|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Fermi maps spacetime, confirms c for many wavelengths
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Fermi maps spacetime, confirms c for many wavelengths
dlzc wrote:
http://www.popsci.com/node/40163/?cmpid=enews110509 David A. Smith Two different frequencies of Gamma rays arriving 0.9 seconds apart from the same source could be considered confirmation that the highest energy GR's /are/ affected by the roughness of space. Yousuf Khan |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Fermi maps spacetime, confirms c for many wavelengths
Yousuf Khan wrote:
Two different frequencies of Gamma rays arriving 0.9 seconds apart from the same source could be considered confirmation that the highest energy GR's /are/ affected by the roughness of space. Not when you don't know that the source's duration was significantly less than 0.9 seconds. They don't know that. Tom Roberts |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Fermi maps spacetime, confirms c for many wavelengths
On Nov 5, 1:00 pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
dlzc wrote: http://www.popsci.com/node/40163/?cmpid=enews110509 David A. Smith Two different frequencies of Gamma rays arriving 0.9 seconds apart from the same source could be considered confirmation that the highest energy GR's /are/ affected by the roughness of space. Yousuf Khan The universe is obviously not a perfect vacuum, it has a density, so just as blue light is slowed more than red in optics, the 0.9 secs diff makes sense. Ken |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Fermi maps spacetime, confirms c for many wavelengths
On Nov 5, 12:12*pm, dlzc wrote:
http://www.popsci.com/node/40163/?cmpid=enews110509 David A. Smith What else do you expect? It is a fact smith. Mitch Raemsch |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Fermi maps spacetime, confirms c for many wavelengths
Dear Yousuf Khan:
On Nov 5, 2:00*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote: dlzc wrote: http://www.popsci.com/node/40163/?cmpid=enews110509 Two different frequencies of Gamma rays arriving 0.9 seconds apart from the same source could be considered confirmation that the highest energy GR's /are/ affected *by the roughness of space. Not when the visible light, radio waves, etc. all also arrive during the same "burst". Bursts are not zero duration events, they ostensibly also come from distant events so the burst gets "duration stretched" by expansion, and we still are not clear on mechanism as to what departs... when. David A. Smith |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Fermi maps spacetime, confirms c for many wavelengths
Tom Roberts wrote:
Yousuf Khan wrote: Two different frequencies of Gamma rays arriving 0.9 seconds apart from the same source could be considered confirmation that the highest energy GR's /are/ affected by the roughness of space. Not when you don't know that the source's duration was significantly less than 0.9 seconds. They don't know that. Then they can't confirm the opposite either. Yousuf Khan |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Fermi maps spacetime, confirms c for many wavelengths
On Nov 5, 5:58*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Tom Roberts wrote: Yousuf Khan wrote: Two different frequencies of Gamma rays arriving 0.9 seconds apart from the same source could be considered confirmation that the highest energy GR's /are/ affected *by the roughness of space. Not when you don't know that the source's duration was significantly less than 0.9 seconds. They don't know that. Then they can't confirm the opposite either. * * * * Yousuf Khan Space is continuous and curved round in substance. It has no roughness. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Fermi maps spacetime, confirms c for many wavelengths
Yousuf Khan wrote:
Tom Roberts wrote: Yousuf Khan wrote: Two different frequencies of Gamma rays arriving 0.9 seconds apart from the same source could be considered confirmation that the highest energy GR's /are/ affected by the roughness of space. Not when you don't know that the source's duration was significantly less than 0.9 seconds. They don't know that. Then they can't confirm the opposite either. Someone has their thinking cap on today. Yousuf Khan |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Fermi maps spacetime, confirms c for many wavelengths
On Nov 5, 7:14*pm, eric gisse wrote:
Yousuf Khan wrote: Tom Roberts wrote: Yousuf Khan wrote: Two different frequencies of Gamma rays arriving 0.9 seconds apart from the same source could be considered confirmation that the highest energy GR's /are/ affected *by the roughness of space. Not when you don't know that the source's duration was significantly less than 0.9 seconds. They don't know that. Then they can't confirm the opposite either. Someone has their thinking cap on today. Yousuf Khan- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Should't light change sizes if it is a local wave? How could a small energy light with a large wavelength spread out accros space at emmision? if it is not a local phenomenon? Mitch Raemsch |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
No telescope at wavelengths of 12.5 nm to 125 nm? | [email protected][_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 6 | July 10th 07 04:06 AM |
Observing the Solar System in Submillimeter Wavelengths | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | June 16th 05 06:32 PM |
Observing the Solar System in Submillimeter Wavelengths | [email protected] | News | 0 | June 16th 05 06:31 PM |
New NASA-Japanese telescope images uncharted wavelengths | Jacques van Oene | News | 0 | November 9th 04 02:30 PM |
our suns light output at different wavelengths? | simon.coombs3 | UK Astronomy | 1 | July 3rd 04 05:02 PM |