Milky Way rotates faster and as heavy as Andromeda

Painius I get your angle analysis and it fits. So would a star moving
away from us with less light intensity(already shinning closer to
red(kind of pink white) Also mass density of star.as it radiates white
light but its great gravity changes photons to be longer and longer
lengths in their great journey to hit our eyes. TreBert PS Wave
lengths of photons tell us a lot ,but to measure each photon wave
accurately is ????

On Feb 2, 5:22*am, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
Painius I get your angle analysis and it fits. So would a star moving
away from us with less light intensity(already shinning closer to
red(kind of pink white) * Also mass density of star.as it radiates white
light but its great gravity changes photons to be longer and longer
lengths in their great journey to hit our eyes. * TreBert * PS Wave
lengths of photons tell us a lot ,but to measure each photon wave
accurately is ????

Obviously black holes drag the photon wave out to its maximum graviton
wavelength, in so much as we see only black or rather the lack of any
spectrum of light.

There's also the black area or dark cloud as any black hole patch of
our cosmic sky, that's also not giving way to photons. (notice the
reddish color shift of stars within the surrounding edge of this dark
substance, as though stellar photons had to drastically slow down
before continuing on their way)

http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys301...68_vlt_big.jpg

~ BG

On Feb 2, 10:58*pm, "Painius" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message...

...



On Feb 2, 5:22 am, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

Painius I get your angle analysis and it fits. So would a star moving
away from us with less light intensity(already shinning closer to
red(kind of pink white) Also mass density of star.as it radiates white
light but its great gravity changes photons to be longer and longer
lengths in their great journey to hit our eyes. TreBert PS Wave
lengths of photons tell us a lot ,but to measure each photon wave
accurately is ????

Obviously black holes drag the photon wave out to its maximum graviton
wavelength, in so much as we see only black or rather the lack of any
spectrum of light.

There's also the black area or dark cloud as any black hole patch of
our cosmic sky, that's also not giving way to photons. (notice the
reddish color shift of stars within the surrounding edge of this dark
substance, as though stellar photons had to drastically slow down
before continuing on their way)

http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys301...h/barnard68_vl...

*~ BG

That's Barnard 68, Brad, a star-forming region about
4 or 500 light years away and 1/2 a light year across.
Astronomers know it's fairly nearby, because there's
not one single star between B68 and the Sun. *And it
does give way to photons, just not visible light. *IR
photons get through just peachy...

*http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080323.html

*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnard_68

So it's a good IR bandpass filter that's made of ? black diamond
dust ?

~ BG

On Feb 3, 12:55*am, "Painius" wrote:
"Painius" wrote in message...

...



"BradGuth" wrote in message...
....
On Feb 2, 5:22 am, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

Painius I get your angle analysis and it fits. So would a star moving
away from us with less light intensity(already shinning closer to
red(kind of pink white) Also mass density of star.as it radiates white
light but its great gravity changes photons to be longer and longer
lengths in their great journey to hit our eyes. TreBert PS Wave
lengths of photons tell us a lot ,but to measure each photon wave
accurately is ????

Obviously black holes drag the photon wave out to its maximum graviton
wavelength, in so much as we see only black or rather the lack of any
spectrum of light.

There's also the black area or dark cloud as any black hole patch of
our cosmic sky, that's also not giving way to photons. (notice the
reddish color shift of stars within the surrounding edge of this dark
substance, as though stellar photons had to drastically slow down
before continuing on their way)

http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys301...h/barnard68_vl....

That's Barnard 68, Brad, a star-forming region about
4 or 500 light years away and 1/2 a light year across.
Astronomers know it's fairly nearby, because there's
not one single star between B68 and the Sun. *And it
does give way to photons, just not visible light. *IR
photons get through just peachy...

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080323.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnard_68

Here's a silly question...

As noted, B68 is fairly close, 4 or 500 light years away.
So if the cloud emitted light, it would take 4 or 500 years
to reach us.

Since no visible light can pierce the darkness of this huge
molecular cloud, and no visible light photons are emitted
from it, how long does it take for the "dark" to reach our
eyes?

IOW, does the darkness travel at the same speed as the
light? or does it reach us instantly?

To better understand the question, ask yourself what
happens if the cloud were to begin to noticeably compress.
Would we see the compression in "real" time because the
darkness reaches our eyes instantly?

And how about the stars behind the cloud? *Their light is
blocked by the cloud, so if the cloud contracts and gets
smaller, won't it take 4 to 500 years before the previously
blocked starlight can reach our eyes?

The answer to that last one would be "yes". *And this of
course means that if the cloud is getting smaller, then we
would not see any newly unblocked stars for the time it
takes the light of the stars to get to our eyes. *So that
cloud could already be smaller than it actually appears.

So it's likely a shrinking dark mass as well as providing a good IR
bandpass filter, that's made of ???? (black diamond dust)

~ BG

On Feb 3, 12:55*am, "Painius" wrote:
"Painius" wrote in message...

...





"BradGuth" wrote in message...
....
On Feb 2, 5:22 am, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

Painius I get your angle analysis and it fits. So would a star moving
away from us with less light intensity(already shinning closer to
red(kind of pink white) Also mass density of star.as it radiates white
light but its great gravity changes photons to be longer and longer
lengths in their great journey to hit our eyes. TreBert PS Wave
lengths of photons tell us a lot ,but to measure each photon wave
accurately is ????

Obviously black holes drag the photon wave out to its maximum graviton
wavelength, in so much as we see only black or rather the lack of any
spectrum of light.

There's also the black area or dark cloud as any black hole patch of
our cosmic sky, that's also not giving way to photons. (notice the
reddish color shift of stars within the surrounding edge of this dark
substance, as though stellar photons had to drastically slow down
before continuing on their way)

http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys301...h/barnard68_vl....

That's Barnard 68, Brad, a star-forming region about
4 or 500 light years away and 1/2 a light year across.
Astronomers know it's fairly nearby, because there's
not one single star between B68 and the Sun. *And it
does give way to photons, just not visible light. *IR
photons get through just peachy...

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080323.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnard_68

Here's a silly question...

As noted, B68 is fairly close, 4 or 500 light years away.
So if the cloud emitted light, it would take 4 or 500 years
to reach us.

Since no visible light can pierce the darkness of this huge
molecular cloud, and no visible light photons are emitted
from it, how long does it take for the "dark" to reach our
eyes?

IOW, does the darkness travel at the same speed as the
light? or does it reach us instantly?


Are we talking photoffs here?

Double-A

AA wrote, re. "speed of darkness":

Are we talking photoffs here?

No, darkons. :-)

On Feb 8, 7:02*am, (oldcoot) wrote:
AA wrote, re. "speed of darkness":

Are we talking photoffs here?

No, darkons. :-)

The speed of dark gravity could be c, 2c or for all we know c2.

Electrons seem to coexist as a BH point-source of combined dark matter
plus dark energy.

~ BG

On Feb 8, 9:37*am, BradGuth wrote:
On Feb 8, 7:02*am, (oldcoot) wrote:

AA wrote, re. "speed of darkness":

Are we talking photoffs here?

No, darkons. :-)

The speed of dark gravity could be c, 2c or for all we know c2.

Electrons seem to coexist as a BH point-source of combined dark matter
plus dark energy.

*~ BG


Citation?

Double-A

On Feb 8, 3:29*pm, Double-A wrote:
On Feb 8, 9:37*am, BradGuth wrote:

On Feb 8, 7:02*am, (oldcoot) wrote:

AA wrote, re. "speed of darkness":

Are we talking photoffs here?

No, darkons. :-)

The speed of dark gravity could be c, 2c or for all we know c2.

Electrons seem to coexist as a BH point-source of combined dark matter
plus dark energy.

*~ BG

Citation?

The best available physics and science is what can't seem to
objectively measure the physical radius of an individual electron.
Most of physics and science has given up on getting any electron
volumetric size, although not of its mass or worth of energy.

In other words, a trillion electrons compacted and/or merged together
would weigh 9.1094e-16 g, and yet as a whole they'd still be dark and
nearly if not still representing a singularity.

Why can't an electron be a BH singularity?

~ BG

On Feb 8, 4:08*pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Feb 8, 3:29*pm, Double-A wrote:





On Feb 8, 9:37*am, BradGuth wrote:

On Feb 8, 7:02*am, (oldcoot) wrote:

AA wrote, re. "speed of darkness":

Are we talking photoffs here?

No, darkons. :-)

The speed of dark gravity could be c, 2c or for all we know c2.

Electrons seem to coexist as a BH point-source of combined dark matter
plus dark energy.

*~ BG

Citation?

The best available physics and science is what can't seem to
objectively measure the physical radius of an individual electron.
Most of physics and science has given up on getting any electron
volumetric size, although not of its mass or worth of energy.

In other words, a trillion electrons compacted and/or merged together
would weigh 9.1094e-16 g, and yet as a whole they'd still be dark and
nearly if not still representing a singularity.

Why can't an electron be a BH singularity?

*~ BG


Wheeler thought it was.

Double-A