Are All Galaxies Being Pulled Down Into a Time Vortex???

On Mar 13, 6:36*am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 3/12/13 11:54 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

The Great Attractor is accepting the galactic trajectories of
thousands just like our galaxy, arriving from all directions.

* *Brad-- Cite some recent (last ten years) papers on the "the great
* *attractor".

* *Reality Check: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_A..._apparent_mass



In 1992, much of the apparent signal of the Great Attractor was
attributed to the effect of Malmquist Bias.[3] In 2005, astronomers
conducting an X-ray survey of part of the sky known as the Clusters
in the Zone of Avoidance (CIZA) project reported that the Great
Attractor was actually only one tenth the mass that scientists had
originally estimated. The survey also confirmed earlier theories that
the Milky Way galaxy is in fact being pulled towards a much more
massive cluster of galaxies near the Shapley Supercluster, which lies
beyond the Great Attractor.

Since there's little if any mass detected within the GA, perhaps it's
just the gravitational focal point of everything surrounding it.
After all, the "Seans" said there was nothing there, as they'd
objectively surveyed this GA for us. Perhaps the GA is just a cosmic
intersection where thousands of galaxies will harmlessly pass all
other galaxies on their way through, so there's nothing to fret over
the prospects of galaxies merging within the GA at 1400 km/sec.

On Mar 3, 8:51*am, China Blue Clay wrote:
What the **** is a 'Time Vortex'?

--
My name is Indigo Montoya. \\ * * * *Annoying Usenet one post at a time.
You flamed my father. * * * \' * * * * At least I can stay in character.
Prepare to be spanked. * * // * * * * * * * When you look into the void,
Stop posting that! * * * *`/ *the void looks into you, and fulfills you.

Going into an event horizon is where time slows way the hell down. If
that's not sufficiently gravity vortex worthy, then perhaps nothing
is.

Are you suggesting that a BH singularity or that of its EH offers
normal time?

On 3/3/13 12:56 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
Going into an event horizon is where time slows way the hell down.

Whether time slow or not depends on the perspective of the observer.
You forgot to study relativity theory, didn't you Brad! :-o

On Mar 3, 11:25*am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 3/3/13 12:56 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

Going into an event horizon is where time slows way the hell down.

* *Whether time slow or not depends on the perspective of the observer.

On 3/3/13 3:48 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
On Mar 3, 11:25 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 3/3/13 12:56 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

Going into an event horizon is where time slows way the hell down.

Whether time slow or not depends on the perspective of the observer.
You forgot to study relativity theory, didn't you Brad! :-o

How is that relative?

Are you suggesting that increased gravity makes time go faster?


Whether time slow or not depends on the perspective of the observer.
You forgot to study relativity theory, didn't you Brad! :-o

On 03/03/2013 4:48 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
On Mar 3, 11:25 am, Sam wrote:
On 3/3/13 12:56 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

Going into an event horizon is where time slows way the hell down.

Whether time slow or not depends on the perspective of the observer.
You forgot to study relativity theory, didn't you Brad! :-o

How is that relative?

Are you suggesting that increased gravity makes time go faster?

Increased gravity makes time go slower, as per General Relativity. But
that's not really the point: if the speed of time changes, then we'll
never notice it's changed because we'll be inside it, and it'll seem
just as fast as it always has. The only way we can tell it's changed is
by comparing ourselves to other galaxies much farther away from us. This
might actually explain Dark Energy, and why things appear to be speeding
up away from us faster. If our local universe is slowing down in time,
then the distant universe would look like it's speeding up in time.

Yousuf Khan

On Mar 3, 12:22*pm, China Blue Clay wrote:
In article ,
*Brad Guth wrote:

On Mar 3, 8:51*am, China Blue Clay wrote:
What the **** is a 'Time Vortex'?

--
My name is Indigo Montoya. \\ * * * *Annoying Usenet one post at a time.
You flamed my father. * * * \' * * * * At least I can stay in character.
Prepare to be spanked. * * // * * * * * * * When you look into the void,
Stop posting that! * * * *`/ *the void looks into you, and fulfills you.

Going into an event horizon is where time slows way the hell down. *If
that's not sufficiently gravity vortex worthy, then perhaps nothing
is.

That's not vortex. That is perceived relativistic dilation for an observer away
from the event horizon. The person going through the horizon sees no dilation,
no helical structure, no loop the looping of timing.

Are you suggesting that a BH singularity or that of its EH offers
normal time?

Everybody sees the normal passage of time in their own reference frame. Even
when tidal forces grind them into fatou dust, their time ticks away normally.

--
My name is Indigo Montoya. \\ * * * *Annoying Usenet one post at a time.
You flamed my father. * * * \' * * * * At least I can stay in character.
Prepare to be spanked. * * // * * * * * * * When you look into the void,
Stop posting that! * * * *`/ *the void looks into you, and fulfills you.

That's a cop-out, and you know it.

Increased gravity as we know it makes our time tick slower as we know
it.

Perhaps the aether mass as representing 96.5% the mass of our universe
has to be taken into account.

On Mar 3, 2:00*pm, China Blue Clay wrote:
In article ,
*Brad Guth wrote:









On Mar 3, 12:22*pm, China Blue Clay wrote:
In article
,
*Brad Guth wrote:

On Mar 3, 8:51*am, China Blue Clay wrote:
What the **** is a 'Time Vortex'?

--
My name is Indigo Montoya. \\ * * * *Annoying Usenet one post at a
time.
You flamed my father. * * * \' * * * * At least I can stay in
character.
Prepare to be spanked. * * // * * * * * * * When you look into the
void,
Stop posting that! * * * *`/ *the void looks into you, and fulfills
you.

Going into an event horizon is where time slows way the hell down. *If
that's not sufficiently gravity vortex worthy, then perhaps nothing
is.

That's not vortex. That is perceived relativistic dilation for an observer
away
from the event horizon. The person going through the horizon sees no
dilation,
no helical structure, no loop the looping of timing.

Are you suggesting that a BH singularity or that of its EH offers
normal time?

Everybody sees the normal passage of time in their own reference frame.
Even
when tidal forces grind them into fatou dust, their time ticks away
normally.

--
My name is Indigo Montoya. \\ * * * *Annoying Usenet one post at a time.
You flamed my father. * * * \' * * * * At least I can stay in character.
Prepare to be spanked. * * // * * * * * * * When you look into the void,
Stop posting that! * * * *`/ *the void looks into you, and fulfills you.

That's a cop-out, and you know it.

Increased gravity as we know it makes our time tick slower as we know
it.

Where did you earn your doctorate in stupidity? If your clock clicks slower,
your awareness of the click will slow equally, and you will perceive your clock
ticking away at the same rate.

--
My name is Indigo Montoya. \\ * * * *Annoying Usenet one post at a time.
You flamed my father. * * * \' * * * * At least I can stay in character.
Prepare to be spanked. * * // * * * * * * * When you look into the void,
Stop posting that! * * * *`/ *the void looks into you, and fulfills you.

Apparently my "doctorate in stupidity" came from the same school as
your doctorate in anti-comprehension. In other words, what the hell
are you going on about?

On Mar 3, 11:51*am, China Blue Clay wrote:
What the **** is a 'Time Vortex'?

--
My name is Indigo Montoya. \\ * * * *Annoying Usenet one post at a time.
You flamed my father. * * * \' * * * * At least I can stay in character.
Prepare to be spanked. * * // * * * * * * * When you look into the void,
Stop posting that! * * * *`/ *the void looks into you, and fulfills you.

Look at this pictu

http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/152...rstructure.jpg

....and then look at this picture, and notice a similar wavy circle of
galaxies, located a tad center-left:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...-NEW_Nasa..jpg

The 'wavy circle' appears to be a representation of a giant,
spherically harmonic wave structure, much as you would have along
around the circumference of a tube. Some have said that the path of
the e-neutrino traces out a spiral path along the circumference of
this tube, but that the tube bends back in on itself, ending up in a
'donut shape'. What we're looking at here though, is a crossectional
view of the photonic band limit of our observation, or a crossection
of the universal donut, or torus of time.

We're being told that the value of the redshift is constant, when it
is not. Quantized redshift is an indicator of a aether structure that
had a lightspeed starting from zero, to what we have today.

As space expands, time contracts, until lightspeed is out-of-reach,
due to the quantum redshift phenomenon. This must mean that the
universe has been heading towards the bottom of the vortex, while
looking at the top of the funnel-shaped cloud of superclusters, 13.772
billion years ago. 13.772 billion years would be the radius of the
event horizon, 13.772 billion years ago, which we can't see beyond
because of the curvature of spacetime.

On Mar 2, 10:11*am, nartrof seven wrote:
Look at all of the rotations of galaxies - there are just as many
clockwise, as their are counter-clockwise, spiraling galaxies in the
universe. Surveys seem to indicate "layers of walls" of galaxies
located liked "stacked sheets", rather than uniform distribution:

from p. 46,47 of:http://www.scribd.com/doc/23724461/E...se-Web-Version

"Brent Tully at Honolulu University found in 1986 that the
distribution of galaxies within 75 Mpc of the earth is “stratified
into four layers”, and Alexander Szalay at Johns Hopkins has reported
regularly-spaced layers out to 3 billion light years. Thus there is
good reason to take the idea seriously and to look for a possible
formative mechanism. The plotting of one such cluster can be found at:

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/9610/9610047.pdf"

Such might seem to indicate the "stacks" might represent lines of
galaxies, like you would have in some kind of a giant vortex, except
that this line would have to be curved, based upon the calculated
current positions of the galaxies, as the light leaving them today
would not now be visible to the observer.


Well if you were the pizza master of the universe, wouldn't you stack
'em?

Double-A