gradient of the Sun's gravity well can never be recognized under their 'no medium' doctrine. Yes, and you are not describing expanding space when you describe both Pioneers' situations. Pioneer has not expanded as far as anybody can see. And if it had, how would we know? You have described, above, a spatial energy-density contraction, not a spatial volume expansion, correct? So now extrapolate 'waaay on out to deep cosmological distances where the 1a supernova 'standard candles' are beginning to appear dimmer than they 'should be'. Obviously there's no telemetry coming back.:-) But the *cosmological PDT gradient*, unrecognized by science, is begining to steepen exponentially. And we see its artifacts in the SN1a data. Light that began its journey in that denser, 'hotter' space, then propagated into our less-dense, 'cooler' space naturally loses amplitude (brigntness) just as is observed. That's the *visible*, prima facie artifact of the cosmological PDT gradient. Now transpose mentally to the 'outside' referance frame (the vantage point of Wolter's 'c-dilation'). Obviously the clock rate or 'tick of time' AND the speed of light have slowed concomitantly with the PDT drop, gradually leveling out to their present values. Yet from here 'inside', the speed of light and clock rate are constant *here* locally, just as they are constant *there*, locally. The invariance of c is never violated `locally` nor is any other constant. The sole variable is the PDT value of space, whether across a 'tiny' gradient like a star's gravity well or across the deep-past, exponentially- steepening cosmological PDT gradient. And again, you seem to be saying that the PDT of space, the SPED, is changing, NOT the volume of space. SR recognizes c as constant in all inertial frames. But it has yet to recognize PDT gradients and the constancy of c `locally` in all PDT frames as well. And GR recognizes a drop in lightspeed the deeper you go in a gravity well. But it doesn't recognize WHY the drop. Recognizing PDT gradients will upgrade both SR and GR from their present 'flat' status. I have no argument with any of this, oc. However, your referring to a higher energy-density of space as "contracted space" in a previous post seems to me to be very different from mainstream science pounding away at the *volume* of space expanding, and how the great distances involving the superclusters and above are the only distances at which we can perceive this volumnal expansion. So i still contend that such an expansion of volume must be absolutely undetectable either just outside the Solar System or just outside the Virgo supercluster. happy days and... starry starry nights! -- Indelibly yours, Paine P.S. Thank YOU for reading! P.P.S. Some secret sites (shh)... http://painellsworth.net http://savethechildren.org http://eBook-eDen.secretsgolden.com |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
the mental transposition to view it from an 'outside' referance frame.
After all, seeing from alternate frames is what the 'relative' in relativity is all about. On Jun 7, 4:23 am, "Painius" wrote: ...you are not describing expanding space when you describe both Pioneers' situations. Pioneer has not expanded as far as anybody can see. And if it had, how would we know? You have described, above, a spatial energy-density contraction, not a spatial volume expansion, correct? Spatial volume *contracts* with increasing energy-density(PDT value). Out where the Pioneer spacecraft are, the volume of space and *of the spacecraft themselves* has contracted relative to 'here' deeper in the Sun's gravity well. 'Here', space is expanded and stretched Sun-ward. Out 'there', space is denser and more contracted in the Sun-ward direction. Outside the Sun's (or any star's) gravity well, the PDT *and volume* of space stabilize to their ambient values.. until at deep distances of several billion LY where the *cosmological PDT gradient* begins to kick in. So now extrapolate 'waaay on out to deep cosmological distances where the 1a supernova 'standard candles' are beginning to appear dimmer than they 'should be'. Obviously there's no telemetry coming back.:-) But the *cosmological PDT gradient*, unrecognized by science, is begining to steepen exponentially. And we see its artifacts in the SN1a data. Light that began its journey in that denser, 'hotter' space, then propagated into our less-dense, 'cooler' space naturally loses amplitude (brigntness) just as is observed. That's the *visible*, prima facie artifact of the cosmological PDT gradient. Now transpose mentally to the 'outside' referance frame (the vantage point of Wolter's 'c-dilation'). Obviously the clock rate or 'tick of time' AND the speed of light have slowed concomitantly with the PDT drop, gradually leveling out to their present values. Yet from here 'inside', the speed of light and clock rate are constant *here* locally, just as they are constant *there*, locally. The invariance of c is never violated `locally` nor is any other constant. The sole variable is the PDT value of space, whether across a 'tiny' gradient like a star's gravity well or across the deep-past, exponentially- steepening cosmological PDT gradient. And again, you seem to be saying that the PDT of space, the SPED, is changing, NOT the volume of space. The volume IS contracting with increasing PDT value. My use of the term "sole variable" should carry this addendum. Thank you. Spatial volume *contracts* all the way back to the instant of its emergence from the BB. I had assumed this was already understood. The addendum will be carried hereafter. SR recognizes c as constant in all inertial frames. But it has yet to recognize PDT gradients and the constancy of c `locally` in all PDT frames as well. And GR recognizes a drop in lightspeed the deeper you go in a gravity well. But it doesn't recognize WHY the drop. Recognizing PDT gradients will upgrade both SR and GR from their present 'flat' status. I have no argument with any of this. However, your referring to a higher energy-density of space as "contracted space" in a previous post seems to me to be very different from mainstream science pounding away at the *volume* of space expanding, and how the great distances involving the superclusters and above are the only distances at which we can perceive this volumnal expansion. So i still contend that such an expansion of volume must be absolutely undetectable either just outside the Solar System or just outside the Virgo supercluster.. ....until doing the mental transposition to view it from an 'outside' referance frame. After all, seeing from alternate frames is what the 'relative' in relativity is all about. :-) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"oldcoot" wrote in message...
... the mental transposition to view it from an 'outside' referance frame. After all, seeing from alternate frames is what the 'relative' in relativity is all about. On Jun 7, 4:23 am, "Painius" wrote: ...you are not describing expanding space when you describe both Pioneers' situations. Pioneer has not expanded as far as anybody can see. And if it had, how would we know? You have described, above, a spatial energy-density contraction, not a spatial volume expansion, correct? Spatial volume *contracts* with increasing energy-density(PDT value). Out where the Pioneer spacecraft are, the volume of space and *of the spacecraft themselves* has contracted relative to 'here' deeper in the Sun's gravity well. 'Here', space is expanded and stretched Sun-ward. Out 'there', space is denser and more contracted in the Sun-ward direction. Outside the Sun's (or any star's) gravity well, the PDT *and volume* of space stabilize to their ambient values.. until at deep distances of several billion LY where the *cosmological PDT gradient* begins to kick in. So now extrapolate 'waaay on out to deep cosmological distances where the 1a supernova 'standard candles' are beginning to appear dimmer than they 'should be'. Obviously there's no telemetry coming back.:-) But the *cosmological PDT gradient*, unrecognized by science, is begining to steepen exponentially. And we see its artifacts in the SN1a data. Light that began its journey in that denser, 'hotter' space, then propagated into our less-dense, 'cooler' space naturally loses amplitude (brigntness) just as is observed. That's the *visible*, prima facie artifact of the cosmological PDT gradient. Now transpose mentally to the 'outside' referance frame (the vantage point of Wolter's 'c-dilation'). Obviously the clock rate or 'tick of time' AND the speed of light have slowed concomitantly with the PDT drop, gradually leveling out to their present values. Yet from here 'inside', the speed of light and clock rate are constant *here* locally, just as they are constant *there*, locally. The invariance of c is never violated `locally` nor is any other constant. The sole variable is the PDT value of space, whether across a 'tiny' gradient like a star's gravity well or across the deep-past, exponentially- steepening cosmological PDT gradient. And again, you seem to be saying that the PDT of space, the SPED, is changing, NOT the volume of space. The volume IS contracting with increasing PDT value. My use of the term "sole variable" should carry this addendum. Thank you. Spatial volume *contracts* all the way back to the instant of its emergence from the BB. I had assumed this was already understood. The addendum will be carried hereafter. SR recognizes c as constant in all inertial frames. But it has yet to recognize PDT gradients and the constancy of c `locally` in all PDT frames as well. And GR recognizes a drop in lightspeed the deeper you go in a gravity well. But it doesn't recognize WHY the drop. Recognizing PDT gradients will upgrade both SR and GR from their present 'flat' status. I have no argument with any of this. However, your referring to a higher energy-density of space as "contracted space" in a previous post seems to me to be very different from mainstream science pounding away at the *volume* of space expanding, and how the great distances involving the superclusters and above are the only distances at which we can perceive this volumnal expansion. So i still contend that such an expansion of volume must be absolutely undetectable either just outside the Solar System or just outside the Virgo supercluster.. ...until doing the mental transposition to view it from an 'outside' referance frame. After all, seeing from alternate frames is what the 'relative' in relativity is all about. :-) I'm still grokkin' on all this. Just wanted you to know i'm not ignorin' it. happy days and... starry starry nights! -- Indelibly yours, Paine P.S. Thank YOU for reading! P.P.S. Some secret sites (shh)... http://painellsworth.net http://savethechildren.org http://eBook-eDen.secretsgolden.com |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"oldcoot" wrote in message
... the mental transposition to view it from an 'outside' referance frame. After all, seeing from alternate frames is what the 'relative' in relativity is all about. On Jun 7, 4:23 am, "Painius" wrote: ...you are not describing expanding space when you describe both Pioneers' situations. Pioneer has not expanded as far as anybody can see. And if it had, how would we know? You have described, above, a spatial energy-density contraction, not a spatial volume expansion, correct? Spatial volume *contracts* with increasing energy-density(PDT value). Out where the Pioneer spacecraft are, the volume of space and *of the spacecraft themselves* has contracted relative to 'here' deeper in the Sun's gravity well. 'Here', space is expanded and stretched Sun-ward. Out 'there', space is denser and more contracted in the Sun-ward direction. Outside the Sun's (or any star's) gravity well, the PDT *and volume* of space stabilize to their ambient values.. until at deep distances of several billion LY where the *cosmological PDT gradient* begins to kick in. So now extrapolate 'waaay on out to deep cosmological distances where the 1a supernova 'standard candles' are beginning to appear dimmer than they 'should be'. Obviously there's no telemetry coming back.:-) But the *cosmological PDT gradient*, unrecognized by science, is begining to steepen exponentially. And we see its artifacts in the SN1a data. Light that began its journey in that denser, 'hotter' space, then propagated into our less-dense, 'cooler' space naturally loses amplitude (brigntness) just as is observed. That's the *visible*, prima facie artifact of the cosmological PDT gradient. Now transpose mentally to the 'outside' referance frame (the vantage point of Wolter's 'c-dilation'). Obviously the clock rate or 'tick of time' AND the speed of light have slowed concomitantly with the PDT drop, gradually leveling out to their present values. Yet from here 'inside', the speed of light and clock rate are constant *here* locally, just as they are constant *there*, locally. The invariance of c is never violated `locally` nor is any other constant. The sole variable is the PDT value of space, whether across a 'tiny' gradient like a star's gravity well or across the deep-past, exponentially- steepening cosmological PDT gradient. And again, you seem to be saying that the PDT of space, the SPED, is changing, NOT the volume of space. The volume IS contracting with increasing PDT value. My use of the term "sole variable" should carry this addendum. Thank you. Spatial volume *contracts* all the way back to the instant of its emergence from the BB. I had assumed this was already understood. The addendum will be carried hereafter. SR recognizes c as constant in all inertial frames. But it has yet to recognize PDT gradients and the constancy of c `locally` in all PDT frames as well. And GR recognizes a drop in lightspeed the deeper you go in a gravity well. But it doesn't recognize WHY the drop. Recognizing PDT gradients will upgrade both SR and GR from their present 'flat' status. I have no argument with any of this. However, your referring to a higher energy-density of space as "contracted space" in a previous post seems to me to be very different from mainstream science pounding away at the *volume* of space expanding, and how the great distances involving the superclusters and above are the only distances at which we can perceive this volumnal expansion. So i still contend that such an expansion of volume must be absolutely undetectable either just outside the Solar System or just outside the Virgo supercluster.. ...until doing the mental transposition to view it from an 'outside' referance frame. After all, seeing from alternate frames is what the 'relative' in relativity is all about. :-) Okay, so here we are for the moment in a RF that's waay outside, and we see two galaxies. That one over on the left is a small spiral galaxy. And that one over there on the right is a very large spiral galaxy. So either the volume of space in the area of the small galaxy is contracted and the volume of space in the vicinity of the huge spiral is expanded, OR, we're just looking at a small galaxy and a huge galaxy in an area of space for which the volume is uniform throughout... Even way out here in this outside RF, how would we know? happy days and... starry starry nights! -- Indelibly yours, Paine Ellsworth P.S.: Thank YOU for reading! P.P.S.: http://painellsworth.net |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jun 15, 1:23*pm, "Painius" wrote:
Okay, so here we are for the moment in a RF that's waay outside, and we see two galaxies. *That one over on the left is a small spiral galaxy. *And that one over there on the right is a very large spiral galaxy. *So either the volume of space in the area of the small galaxy is contracted and the volume of space in the vicinity of the huge spiral is expanded, OR, we're just looking at a small galaxy and a huge galaxy in an area of space for which the volume is uniform throughout... Even way out here in this outside RF, how would we know? Well, assuming both galaxies are relatively close by in their supercluster, the volume and PDT value of space in which they reside would be uniform. Then you'd look at how far back in time the supercluster itself resides. See graph - http://community-2.webtv.net/oldcoot...ang/page2.html If it's *far enough* back to where the cosmological PDT value is beginning to really steepen, then the spatial volume will be contracting concomitantly with it. You're simply "playing the tape backwards" of the thinning and expansion of space on the cosmological scale. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Accelerating Universe and Decreasing Cosmic Gravity | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 16 | August 18th 07 04:16 AM |
Expanding Universe - Accelerating | TeaTime | UK Astronomy | 0 | November 23rd 06 01:46 AM |
Article - SETI ... and the Aliens Conundrum - Part I | Jason H. | SETI | 11 | August 3rd 06 12:23 AM |
Accelerating Model of the Universe | azazel scratch | Misc | 3 | October 4th 04 02:36 AM |
Oh, the conundrum | Eric Martin | Amateur Astronomy | 16 | December 10th 03 02:14 AM |