SNe Ia DATA ARE COMPATIBLE WITH A STABLE UNIVERSE

SNe Ia DATA ARE COMPATIBLE WITH A STABLE UNIVERSE

cf. http://perso.wanadoo.fr/mluttgens/SNpaper2.htm

Marcel Luttgens

Dear Marcel Luttgens:

"Marcel Luttgens" wrote in message
om...
SNe Ia DATA ARE COMPATIBLE WITH A STABLE UNIVERSE

cf. http://perso.wanadoo.fr/mluttgens/SNpaper2.htm

The CMBR is not.

David A. Smith

\(formerly\)" dlzc1.cox@net wrote in message news:wroyb.24334$Bk1.5991@fed1read05...
Dear Marcel Luttgens:

"Marcel Luttgens" wrote in message
om...
SNe Ia DATA ARE COMPATIBLE WITH A STABLE UNIVERSE

cf. http://perso.wanadoo.fr/mluttgens/SNpaper2.htm

The CMBR is not.

David A. Smith

Indeed it is! (Radiation from the Olber's wall of stars...)

Aladar
http://www.stolmarphysics.com

Dear Aladar:

"Aladar" wrote in message
om...
\(formerly\)" dlzc1.cox@net wrote in message
news:wroyb.24334$Bk1.5991@fed1read05...
Dear Marcel Luttgens:

"Marcel Luttgens" wrote in message
om...
SNe Ia DATA ARE COMPATIBLE WITH A STABLE UNIVERSE

cf. http://perso.wanadoo.fr/mluttgens/SNpaper2.htm

The CMBR is not.

Indeed it is! (Radiation from the Olber's wall of stars...)

No. Hydrogen at 3000 K. Filled all of space, and was only some tens of
Mly across. Light since "stretched" to 9 K (1 Gy ago), now less than 3 K.
I don't see any 3000 K, space-filling, glowing, hydrogen cloud out there
now...

It is a slippery slope, and it *is* downhill. You don't really believe
that the second law of thermodynamics could be tricked on the cosmic scale
do you? The fuse, once lit, burns steadily onwards...

David A. Smith

\(formerly\)" dlzc1.cox@net wrote in message news:cfwyb.24668$Bk1.7463@fed1read05...
Dear Aladar:

"Aladar" wrote in message
om...
\(formerly\)" dlzc1.cox@net wrote in message
news:wroyb.24334$Bk1.5991@fed1read05...
Dear Marcel Luttgens:

"Marcel Luttgens" wrote in message
om...
SNe Ia DATA ARE COMPATIBLE WITH A STABLE UNIVERSE

cf. http://perso.wanadoo.fr/mluttgens/SNpaper2.htm

The CMBR is not.

Indeed it is! (Radiation from the Olber's wall of stars...)

No. Hydrogen at 3000 K. Filled all of space, and was only some tens of
Mly across. Light since "stretched" to 9 K (1 Gy ago), now less than 3 K.
I don't see any 3000 K, space-filling, glowing, hydrogen cloud out there
now...

It is a slippery slope, and it *is* downhill. You don't really believe
that the second law of thermodynamics could be tricked on the cosmic scale
do you? The fuse, once lit, burns steadily onwards...

David A. Smith

Cf. History of 2.7 K Temperature Prior to Penzias and Wilson at
http://www.dfi.uem.br/~macedane/history_of_2.7k.html
and their conclusion:
"Our conclusion is that the discovery of the CBR by Penzias and Wilson is
a decisive facto in favour of a Universe in dynamical equilibrium, and
against models of an expanding Universe, such as the Big Bang and the steady-state."

Marcel Luttgens

Marcel Luttgens wrote:

\(formerly\)" dlzc1.cox@net wrote in message news:cfwyb.24668$Bk1.7463@fed1read05...
Dear Aladar:

"Aladar" wrote in message
om...
\(formerly\)" dlzc1.cox@net wrote in message
news:wroyb.24334$Bk1.5991@fed1read05...
Dear Marcel Luttgens:

"Marcel Luttgens" wrote in message
om...
SNe Ia DATA ARE COMPATIBLE WITH A STABLE UNIVERSE

cf. http://perso.wanadoo.fr/mluttgens/SNpaper2.htm

The CMBR is not.

Indeed it is! (Radiation from the Olber's wall of stars...)

No. Hydrogen at 3000 K. Filled all of space, and was only some tens of
Mly across. Light since "stretched" to 9 K (1 Gy ago), now less than 3 K.
I don't see any 3000 K, space-filling, glowing, hydrogen cloud out there
now...

It is a slippery slope, and it *is* downhill. You don't really believe
that the second law of thermodynamics could be tricked on the cosmic scale
do you? The fuse, once lit, burns steadily onwards...

David A. Smith

Cf. History of 2.7 K Temperature Prior to Penzias and Wilson at
http://www.dfi.uem.br/~macedane/history_of_2.7k.html
and their conclusion:
"Our conclusion is that the discovery of the CBR by Penzias and Wilson is
a decisive facto in favour of a Universe in dynamical equilibrium, and
against models of an expanding Universe, such as the Big Bang and the
steady-state."

Scanning through the article, they appear to argue that the CMBR comes
essentially from star light. Despite their conclusion, they don't
present
evidence that the measurement of the CMBR is evidence against the Big
Bang
- they only point out that the measured temperature of the CMBR
disagrees
with some early theoretical predictions. They ignore that there are
newer,
more precise theoretical predictions, they don't explain the astonishing
smoothness of the CMBR (how on earth could this result if it comes from
star light?), and they ignore the following:
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/Eddington-T0.html


Bye,
Bjoern

Dear Marcel Luttgens:

"Marcel Luttgens" wrote in message
om...
\(formerly\)" dlzc1.cox@net wrote in message
news:cfwyb.24668$Bk1.7463@fed1read05...
Dear Aladar:

"Aladar" wrote in message
om...
\(formerly\)" dlzc1.cox@net wrote in message
news:wroyb.24334$Bk1.5991@fed1read05...
Dear Marcel Luttgens:

"Marcel Luttgens" wrote in message
om...
SNe Ia DATA ARE COMPATIBLE WITH A STABLE UNIVERSE

cf. http://perso.wanadoo.fr/mluttgens/SNpaper2.htm

The CMBR is not.

Indeed it is! (Radiation from the Olber's wall of stars...)

No. Hydrogen at 3000 K. Filled all of space, and was only some tens
of
Mly across. Light since "stretched" to 9 K (1 Gy ago), now less than 3
K.
I don't see any 3000 K, space-filling, glowing, hydrogen cloud out
there
now...

It is a slippery slope, and it *is* downhill. You don't really believe
that the second law of thermodynamics could be tricked on the cosmic
scale
do you? The fuse, once lit, burns steadily onwards...

Cf. History of 2.7 K Temperature Prior to Penzias and Wilson at
http://www.dfi.uem.br/~macedane/history_of_2.7k.html
and their conclusion:
"Our conclusion is that the discovery of the CBR by Penzias and Wilson is
a decisive facto in favour of a Universe in dynamical equilibrium, and
against models of an expanding Universe, such as the Big Bang and the
steady-state."

So you look into the last warmth of the fireplace, and see a fire? How is
it that starlight, which is not exclusively hydrogen (since what is emitted
is emitted from the surface of the star), is reduced to being only
spectrally hydrogen?

In a Universe that is so dominated by the second law of thermodynamics, how
do you propose for new hydrogen to be created from "old" iron? A steady
state Universe does not conform to what we see even locally.

David A. Smith

\(formerly\)" dlzc1.cox@net wrote in message news:WUHyb.25159$Bk1.11299@fed1read05...
[...]
The CMBR is not.

Indeed it is! (Radiation from the Olber's wall of stars...)

No. Hydrogen at 3000 K. Filled all of space, and was only some tens
of
Mly across. Light since "stretched" to 9 K (1 Gy ago), now less than 3
K.

That is a dream, or an article of faith.


I don't see any 3000 K, space-filling, glowing, hydrogen cloud out
there
now...

You don't have to, just repeat my calculation of star light, coming from as
seen density of galaxies.


It is a slippery slope, and it *is* downhill. You don't really believe
that the second law of thermodynamics could be tricked on the cosmic
scale
do you? The fuse, once lit, burns steadily onwards...

I really would like to hear what do you mean by that!


Cf. History of 2.7 K Temperature Prior to Penzias and Wilson at
http://www.dfi.uem.br/~macedane/history_of_2.7k.html
and their conclusion:
"Our conclusion is that the discovery of the CBR by Penzias and Wilson is
a decisive facto in favour of a Universe in dynamical equilibrium, and
against models of an expanding Universe, such as the Big Bang and the
steady-state."

Correct. Universe in dynamical equilibrium - this is what we have.


So you look into the last warmth of the fireplace, and see a fire? How is
it that starlight, which is not exclusively hydrogen (since what is emitted
is emitted from the surface of the star), is reduced to being only
spectrally hydrogen?

BS.


In a Universe that is so dominated by the second law of thermodynamics, how
do you propose for new hydrogen to be created from "old" iron? A steady
state Universe does not conform to what we see even locally.

David A. Smith

a Universe that is so dominated by the second law of thermodynamics - do you
eat it or drink it?

If you really interested, the abundance of elements is not explained
by standard model; the so called fundamental particles are over a dozen
and growing - and in general: returning to the good old colliding
atoms - one collision event is the universal element of everything - is
the only way out...

Cheers!
Aladar
http://www.stolmarphysics.com

Dear Aladar:

"Aladar" wrote in message
om...
\(formerly\)" dlzc1.cox@net wrote in message
news:WUHyb.25159$Bk1.11299@fed1read05...
....
Indeed it is! (Radiation from the Olber's wall of stars...)

No. Hydrogen at 3000 K. Filled all of space, and was only some
tens
of
Mly across. Light since "stretched" to 9 K (1 Gy ago), now less
than 3
K.

That is a dream, or an article of faith.

It is data that has been published in peer reviewed journals. Deal with
it.

I don't see any 3000 K, space-filling, glowing, hydrogen cloud out
there
now...

You don't have to, just repeat my calculation of star light, coming from
as
seen density of galaxies.

Handle a CMBR of 9 K 1 Gy ago.

It is a slippery slope, and it *is* downhill. You don't really
believe
that the second law of thermodynamics could be tricked on the
cosmic
scale
do you? The fuse, once lit, burns steadily onwards...

I really would like to hear what do you mean by that!

Second Law. The hydrogen that is being fused by the stars has *no* method
of returning to hydrogen in the required quantities to support a
steady-state Universe. Proton decay (protons emitted from a nucleus,
without being part of an alpha) is not well documented in the Universe
today.

So you look into the last warmth of the fireplace, and see a fire? How
is
it that starlight, which is not exclusively hydrogen (since what is
emitted
is emitted from the surface of the star), is reduced to being only
spectrally hydrogen?

BS.

That is the degree I hold, yes. Your remark is deficient in content. The
CMBR spectrum is that of pure hydrogen, and not dust-decayed noise.

In a Universe that is so dominated by the second law of thermodynamics,
how
do you propose for new hydrogen to be created from "old" iron? A
steady
state Universe does not conform to what we see even locally.

a Universe that is so dominated by the second law of thermodynamics - do
you
eat it or drink it?

The fact that you must consume, is proof.

If you really interested, the abundance of elements is not explained
by standard model; the so called fundamental particles are over a dozen
and growing - and in general: returning to the good old colliding
atoms - one collision event is the universal element of everything - is
the only way out...

The abundance is certainly not described by a steady-state Universe. We
are either at the "beginning" of a steady-state condition, or it isn't
steady-state. Stars make iron, and heavier stuff by accident. They don't
take iron and make hydrogen.

Until you handle the hard stuff, your hypotheses are just fantasy.

David A. Smith

\(formerly\)" dlzc1.cox@net wrote in message news:WUHyb.25159$Bk1.11299@fed1read05...

So you look into the last warmth of the fireplace, and see a fire? How is
it that starlight, which is not exclusively hydrogen (since what is emitted
is emitted from the surface of the star), is reduced to being only
spectrally hydrogen?

Please refer to my answer to Bjoern Feuerbacher.

In a Universe that is so dominated by the second law of thermodynamics, how
do you propose for new hydrogen to be created from "old" iron? A steady
state Universe does not conform to what we see even locally.

What is the fate of "old" iron in a B.H. ?

David A. Smith

Marcel Luttgens