Acceleration of Universe's Expansion an Illusion!

In the current issue of "Discover Magazine" in an article called
"Overturning Einstein" (you can see Einstein upside down on the
cover), toward the end of the article, a physicist relates his theory
that since light travels faster than what we measure as c when it
travels through intergactic space, being away from gravitational mass,
by not taking this into account, scientists have been thown off in
their calculations leading to the idea that the expansion of the
universe is accelerating! Therefore the acceleration of the
universe's expansion is an illusion and there is not need to
hypothesize dark energy! I have been harping on the fact for years in
these groups that light outside of galaxies will travel faster than c
as we measure it here! Clocks turn faster out there away from the
influence of mass, and so light has to go faster to keep up. Also,
the idea that the universe in accelerating in its expansion is an
awfully far fetched and unlikely explanation for observations on the
face of it.

http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&g...:0&tx=47&ty=64

Double-A

On Sun, 26 Feb 2012 15:18:05 -0800 (PST), Double-A
wrote:

In the current issue of "Discover Magazine" in an article called
"Overturning Einstein" (you can see Einstein upside down on the
cover), toward the end of the article, a physicist relates his theory
that since light travels faster than what we measure as c when it
travels through intergactic space, being away from gravitational mass,
by not taking this into account, scientists have been thown off in
their calculations leading to the idea that the expansion of the
universe is accelerating! Therefore the acceleration of the
universe's expansion is an illusion and there is not need to
hypothesize dark energy! I have been harping on the fact for years in
these groups that light outside of galaxies will travel faster than c
as we measure it here! Clocks turn faster out there away from the
influence of mass, and so light has to go faster to keep up. Also,
the idea that the universe in accelerating in its expansion is an
awfully far fetched and unlikely explanation for observations on the
face of it.

http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&g...:0&tx=47&ty=64

Double-A

I wonder if the unnamed physicist happened to mention how fast light
traveled in intergalactic space? 2c? 3c?
How about in interclusteric space?

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine @ http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/
"There is buried treasure within your fear!"

On 2/26/2012 6:18 PM, Double-A wrote:
In the current issue of "Discover Magazine" in an article called
"Overturning Einstein" (you can see Einstein upside down on the
cover), toward the end of the article, a physicist relates his theory
that since light travels faster than what we measure as c when it
travels through intergactic space, being away from gravitational mass,
by not taking this into account, scientists have been thown off in
their calculations leading to the idea that the expansion of the
universe is accelerating! Therefore the acceleration of the
universe's expansion is an illusion and there is not need to
hypothesize dark energy! I have been harping on the fact for years in
these groups that light outside of galaxies will travel faster than c
as we measure it here! Clocks turn faster out there away from the
influence of mass, and so light has to go faster to keep up. Also,
the idea that the universe in accelerating in its expansion is an
awfully far fetched and unlikely explanation for observations on the
face of it.

I bet Painus has half a hard-on just hearing this.

It's a stupid premise. I'm unsurprised that he reached an
erroneous conclusion.





--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo

On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 07:26:12 -0500, HVAC wrote:

On 2/26/2012 6:18 PM, Double-A wrote:
In the current issue of "Discover Magazine" in an article called
"Overturning Einstein" (you can see Einstein upside down on the
cover), toward the end of the article, a physicist relates his theory
that since light travels faster than what we measure as c when it
travels through intergactic space, being away from gravitational mass,
by not taking this into account, scientists have been thown off in
their calculations leading to the idea that the expansion of the
universe is accelerating! Therefore the acceleration of the
universe's expansion is an illusion and there is not need to
hypothesize dark energy! I have been harping on the fact for years in
these groups that light outside of galaxies will travel faster than c
as we measure it here! Clocks turn faster out there away from the
influence of mass, and so light has to go faster to keep up. Also,
the idea that the universe in accelerating in its expansion is an
awfully far fetched and unlikely explanation for observations on the
face of it.

I bet Painus has half a hard-on just hearing this.

It's a stupid premise. I'm unsurprised that he reached an
erroneous conclusion.

Perhaps, but just think of the implication for astronomy, the most
important of which would be that galaxies, perhaps even stars (since
we might find out that c is only valid in the gravity well of our
Solar system), are much closer to us and to each other than previously
thought. The Universe may not be so large as we think, and this would
move up the era of the so-called Big Bang, which means the Universe is
not nearly so old as we think it (is) may be.

You are probably right. It's a stupid premise. However it wouldn't
be the first stupid premise that turned out to be reality, eh?

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine @ http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/
"There is buried treasure within your fear!"

On 2/27/2012 4:35 PM, Painius wrote:


I bet Painus has half a hard-on just hearing this.

It's a stupid premise. I'm unsurprised that he reached an
erroneous conclusion.

Perhaps, but just think of the implication for astronomy,


Thinking about the implications of an erroneous conclusion
is not only mental masturbation, it's a waste of time.


important of which would be that galaxies, perhaps even stars (since
we might find out that c is only valid in the gravity well of our
Solar system), are much closer to us and to each other than previously
thought. The Universe may not be so large as we think, and this would
move up the era of the so-called Big Bang, which means the Universe is
not nearly so old as we think it (is) may be.


We can just make up anything? Are those the rules?


You are probably right. It's a stupid premise. However it wouldn't
be the first stupid premise that turned out to be reality, eh?


Got another one?


PS- Look... I'm not even x-posting this to aa. Happy?


--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo

On Feb 26, 3:18*pm, Double-A wrote:
In the current issue of "Discover Magazine" in an article called
"Overturning Einstein" (you can see Einstein upside down on the
cover), toward the end of the article, a physicist relates his theory
that since light travels faster than what we measure as c when it
travels through intergactic space, being away from gravitational mass,
by not taking this into account, scientists have been thown off in
their calculations leading to the idea that the expansion of the
universe is accelerating! *Therefore the acceleration of the
universe's expansion is an illusion and there is not need to
hypothesize dark energy! *I have been harping on the fact for years in
these groups that light outside of galaxies will travel faster than c
as we measure it here! *Clocks turn faster out there away from the
influence of mass, and so light has to go faster to keep up. *Also,
the idea that the universe in accelerating in its expansion is an
awfully far fetched and unlikely explanation for observations on the
face of it.

http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&g...43&tbm=isch&tb...

Double-A

Insiders of "Discover Magazine" get to publish anything they like,
just like GW Bush, Dick Cheney, Kissinger and Hitler all got to do as
they pleased.

However, I'm glad to see a few words on behalf of reconsidering
alternative interpretations, because it makes some of us think a bit
harder than trying to figure out how to tie our shoelaces.

It is like my interpretation of the universe event horizon acting like
a 100% efficient mirror (the mother-lode of all lensing), whereas this
would also cause a great many optical and/or microwave illusions, to
go along with the 2c or faster velocity of gravity.

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

On Feb 26, 9:33*pm, Painius wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2012 15:18:05 -0800 (PST), Double-A





wrote:
In the current issue of "Discover Magazine" in an article called
"Overturning Einstein" (you can see Einstein upside down on the
cover), toward the end of the article, a physicist relates his theory
that since light travels faster than what we measure as c when it
travels through intergactic space, being away from gravitational mass,
by not taking this into account, scientists have been thown off in
their calculations leading to the idea that the expansion of the
universe is accelerating! *Therefore the acceleration of the
universe's expansion is an illusion and there is not need to
hypothesize dark energy! *I have been harping on the fact for years in
these groups that light outside of galaxies will travel faster than c
as we measure it here! *Clocks turn faster out there away from the
influence of mass, and so light has to go faster to keep up. *Also,
the idea that the universe in accelerating in its expansion is an
awfully far fetched and unlikely explanation for observations on the
face of it.

http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&g...43&tbm=isch&tb...

Double-A

I wonder if the unnamed physicist happened to mention how fast light
traveled in intergalactic space? *2c? *3c?
How about in interclusteric space?


I don't see a current copy of "Discover" here at the library or I'd
give you his name. It's sort of a sidelight to the artcile about the
guy who's challenging Einstein's ideas. I would guesss nothing so
dramitic as 2c. But this is fully consistent with and should be
predicted by General Relativity. We know that relative to us
observers on Earth, light near a massive object (even the Sun) move
slower through space relative to us. This implies that light far from
any mass, even galaxies, would move faster relative to us, using our
clocks. I don't thing the speed would vary by much relative to what
we measure as c here on Earth, or within the solar system, but when
you are tallking billions of light-years, any deviation in the speed
from what we assume could thow calculations off.

Double-A

On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 16:56:54 -0500, HVAC wrote:

On 2/27/2012 4:35 PM, Painius wrote:


I bet Painus has half a hard-on just hearing this.

It's a stupid premise. I'm unsurprised that he reached an
erroneous conclusion.

Perhaps, but just think of the implication for astronomy,

Thinking about the implications of an erroneous conclusion
is not only mental masturbation, it's a waste of time.

That would be a valid statement coming from anyone else but you.

You seem to think that *anything* outside the minuscule box of your
own knowledge of science is mental masturbation. While you're
masturbating, others are making discoveries, LaggartVAC.

important of which would be that galaxies, perhaps even stars (since
we might find out that c is only valid in the gravity well of our
Solar system), are much closer to us and to each other than previously
thought. The Universe may not be so large as we think, and this would
move up the era of the so-called Big Bang, which means the Universe is
not nearly so old as we think it (is) may be.

We can just make up anything? Are those the rules?

No, we cannot make up anything. The value of c, the speed of
electromagnetic radiation, might not be restricted to any given value
if conditions for its value change. A slightly higher c outside the
Solar system might very well account for the Pioneer anomaly.

This is not fiction, where the writer must restrict him or herself to
believable science, Harlow. This is reality, and reality knows no
restrictions. That doesn't mean we can make up anything, but it does
mean that reality will sometimes surprise us!

You are probably right. It's a stupid premise. However it wouldn't
be the first stupid premise that turned out to be reality, eh?

Got another one?

Your scientific knowledge?

PS- Look... I'm not even x-posting this to aa. Happy?

Who gives a **** 'n shinola where the hell you xpost? You have
serious issues, NeurotiVAC!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine @ http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/
"Unimaginative people find refuge in consistency."

On Feb 28, 12:34*pm, Painius wrote:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 16:56:54 -0500, HVAC wrote:
On 2/27/2012 4:35 PM, Painius wrote:

I bet Painus has half a hard-on just hearing this.

It's a stupid premise. I'm unsurprised that he reached an
erroneous conclusion.

Perhaps, but just think of the implication for astronomy,

Thinking about the implications of an erroneous conclusion
is not only mental masturbation, it's a waste of time.

That would be a valid statement coming from anyone else but you.

You seem to think that *anything* outside the minuscule box of your
own knowledge of science is mental masturbation. *While you're
masturbating, others are making discoveries, LaggartVAC.

important of which would be that galaxies, perhaps even stars (since
we might find out that c is only valid in the gravity well of our
Solar system), are much closer to us and to each other than previously
thought. *The Universe may not be so large as we think, and this would
move up the era of the so-called Big Bang, which means the Universe is
not nearly so old as we think it (is) may be.

We can just make up anything? *Are those the rules?

No, we cannot make up anything. *The value of c, the speed of
electromagnetic radiation, might not be restricted to any given value
if conditions for its value change. *A slightly higher c outside the
Solar system might very well account for the Pioneer anomaly.

This is not fiction, where the writer must restrict him or herself to
believable science, Harlow. *This is reality, and reality knows no
restrictions. *That doesn't mean we can make up anything, but it does
mean that reality will sometimes surprise us!

You are probably right. *It's a stupid premise. *However it wouldn't
be the first stupid premise that turned out to be reality, eh?

Got another one?

Your scientific knowledge?

PS- Look... I'm not even x-posting this to aa. * Happy?

Who gives a **** 'n shinola where the hell you xpost? *You have
serious issues, NeurotiVAC!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine @http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/
"Unimaginative people find refuge in consistency."

HVAC is xposting his silly brain cell out, and stopping that function
could be highly detrimental to his redneck survival. But then you
haven't exactly set the bar for intelligence all that high either.

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

On 2/28/2012 3:34 PM, Painius wrote:




PS- Look... I'm not even x-posting this to aa. Happy?

Who gives a **** 'n shinola where the hell you xpost? You have
serious issues, NeurotiVAC!


Oh, so NOW you have an opinion?












--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo