One pillar down for Big Bang Theory

(lymphnote) wrote in message . com...
The red shift from distant glaxies has been interpreted as the
Universe is expanding and, if tracked back in time, the Universe was
formed from a singularity. However, the red shift may not be the
result of Doppler effect after all. Photons age and their red shift
is only observable after very very long time. That is why ancient
photons from distant past appear red shifted. The truly distant
(infinite past) photons turn into background microwave. So, folks, no
Big Bang.

If you're genuinely interested in learning about cosmological events
such as the Big Bang, sci.astro would be a better place to discuss it.

Earthling

Apparently on date Wed, 16 Jul 2003 05:41:00 +0000 (UTC),
said:

(lymphnote) wrote in message . com...
The red shift from distant glaxies has been interpreted as the
Universe is expanding and, if tracked back in time, the Universe was
formed from a singularity. However, the red shift may not be the
result of Doppler effect after all. Photons age and their red shift
is only observable after very very long time. That is why ancient
photons from distant past appear red shifted. The truly distant
(infinite past) photons turn into background microwave. So, folks, no
Big Bang.

If you're genuinely interested in learning about cosmological events
such as the Big Bang, sci.astro would be a better place to discuss it.

"Tired light" is a common idea but it is wrong.

HST, sci.astro probably contains more people who go on about it than t.o

(lymphnote) wrote in message . com...

The red shift from distant glaxies has been interpreted as the
Universe is expanding and, if tracked back in time, the Universe was
formed from a singularity. However, the red shift may not be the
result of Doppler effect after all. Photons age and their red shift
is only observable after very very long time. That is why ancient
photons from distant past appear red shifted. The truly distant
(infinite past) photons turn into background microwave. So, folks, no
Big Bang.

This is the 'tired light' theory of cosmological redshifts. It was
invented to explain the red shift of galaxies. However, it fails to
explain the cosmic microwave background radiation. The key point is
that the conventional expansion theory preserves the 'back-body-ness'
of this radiation, but TL does not (since expansion changes not only
the energy of the photons, but also their density and arrival rate;
TL changes only their energy.) Since the CMBR comes from cosmological
distances, it would have to have been created as a very non-black-body
radiation field that TL just coincidently tweaked into something that
is now extremely close to one.

There are some net cranks who don't or won't understand this argument.

Paul

In article ,
wrote:

(lymphnote) wrote in message
. com...
The red shift from distant glaxies has been interpreted as the
Universe is expanding and, if tracked back in time, the Universe was
formed from a singularity. However, the red shift may not be the
result of Doppler effect after all. Photons age and their red shift
is only observable after very very long time. That is why ancient
photons from distant past appear red shifted. The truly distant
(infinite past) photons turn into background microwave. So, folks, no
Big Bang.

If you're genuinely interested in learning about cosmological events
such as the Big Bang, sci.astro would be a better place to discuss it.

Earthling

The Big Bang was not a cosmological event but rather an intellectual
masturbation that got out of hand.

CC

On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 03:16:01 +0000 (UTC),
Charles Cagle wrote:
In article ,
wrote:

(lymphnote) wrote in message
. com...
The red shift from distant glaxies has been interpreted as the
Universe is expanding and, if tracked back in time, the Universe was
formed from a singularity. However, the red shift may not be the
result of Doppler effect after all. Photons age and their red shift
is only observable after very very long time. That is why ancient
photons from distant past appear red shifted. The truly distant
(infinite past) photons turn into background microwave. So, folks, no
Big Bang.

If you're genuinely interested in learning about cosmological events
such as the Big Bang, sci.astro would be a better place to discuss it.

Earthling

The Big Bang was not a cosmological event but rather an intellectual
masturbation that got out of hand.

Really? Wow!

Please provide your explanation for the expansion of the Universe and the
cosmic background radiation that's everywhere you care to look. And please
provide the evidence for this explanation. I smell a nobel prize if you've
got one that overthrows Big Bang cosmology.

--
Aaron Clausen

On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 03:16:01 +0000 (UTC), Charles Cagle
wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

(lymphnote) wrote in message
. com...
The red shift from distant glaxies has been interpreted as the
Universe is expanding and, if tracked back in time, the Universe was
formed from a singularity. However, the red shift may not be the
result of Doppler effect after all. Photons age and their red shift
is only observable after very very long time. That is why ancient
photons from distant past appear red shifted. The truly distant
(infinite past) photons turn into background microwave. So, folks, no
Big Bang.

If you're genuinely interested in learning about cosmological events
such as the Big Bang, sci.astro would be a better place to discuss it.

Earthling

The Big Bang was not a cosmological event but rather an intellectual
masturbation that got out of hand.

Wilkins, is that you?

If not, I bet you are kicking yourself for not having come up with that
pun.

---------------
J. Pieret
---------------

Nunc Id Vides, Nunc Ne Vides

- Unseen University Motto -