Fermi maps spacetime, confirms c for many wavelengths

http://www.popsci.com/node/40163/?cmpid=enews110509

David A. Smith

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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