The Cosmological Principle

The Cosmological Principle

APM Survey fo a 30 deg. swath of the sky, showing about 1 million
galaxies out to a distance of almost 2 billion light years.
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/ContentMedia/990047b.jpg

After the introduction of General Relativity a number of scientists,
including Einstein, tried to apply the new gravitational dynamics to
the universe as a whole. At the time this required an assumption about
how the matter in the universe was distributed. The simplest assumption
to make is that if you viewed the contents of the universe with
sufficiently poor vision, it would appear roughly the same everywhere
and in every direction. That is, the matter in the universe is
homogeneous and isotropic when averaged over very large scales. This is
called the Cosmological Principle. This assumption is being tested
continuously as we actually observe the distribution of galaxies on
ever larger scales. The accompanying picture shows how uniform the
distribution of measured galaxies is over a 30° swath of the sky. In
addition the cosmic microwave background radiation, the remnant heat
from the Big Bang, has a temperature which is highly uniform over the
entire sky. This fact strongly supports the notion that the gas which
emitted this radiation long ago was very uniformly distributed.

These two ideas form the entire theoretical basis for Big Bang
cosmology and lead to very specific predictions for observable
properties of the universe. An overview of the Big Bang Model is
presented in a set of companion pages.

See: ref: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bb1.html

"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
news:LVmYe.357539$_o.295746@attbi_s71...
The Cosmological Principle

APM Survey fo a 30 deg. swath of the sky, showing about 1 million
galaxies out to a distance of almost 2 billion light years.
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/ContentMedia/990047b.jpg

After the introduction of General Relativity a number of scientists,
including Einstein, tried to apply the new gravitational dynamics to
the universe as a whole. At the time this required an assumption about
how the matter in the universe was distributed. The simplest assumption
to make is that if you viewed the contents of the universe with
sufficiently poor vision, it would appear roughly the same everywhere
and in every direction. That is, the matter in the universe is
homogeneous and isotropic when averaged over very large scales. This is
called the Cosmological Principle. This assumption is being tested
continuously as we actually observe the distribution of galaxies on
ever larger scales. The accompanying picture shows how uniform the
distribution of measured galaxies is over a 30° swath of the sky. In
addition the cosmic microwave background radiation, the remnant heat
from the Big Bang, has a temperature which is highly uniform over the
entire sky. This fact strongly supports the notion that the gas which
emitted this radiation long ago was very uniformly distributed.

These two ideas form the entire theoretical basis for Big Bang
cosmology and lead to very specific predictions for observable
properties of the universe. An overview of the Big Bang Model is
presented in a set of companion pages.

See: ref: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bb1.html



This is nothing new. What's your point?

Thomas Farrsby wrote:
"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
news:LVmYe.357539$_o.295746@attbi_s71...
The Cosmological Principle

APM Survey fo a 30 deg. swath of the sky, showing about 1 million
galaxies out to a distance of almost 2 billion light years.
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/ContentMedia/990047b.jpg

After the introduction of General Relativity a number of scientists,
including Einstein, tried to apply the new gravitational dynamics to
the universe as a whole. At the time this required an assumption about
how the matter in the universe was distributed. The simplest assumption
to make is that if you viewed the contents of the universe with
sufficiently poor vision, it would appear roughly the same everywhere
and in every direction. That is, the matter in the universe is
homogeneous and isotropic when averaged over very large scales. This is
called the Cosmological Principle. This assumption is being tested
continuously as we actually observe the distribution of galaxies on
ever larger scales. The accompanying picture shows how uniform the
distribution of measured galaxies is over a 30=B0 swath of the sky. In
addition the cosmic microwave background radiation, the remnant heat
from the Big Bang, has a temperature which is highly uniform over the
entire sky. This fact strongly supports the notion that the gas which
emitted this radiation long ago was very uniformly distributed.

These two ideas form the entire theoretical basis for Big Bang
cosmology and lead to very specific predictions for observable
properties of the universe. An overview of the Big Bang Model is
presented in a set of companion pages.

See: ref: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bb1.html



This is nothing new. What's your point?

This is an exercise in Newtonian/relativistic thumbsucking and the
contrapunctal opposite of the principles of astronomy.

So,how did Newton look at the remaining observable stars -

"Cor. 2. And since these stars are liable to no sensible parallax from
the annual motion of the earth, they can have no force, because of
their immense distance, to produce any sensible effect in our system.
Not to mention that the fixed stars, every where promiscuously
dispersed in the heavens, by their contrary actions destroy their
mutual actions, by Prop. LXX, Book I."[Principia]

In spite of this,Albert decided that Newton give a center to the
observable universe -

"This view is not in harmony with the theory of Newton. The latter
theory rather requires that the universe should have a kind of centre
in which the density of the stars is a maximum, and that as we proceed
outwards from this centre the group-density of the stars should
diminish, until finally, at great distances, it is succeeded by an
infinite region of emptiness. The stellar universe ought to be a finite
island in the infinite ocean of space."

http://www.bartleby.com/173/30.html

Now,any person with common sense would see the poor guy in 1920 ,in an
era before stellar islands known as galaxies were observed,has just
rejected the notion of galaxies or what amounts to the same thing; a
new axis of rotation to incorporate heliocentric motion into.

No for the last 80 years you have been following pure homocentric
garbage and even managing to turn Copernicus into a homocentrist -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernican_principle

You are an embarrassing bunch with your 'sunrises and sunsets' after
half a millenia since the exquisite reasoning behind Copernican
heliocentricity emerged.

oriel36 wrote:
You are an embarrassing bunch with your 'sunrises and sunsets' after
half a millenia since the exquisite reasoning behind Copernican
heliocentricity emerged.

My six year old has a better grasp of astronomy and physics... Hell, I
think my cat has a clearer idea of how the Universe works... Talk about
being embarrassed!

Ok, here we PLONK again.

oriel36 wrote:
Thomas Farrsby wrote:

"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
news:LVmYe.357539$_o.295746@attbi_s71...

The Cosmological Principle

APM Survey fo a 30 deg. swath of the sky, showing about 1 million
galaxies out to a distance of almost 2 billion light years.
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/ContentMedia/990047b.jpg

After the introduction of General Relativity a number of scientists,
including Einstein, tried to apply the new gravitational dynamics to
the universe as a whole. At the time this required an assumption about
how the matter in the universe was distributed. The simplest assumption
to make is that if you viewed the contents of the universe with
sufficiently poor vision, it would appear roughly the same everywhere
and in every direction. That is, the matter in the universe is
homogeneous and isotropic when averaged over very large scales. This is
called the Cosmological Principle. This assumption is being tested
continuously as we actually observe the distribution of galaxies on
ever larger scales. The accompanying picture shows how uniform the
distribution of measured galaxies is over a 30° swath of the sky. In
addition the cosmic microwave background radiation, the remnant heat
from the Big Bang, has a temperature which is highly uniform over the
entire sky. This fact strongly supports the notion that the gas which
emitted this radiation long ago was very uniformly distributed.

These two ideas form the entire theoretical basis for Big Bang
cosmology and lead to very specific predictions for observable
properties of the universe. An overview of the Big Bang Model is
presented in a set of companion pages.

See: ref: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bb1.html



This is nothing new. What's your point?


This is an exercise in Newtonian/relativistic thumbsucking and the
contrapunctal opposite of the principles of astronomy.

So,how did Newton look at the remaining observable stars -

"Cor. 2. And since these stars are liable to no sensible parallax from
the annual motion of the earth, they can have no force, because of
their immense distance, to produce any sensible effect in our system.
Not to mention that the fixed stars, every where promiscuously
dispersed in the heavens, by their contrary actions destroy their
mutual actions, by Prop. LXX, Book I."[Principia]

In spite of this,Albert decided that Newton give a center to the
observable universe -

"This view is not in harmony with the theory of Newton. The latter
theory rather requires that the universe should have a kind of centre
in which the density of the stars is a maximum, and that as we proceed
outwards from this centre the group-density of the stars should
diminish, until finally, at great distances, it is succeeded by an
infinite region of emptiness. The stellar universe ought to be a finite
island in the infinite ocean of space."

http://www.bartleby.com/173/30.html

Now,any person with common sense would see the poor guy in 1920 ,in an
era before stellar islands known as galaxies were observed,has just
rejected the notion of galaxies or what amounts to the same thing; a
new axis of rotation to incorporate heliocentric motion into.

No for the last 80 years you have been following pure homocentric
garbage and even managing to turn Copernicus into a homocentrist -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernican_principle

You are an embarrassing bunch with your 'sunrises and sunsets' after
half a millenia since the exquisite reasoning behind Copernican
heliocentricity emerged.


Interesting: http://www.google.com/search?q=oriel...ers.pandora.be

This is an exercise in Newtonian/relativistic thumbsucking and the
contrapunctal opposite of the principles of astronomy.

So,how did Newton look at the remaining observable stars -

"Cor. 2. And since these stars are liable to no sensible parallax from
the annual motion of the earth, they can have no force, because of
their immense distance, to produce any sensible effect in our system.
Not to mention that the fixed stars, every where promiscuously
dispersed in the heavens, by their contrary actions destroy their
mutual actions, by Prop. LXX, Book I."[Principia]

In spite of this,Albert decided that Newton give a center to the
observable universe -

"This view is not in harmony with the theory of Newton. The latter
theory rather requires that the universe should have a kind of centre
in which the density of the stars is a maximum, and that as we proceed
outwards from this centre the group-density of the stars should
diminish, until finally, at great distances, it is succeeded by an
infinite region of emptiness. The stellar universe ought to be a finite
island in the infinite ocean of space."


Again I ask, what kind of asshole are you?

"oriel36" wrote in message
ups.com...

Thomas Farrsby wrote:
"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
news:LVmYe.357539$_o.295746@attbi_s71...
The Cosmological Principle


Oh good, Gerald and Mick are back.

Ed

"

Thomas Farrsby wrote:
"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
news:LVmYe.357539$_o.295746@attbi_s71...
The Cosmological Principle


Oh good, Gerald and Mick are back.

Ed


Ohhh Ok..THAT kind of asshole.

Thomas Farrsby wrote:

"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
news:LVmYe.357539$_o.295746@attbi_s71...
The Cosmological Principle

APM Survey fo a 30 deg. swath of the sky, showing about 1 million
galaxies out to a distance of almost 2 billion light years.
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/ContentMedia/990047b.jpg

After the introduction of General Relativity a number of scientists,
including Einstein, tried to apply the new gravitational dynamics to
the universe as a whole. At the time this required an assumption about
how the matter in the universe was distributed. The simplest assumption
to make is that if you viewed the contents of the universe with
sufficiently poor vision, it would appear roughly the same everywhere
and in every direction. That is, the matter in the universe is
homogeneous and isotropic when averaged over very large scales. This is
called the Cosmological Principle. This assumption is being tested
continuously as we actually observe the distribution of galaxies on
ever larger scales. The accompanying picture shows how uniform the
distribution of measured galaxies is over a 30° swath of the sky. In
addition the cosmic microwave background radiation, the remnant heat
from the Big Bang, has a temperature which is highly uniform over the
entire sky. This fact strongly supports the notion that the gas which
emitted this radiation long ago was very uniformly distributed.

These two ideas form the entire theoretical basis for Big Bang
cosmology and lead to very specific predictions for observable
properties of the universe. An overview of the Big Bang Model is
presented in a set of companion pages.

See: ref: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bb1.html

This is nothing new. What's your point?

The point is to start what followed below, obviously.

To Sam

There is no doubt that theorists and cataloguers constitute a really
unique bunch in the history of humanity's investigation of natural
phenomena of which astronomy was once the noblest of
disciplines.Perhaps most here imagine that owning a telescope makes
them an astronomer but that never was the case.

The heliocentric astronomer recognise the great Copernican insight of a
faster Earth moving in an inner orbital circuit as resolving apparent
retrogrades and simultaneously inferring the heliocentric axis.

http://www.opencourse.info/astronomy...turn_retro.gif

Like a faster car overtaking slower cars on a large traffic roundabout
likewise viewers on the faster Earth will observe the other planets
fall behind and then move forward again.This is the original Copernican
principle and there is no other and certainly not the utterly stupid
Newtonian take on how to resolve retrograde -

"For to the earth they appear sometimes direct, sometimes stationary,
nay, and sometimes retrograde. But from the sun they are always seen
direct..."

http://members.tripod.com/~gravitee/phaenomena.htm

You lot must certainly hate heliocentric astronomy for there is one
and only one way to resolve apparent retrograde motion.If you cretins
dragged yourselves away from you telescopes for an hour and started to
think like the great heliocentrists instead of dumb empiricists,I would
not have to try so hard to give you an education.

As for the geeks with nothing to say,well those creatures have always
existed with merit or comment.