A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Hubble derivation & Age of the universe



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old July 8th 12, 12:11 AM posted to sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity,sci.astro
The Pope
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Hubble derivation & Age of the universe

On Sat, 7 Jul 2012 07:35:50 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
wrote:

On Jul 7, 6:36*am, "G=EMC^2" wrote:
On Jul 3, 9:33*pm, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) wrote:









On Tue, 3 Jul 2012 23:56:12 +0100, "Androcles" wrote:


"Henry Wilson DSc." *wrote in message
.. .


On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 22:34:51 -0700, "hanson" wrote:


In Hubble derivation & Age of the universe


Hanson, old chap, you are completely up the wrong creek.


One important reason for cosmic redshift is that planet Earth lies well away
from the centre of our galaxy whilst average light reaching us comes from
regions closer to galactic centres (where most stars lie).


Consequently, the photon acceleration as it falls to Earth under gravity is
generally less than the slowing as it escapes its source region. That means
the average speed of cosmic light reaching planet Earth is less than c (wrt
us). It is therefore redshifted. Add random source speeds to that and you
end up with a spread of spectral shifts biased towards the red end.


None of that is distance dependent. However photons lose energy a they
travel due to a number of factors, causing more redshift that IS
proportional to distance.


It is a sad fact that the whole of astronomy is wrong because it is based on
the Einsteinian presumption that all light in the universe travels at
exactly c wrt little planet Earth.


I just want to be around to see all the red faces when they finally wake up.


================================================= ===================
Good thought, but it has some serious problems. The Milky Way is a disc
and from our viewpoint it is seen edge on, although we are inside it. Light
from distant galaxies that are above and below the disc would, if your
gravity
theory held water, be mostly blue-shifted as it accelerated toward us.


Only a small fraction would. ALL of it has left its own galaxy at c
relative to that galaxy (and on average relative to us). Only that which
arrives from points perpendicular to our plane would accelerate back to near
c.
Incidentally, light from sources directly opposite the MW's centre (ie.,
having to pass through or near the centre) should be affected in exactly the
same way as light coming to us from the opposite direction, although there
might be some additional slowing of the former due to interaction with the
higher densities it passes through.


Your second theory, that light loses energy, doesn't work either.
Energy is a conserved quantity. Instead of losing energy the energy is
spread
over a greater area. As the photons get larger you need a bigger mirror to
collect them and focus them down to a point again.


I agree they get larger..... and I also reckon they coalesce.....
But I also think they are affected very very slightly by any stray field or
matter they pass through. Every interaction must result in some kind of
energy loss to space.
It is also reasonable to believe that no significant object in the
observable universe moves at anywhere near c wrt any other object.


Gravity created the big bang,and over 22 billion years evolving by
gravity to "NOW" *is for humankind to give *reality to spacetime. To
judge its age. To know how mass +Energy came to be. The universe
created us so it could see itself. As of "NOW" we only see 2% of the
universe. * TreBert


Your 22 billion years is perhaps as good as any, but there's really no
telling how old this universe really is, or how many big bangs there
have been.

I doubt we're seeing 0.1% of our universe, but even if it were capable
of seeing 100% it really makes no difference because we still can't
even get ourselves safely to/from our moon, much less the extremely
nearby planet Venus.

At the consumption rate we're going, in a few hundred years there will
not be sufficient terrestrial resources to get ourselves safely off
this planet. Only the upper .0001% as Oligarch Rothschilds and their
mafia partners in crimes against humanity will get saved (that's at
best one out of a million). With eventually 10 billion humans on
Earth, that's only 10 thousand that'll get to go on once our planet is
depleted and otherwise past the point of no return.


Your concerns are unfounded.
God will maintain our planet so it will always be fit for human habitation.
It is written in the scriptures.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”


You should pray more often. It is guaranteed to produce results.
  #22  
Old July 8th 12, 06:32 AM posted to sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity,sci.astro
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default Hubble derivation & Age of the universe

On Jul 7, 4:11*pm, ..@..(The Pope) wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jul 2012 07:35:50 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
wrote:









On Jul 7, 6:36*am, "G=EMC^2" wrote:
On Jul 3, 9:33*pm, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) wrote:


On Tue, 3 Jul 2012 23:56:12 +0100, "Androcles" wrote:


"Henry Wilson DSc." *wrote in message
.. .


On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 22:34:51 -0700, "hanson" wrote:


In Hubble derivation & Age of the universe


Hanson, old chap, you are completely up the wrong creek.


One important reason for cosmic redshift is that planet Earth lies well away
from the centre of our galaxy whilst average light reaching us comes from
regions closer to galactic centres (where most stars lie).


Consequently, the photon acceleration as it falls to Earth under gravity is
generally less than the slowing as it escapes its source region. That means
the average speed of cosmic light reaching planet Earth is less than c (wrt
us). It is therefore redshifted. Add random source speeds to that and you
end up with a spread of spectral shifts biased towards the red end.


None of that is distance dependent. However photons lose energy a they
travel due to a number of factors, causing more redshift that IS
proportional to distance.


It is a sad fact that the whole of astronomy is wrong because it is based on
the Einsteinian presumption that all light in the universe travels at
exactly c wrt little planet Earth.


I just want to be around to see all the red faces when they finally wake up.


================================================= ===================
Good thought, but it has some serious problems. The Milky Way is a disc
and from our viewpoint it is seen edge on, although we are inside it. Light
from distant galaxies that are above and below the disc would, if your
gravity
theory held water, be mostly blue-shifted as it accelerated toward us.


Only a small fraction would. ALL of it has left its own galaxy at c
relative to that galaxy (and on average relative to us). Only that which
arrives from points perpendicular to our plane would accelerate back to near
c.
Incidentally, light from sources directly opposite the MW's centre (ie.,
having to pass through or near the centre) should be affected in exactly the
same way as light coming to us from the opposite direction, although there
might be some additional slowing of the former due to interaction with the
higher densities it passes through.


Your second theory, that light loses energy, doesn't work either.
Energy is a conserved quantity. Instead of losing energy the energy is
spread
over a greater area. As the photons get larger you need a bigger mirror to
collect them and focus them down to a point again.


I agree they get larger..... and I also reckon they coalesce.....
But I also think they are affected very very slightly by any stray field or
matter they pass through. Every interaction must result in some kind of
energy loss to space.
It is also reasonable to believe that no significant object in the
observable universe moves at anywhere near c wrt any other object.


Gravity created the big bang,and over 22 billion years evolving by
gravity to "NOW" *is for humankind to give *reality to spacetime. To
judge its age. To know how mass +Energy came to be. The universe
created us so it could see itself. As of "NOW" we only see 2% of the
universe. * TreBert


Your 22 billion years is perhaps as good as any, but there's really no
telling how old this universe really is, or how many big bangs there
have been.


I doubt we're seeing 0.1% of our universe, but even if it were capable
of seeing 100% it really makes no difference because we still can't
even get ourselves safely to/from our moon, much less the extremely
nearby planet Venus.


At the consumption rate we're going, in a few hundred years there will
not be sufficient terrestrial resources to get ourselves safely off
this planet. *Only the upper .0001% as Oligarch Rothschilds and their
mafia partners in crimes against humanity will get saved (that's at
best one out of a million). *With eventually 10 billion humans on
Earth, that's only 10 thousand that'll get to go on once our planet is
depleted and otherwise past the point of no return.


Your concerns are unfounded.
God will maintain our planet so it will always be fit for human habitation.

  #23  
Old July 8th 12, 08:02 AM posted to sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity,sci.astro
The Pope
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Hubble derivation & Age of the universe

On Sat, 7 Jul 2012 22:32:33 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
wrote:

On Jul 7, 4:11*pm, ..@..(The Pope) wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jul 2012 07:35:50 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth



Your 22 billion years is perhaps as good as any, but there's really no
telling how old this universe really is, or how many big bangs there
have been.


I doubt we're seeing 0.1% of our universe, but even if it were capable
of seeing 100% it really makes no difference because we still can't
even get ourselves safely to/from our moon, much less the extremely
nearby planet Venus.


At the consumption rate we're going, in a few hundred years there will
not be sufficient terrestrial resources to get ourselves safely off
this planet. *Only the upper .0001% as Oligarch Rothschilds and their
mafia partners in crimes against humanity will get saved (that's at
best one out of a million). *With eventually 10 billion humans on
Earth, that's only 10 thousand that'll get to go on once our planet is
depleted and otherwise past the point of no return.


Your concerns are unfounded.
God will maintain our planet so it will always be fit for human habitation.
It is written in the scriptures.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”


You should pray more often. It is guaranteed to produce results.


You must not notice all the hundreds of millions suffering and
starving to death as is.

Are you public funded, or just Semitic faith-based funded?

Apparently your God doesn't care about those lower caste people, nor
does your God care about the environment or its biodiversity.


I hope you aren't suggesting that God is cruel because he uses earthquakes,
floods and famines to exterminate all the bad people.

You should say a few more prayers, boy, or you will suffer eternally in
hell.


http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”


  #24  
Old July 8th 12, 12:30 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity,sci.astro
G=EMC^2[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,655
Default Hubble derivation & Age of the universe

On Jul 8, 3:02*am, ..@..(The Pope) wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jul 2012 22:32:33 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
wrote:









On Jul 7, 4:11*pm, ..@..(The Pope) wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jul 2012 07:35:50 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
Your 22 billion years is perhaps as good as any, but there's really no
telling how old this universe really is, or how many big bangs there
have been.


I doubt we're seeing 0.1% of our universe, but even if it were capable
of seeing 100% it really makes no difference because we still can't
even get ourselves safely to/from our moon, much less the extremely
nearby planet Venus.


At the consumption rate we're going, in a few hundred years there will
not be sufficient terrestrial resources to get ourselves safely off
this planet. *Only the upper .0001% as Oligarch Rothschilds and their
mafia partners in crimes against humanity will get saved (that's at
best one out of a million). *With eventually 10 billion humans on
Earth, that's only 10 thousand that'll get to go on once our planet is
depleted and otherwise past the point of no return.


Your concerns are unfounded.
God will maintain our planet so it will always be fit for human habitation.
It is written in the scriptures.


http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”


You should pray more often. It is guaranteed to produce results.


You must not notice all the hundreds of millions suffering and
starving to death as is.


Are you public funded, or just Semitic faith-based funded?


Apparently your God doesn't care about those lower caste people, nor
does your God care about the environment or its biodiversity.


I hope you aren't suggesting that God is cruel because he uses earthquakes,
floods and famines to exterminate all the bad people.

You should say a few more prayers, boy, or you will suffer eternally in
hell.







http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”


Pope Could you give me the full name of "His holiness Pope in Vatican
City Rome,Italy" I wish to send his a picture. Thanks in advance
TreBert
  #25  
Old July 8th 12, 09:15 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity,sci.astro
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default Hubble derivation & Age of the universe

On Jul 8, 12:02*am, ..@..(The Pope) wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jul 2012 22:32:33 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
wrote:









On Jul 7, 4:11*pm, ..@..(The Pope) wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jul 2012 07:35:50 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
Your 22 billion years is perhaps as good as any, but there's really no
telling how old this universe really is, or how many big bangs there
have been.


I doubt we're seeing 0.1% of our universe, but even if it were capable
of seeing 100% it really makes no difference because we still can't
even get ourselves safely to/from our moon, much less the extremely
nearby planet Venus.


At the consumption rate we're going, in a few hundred years there will
not be sufficient terrestrial resources to get ourselves safely off
this planet. *Only the upper .0001% as Oligarch Rothschilds and their
mafia partners in crimes against humanity will get saved (that's at
best one out of a million). *With eventually 10 billion humans on
Earth, that's only 10 thousand that'll get to go on once our planet is
depleted and otherwise past the point of no return.


Your concerns are unfounded.
God will maintain our planet so it will always be fit for human habitation.
It is written in the scriptures.


http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”


You should pray more often. It is guaranteed to produce results.


You must not notice all the hundreds of millions suffering and
starving to death as is.


Are you public funded, or just Semitic faith-based funded?


Apparently your God doesn't care about those lower caste people, nor
does your God care about the environment or its biodiversity.


I hope you aren't suggesting that God is cruel because he uses earthquakes,
floods and famines to exterminate all the bad people.

No, because he/she only seems to further impoverish, torment and kill
the really good people, leaving all the Oligarch Rothschilds as
unharmed and only richer and more powerful after each and every
natural or man made disaster. Your God is clearly one of wars and
greed, as well as pestilence, starvation and death for the lower 99.9%
of us.


You should say a few more prayers, boy, or you will suffer eternally in
hell.

If I were a Zionist Jew, I would not have to worry about going to
hell, no matters how much skulduggery or nastiness I manage to pull
off. More than a few other religions have a failsafe forgiveness
policy, if need be by simply looking the other way.


http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”


  #26  
Old July 8th 12, 09:29 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity,sci.astro
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default Hubble derivation & Age of the universe

On Jul 8, 4:30*am, "G=EMC^2" wrote:
On Jul 8, 3:02*am, ..@..(The Pope) wrote:









On Sat, 7 Jul 2012 22:32:33 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
wrote:


On Jul 7, 4:11*pm, ..@..(The Pope) wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jul 2012 07:35:50 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
Your 22 billion years is perhaps as good as any, but there's really no
telling how old this universe really is, or how many big bangs there
have been.


I doubt we're seeing 0.1% of our universe, but even if it were capable
of seeing 100% it really makes no difference because we still can't
even get ourselves safely to/from our moon, much less the extremely
nearby planet Venus.


At the consumption rate we're going, in a few hundred years there will
not be sufficient terrestrial resources to get ourselves safely off
this planet. *Only the upper .0001% as Oligarch Rothschilds and their
mafia partners in crimes against humanity will get saved (that's at
best one out of a million). *With eventually 10 billion humans on
Earth, that's only 10 thousand that'll get to go on once our planet is
depleted and otherwise past the point of no return.


Your concerns are unfounded.
God will maintain our planet so it will always be fit for human habitation.
It is written in the scriptures.


http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”


You should pray more often. It is guaranteed to produce results.


You must not notice all the hundreds of millions suffering and
starving to death as is.


Are you public funded, or just Semitic faith-based funded?


Apparently your God doesn't care about those lower caste people, nor
does your God care about the environment or its biodiversity.


I hope you aren't suggesting that God is cruel because he uses earthquakes,
floods and famines to exterminate all the bad people.


You should say a few more prayers, boy, or you will suffer eternally in
hell.


http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”


Pope *Could you give me the full name of "His holiness Pope in Vatican
City Rome,Italy" *I wish to send his a picture. * *Thanks in advance
TreBert


http://www.vatican.va/phome_en.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican_City

The Pope doesn't do email, and apparently no one in Vatican City can
be trusted, not even the butler. Good luck.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
HUBBLE Observations - The Age of the Universe - Continued: Robert Morpheal, Morphealism, Bob Ezergailis Astronomy Misc 9 June 30th 09 01:42 AM
HUBBLE Observations - The Age of the Universe - Continued: Robert Morpheal, Morphealism, Bob Ezergailis Amateur Astronomy 0 May 19th 09 06:41 PM
Hubble - Age of the Universe As a Monad - Exploring An Ancient Bad Robert Morpheal, Morphealism, Bob Ezergailis Research 3 May 19th 09 02:15 PM
Hubble Uncovers a Baby Galaxy in a Grown-Up Universe Ron News 0 December 1st 04 06:34 PM
law hubble and the age of the universe andreas UK Astronomy 4 September 22nd 04 11:45 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.