Parallax vs Redshift distance comparisons

In article , odysseus1479-at@yahoo-
dot.ca says...
Mark McIntyre wrote:

On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 16:38:00 GMT, in uk.sci.astronomy , "Luigi
Caselli" wrote:

[snip]

I have not such a fantasy to think about it.

I'm sorry, but thats not an english sentence.

Not idiomatic or 'native' English, granted, but each of the words is
English and the meaning is reasonably apparent. Although it might be
rash to conclude too much from appearances, Luigi seems to be Italian
and I'd venture a guess that he's not writing in his mother-tongue.
His English is certainly better than my (few words of) Italian!

And if we were to digress into criticism of each other's spelling and
grammar, someone might point out that the contraction "that's"
requires an apostrophe, or that the proper name "English" requires an
initial capital. But let's not, m'kay?


Reminds me of the comment the wife of a friend made. He comes out of the
Kwiki-Mart complaining about having trouble understanding the clerk. She
says, "Look at this way honey, he just speaks one more language than
you".

"Odysseus" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
Mark McIntyre wrote:

On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 16:38:00 GMT, in uk.sci.astronomy , "Luigi
Caselli" wrote:

[snip]

I have not such a fantasy to think about it.

I'm sorry, but thats not an english sentence.

Not idiomatic or 'native' English, granted, but each of the words is
English and the meaning is reasonably apparent. Although it might be
rash to conclude too much from appearances, Luigi seems to be Italian
and I'd venture a guess that he's not writing in his mother-tongue.
His English is certainly better than my (few words of) Italian!

You're right, I'm italian... and I have to improve my english...
Maybe I had to write "I have not enough fantasy to think about it".

Luigi Caselli

"Greg Crinklaw" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
Luigi Caselli wrote:
I know the answers of big bang theory but I have also some doubts...
I think in the next decade, with the observation improvement, we'll have
a
lot of surprises.
I just like the old observation approach to the universe.

But Quasars don't really have anything to do with the Big Bang other
than their existance is consistent with the Big Bang theory. Do you
mean observation as in "looking" or as in deriving explanations by
making measurements? I consider myself an observational astronomer in
both senses. The range of quaser-like objets *is* an observation.

I'm waiting the launch of JWST telescope for a better universe
understanding.

In the Nasa site ( http://ngst.gsfc.nasa.gov/FastFacts.htm ) you can see the
mission goals:

1. Determine the shape of the Universe.
2. Explain galaxy evolution
3. Understand the birth and formation of stars
4. Determine how planetary systems form and interact.
5. Determine how the Universe built up its present chemical/elemental
composition.
6. Probe the nature and abundance of Dark Matter.

These are big questions and we don't have yet a sure answer... otherwise why
NASA is working at this mission?
I'm quite sure we'll have a lot of surprises.

Luigi Caselli

Luigi Caselli wrote:

You're right, I'm italian... and I have to improve my english...
Maybe I had to write "I have not enough fantasy to think about it".

That's more grammatical (although most people would write "I don't
have enough ..." in an informal context), but the use of "fantasy"
(or "phantasy") referring to a person's faculty of imagination is
pretty well obsolete. A more idiomatic way of saying what I think you
mean might be "I can't imagine (or conceive of) anything so
fantastic," or just "It's beyond my imagination."

--
Odysseus

"Odysseus" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
Luigi Caselli wrote:

You're right, I'm italian... and I have to improve my english...
Maybe I had to write "I have not enough fantasy to think about it".

That's more grammatical (although most people would write "I don't
have enough ..." in an informal context), but the use of "fantasy"
(or "phantasy") referring to a person's faculty of imagination is
pretty well obsolete. A more idiomatic way of saying what I think you
mean might be "I can't imagine (or conceive of) anything so
fantastic," or just "It's beyond my imagination."

Thanks for the little english lesson!

Luigi Caselli

"Luigi Caselli" wrote in message ...

1. Determine the shape of the Universe.
2. Explain galaxy evolution
3. Understand the birth and formation of stars
4. Determine how planetary systems form and interact.
5. Determine how the Universe built up its present chemical/elemental
composition.
6. Probe the nature and abundance of Dark Matter.

These are big questions and we don't have yet a sure answer... otherwise why
NASA is working at this mission?
I'm quite sure we'll have a lot of surprises.

The deeper we peer, the more questions seem to be thrown up. If
space-time distortions prove common place over *billions* of years of
time and *billions* of light years across space, then anything other
than top line intellectual "guesses" will always be prone to chaotic
anomalies.

Check this out:
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0402/02bigbang/

AA

Luigi Caselli