#1
|
|||
|
|||
Georges Lemaître
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:35:07 -0700 (PDT), Double-A
wrote: On Oct 16, 12:32*am, Painius wrote: From Wikipedia... "Georges Henri Joseph douard Lema tre (17 July 1894 20 June 1966) was a Belgian priest, astronomer and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Louvain (Belgium). *He was the first person to propose the theory of the expansion of the Universe, widely misattributed to Edwin Hubble. Yes, Hubble would have nothing to do with such nonsense! Maybe not at first - but then, when he did come around and embrace the proposal, Hubble gave it scientific credibility. He looked out and saw faraway galaxies that seemed to be rushing away from us at tremendous speeds. He noted that the farther away those galaxies were from us, the faster away from us they appeared to go. So he interpreted his observations of those faraway galaxies to mean that the Universe indeed *must* be expanding. And it was never questioned that those faraway galaxies' behaviors had taken place billions of years ago, that there was no way of telling what those galaxies were doing right now, that it was the height of human hubris to glean from those observations that the Universe is expanding NOW. Astronomers don't have any trouble with the thought that we see our own star, the Sun, as it was about eight minutes ago, because the Sun is about 8 light minutes away. They have no problem with the fact that if the star Sirius were to blow up today, we wouldn't know about it until about 8.6 years from now, because Sirius is 8.6 light years away. So why do they have so much trouble with the thought that if a galaxy is racing away from us, that may have been what it WAS doing billions of years ago? How can they take that observation and conclude that the Universe is expanding NOW??? *He was also the first to derive what is now known as the Hubble's law and made the first estimation of what is now called the Hubble constant, which he published in 1927, two years before Hubble's article. *Lema tre also proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe, which he called his 'hypothesis of the primeval atom'. Dubbed "Big Bang" by Fred Hoyle in ridicule of the theory! *As he was a secular priest, he was called Abb , then, after being made a canon, Monseigneur." So this Jesuit priest not only proposed what became the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe, he ALSO was the first to give us the theory that the Universe is expanding! He has made fools of us all. *LMBO ! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre -- Indelibly yours, Paine @ http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/ "A neurosis is a secret that you don't know you are keeping." |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Georges Lemaître
On Oct 16, 8:17*pm, Painius wrote:
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:35:07 -0700 (PDT), Double-A wrote: On Oct 16, 12:32 am, Painius wrote: From Wikipedia... "Georges Henri Joseph douard Lema tre (17 July 1894 20 June 1966) was a Belgian priest, astronomer and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Louvain (Belgium). He was the first person to propose the theory of the expansion of the Universe, widely misattributed to Edwin Hubble. Yes, Hubble would have nothing to do with such nonsense! Maybe not at first - but then, when he did come around and embrace the proposal, Hubble gave it scientific credibility. *He looked out and saw faraway galaxies that seemed to be rushing away from us at tremendous speeds. *He noted that the farther away those galaxies were from us, the faster away from us they appeared to go. So he interpreted his observations of those faraway galaxies to mean that the Universe indeed *must* be expanding. *And it was never questioned that those faraway galaxies' behaviors had taken place billions of years ago, that there was no way of telling what those galaxies were doing right now, that it was the height of human hubris to glean from those observations that the Universe is expanding NOW. Astronomers don't have any trouble with the thought that we see our own star, the Sun, as it was about eight minutes ago, because the Sun is about 8 light minutes away. *They have no problem with the fact that if the star Sirius were to blow up today, we wouldn't know about it until about 8.6 years from now, because Sirius is 8.6 light years away. *So why do they have so much trouble with the thought that if a galaxy is racing away from us, that may have been what it WAS doing billions of years ago? *How can they take that observation and conclude that the Universe is expanding NOW??? He was also the first to derive what is now known as the Hubble's law and made the first estimation of what is now called the Hubble constant, which he published in 1927, two years before Hubble's article. Lema tre also proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe, which he called his 'hypothesis of the primeval atom'. Dubbed "Big Bang" by Fred Hoyle in ridicule of the theory! As he was a secular priest, he was called Abb , then, after being made a canon, Monseigneur." So this Jesuit priest not only proposed what became the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe, he ALSO was the first to give us the theory that the Universe is expanding! He has made fools of us all. LMBO ! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre -- Indelibly yours, Paine @http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/ "A neurosis is a secret that you don't know you are keeping." Any 13.75e9 years worth of delayed science gives us 13.75e9 years worth of interpretations to ponder. In cosmic terms this means that almost anything is possible, including the general aging of stars, majority of stars being red dwarfs and the aether cluttered with helium and carbon buckyballs just to mention a few. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Georges Lemaître
"Painius" wrote in message ... On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:35:07 -0700 (PDT), Double-A wrote: On Oct 16, 12:32 am, Painius wrote: From Wikipedia... "Georges Henri Joseph douard Lema tre (17 July 1894 20 June 1966) was a Belgian priest, astronomer and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Louvain (Belgium). He was the first person to propose the theory of the expansion of the Universe, widely misattributed to Edwin Hubble. Yes, Hubble would have nothing to do with such nonsense! Maybe not at first - but then, when he did come around and embrace the proposal, Hubble gave it scientific credibility. He looked out and saw faraway galaxies that seemed to be rushing away from us at tremendous speeds. He noted that the farther away those galaxies were from us, the faster away from us they appeared to go. So he interpreted his observations of those faraway galaxies to mean that the Universe indeed *must* be expanding. And it was never questioned that those faraway galaxies' behaviors had taken place billions of years ago, that there was no way of telling what those galaxies were doing right now, that it was the height of human hubris to glean from those observations that the Universe is expanding NOW. Astronomers don't have any trouble with the thought that we see our own star, the Sun, as it was about eight minutes ago, because the Sun is about 8 light minutes away. They have no problem with the fact that if the star Sirius were to blow up today, we wouldn't know about it until about 8.6 years from now, because Sirius is 8.6 light years away. So why do they have so much trouble with the thought that if a galaxy is racing away from us, that may have been what it WAS doing billions of years ago? How can they take that observation and conclude that the Universe is expanding NOW??? Let me help you out, dumbass. When you look in every direction and all you see is Galaxies that are red shifted identically for their particular distance from us, then there is a pretty good chance that the Universe is expanding. If it were just one or two, one might concede the point. But every single galaxy in EVERY direction displays a red shift, which pretty much speaks for itself ... unless you are Panintheass, naturally. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Georges Lemaître
On Oct 16, 8:17*pm, Painius wrote:
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:35:07 -0700 (PDT), Double-A wrote: On Oct 16, 12:32 am, Painius wrote: From Wikipedia... "Georges Henri Joseph douard Lema tre (17 July 1894 20 June 1966) was a Belgian priest, astronomer and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Louvain (Belgium). He was the first person to propose the theory of the expansion of the Universe, widely misattributed to Edwin Hubble. Yes, Hubble would have nothing to do with such nonsense! Maybe not at first - but then, when he did come around and embrace the proposal, Hubble gave it scientific credibility. *He looked out and saw faraway galaxies that seemed to be rushing away from us at tremendous speeds. *He noted that the farther away those galaxies were from us, the faster away from us they appeared to go. Hubble never "came around". "Hubble believed that his count data gave a more reasonable result concerning spatial curvature if the redshift correction was made assuming no recession. To the very end of his writings he maintained this position, favouring (or at the very least keeping open) the model where no true expansion exists, and therefore that the redshift "represents a hitherto unrecognized principle of nature."[23]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Hubble So he interpreted his observations of those faraway galaxies to mean that the Universe indeed *must* be expanding. *And it was never questioned that those faraway galaxies' behaviors had taken place billions of years ago, that there was no way of telling what those galaxies were doing right now, that it was the height of human hubris to glean from those observations that the Universe is expanding NOW. Astronomers don't have any trouble with the thought that we see our own star, the Sun, as it was about eight minutes ago, because the Sun is about 8 light minutes away. *They have no problem with the fact that if the star Sirius were to blow up today, we wouldn't know about it until about 8.6 years from now, because Sirius is 8.6 light years away. *So why do they have so much trouble with the thought that if a galaxy is racing away from us, that may have been what it WAS doing billions of years ago? *How can they take that observation and conclude that the Universe is expanding NOW??? They take measurements of the relative speeds of closer galaxies and extrapolate. Actually, if closer galaxies seem to be moving apart disproportionately faster than more distant galaxies, where they know they are looking further back in time, they conclude there has been acceleration! Double-A |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Georges Lemaître
On Oct 17, 12:18*pm, "H gar" wrote:
"Painius" wrote in message ... On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:35:07 -0700 (PDT), Double-A wrote: On Oct 16, 12:32 am, Painius wrote: From Wikipedia... "Georges Henri Joseph douard Lema tre (17 July 1894 20 June 1966) was a Belgian priest, astronomer and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Louvain (Belgium). He was the first person to propose the theory of the expansion of the Universe, widely misattributed to Edwin Hubble. Yes, Hubble would have nothing to do with such nonsense! Maybe not at first - but then, when he did come around and embrace the proposal, Hubble gave it scientific credibility. *He looked out and saw faraway galaxies that seemed to be rushing away from us at tremendous speeds. *He noted that the farther away those galaxies were from us, the faster away from us they appeared to go. So he interpreted his observations of those faraway galaxies to mean that the Universe indeed *must* be expanding. *And it was never questioned that those faraway galaxies' behaviors had taken place billions of years ago, that there was no way of telling what those galaxies were doing right now, that it was the height of human hubris to glean from those observations that the Universe is expanding NOW. Astronomers don't have any trouble with the thought that we see our own star, the Sun, as it was about eight minutes ago, because the Sun is about 8 light minutes away. *They have no problem with the fact that if the star Sirius were to blow up today, we wouldn't know about it until about 8.6 years from now, because Sirius is 8.6 light years away. *So why do they have so much trouble with the thought that if a galaxy is racing away from us, that may have been what it WAS doing billions of years ago? *How can they take that observation and conclude that the Universe is expanding NOW??? Let me help you out, dumbass. *When you look in every direction and all you see is Galaxies that are red shifted identically for their particular distance from us, then there is a pretty good chance that the Universe is expanding. *If it were just one or two, one might concede the point. *But every single galaxy in EVERY direction displays a red shift, which pretty much speaks for itself ... unless you are Panintheass, naturally. Are all rednecks lacking the visual spectrum of blue? Perhaps being redneck has put way too much blood into your eyes. Not every galaxy is floating away from us. Why is that? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Georges Lemaître
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 12:18:06 -0700, "Hägar" wrote:
"Painius" wrote in message .. . On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:35:07 -0700 (PDT), Double-A wrote: On Oct 16, 12:32 am, Painius wrote: From Wikipedia... "Georges Henri Joseph douard Lema tre (17 July 1894 20 June 1966) was a Belgian priest, astronomer and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Louvain (Belgium). He was the first person to propose the theory of the expansion of the Universe, widely misattributed to Edwin Hubble. Yes, Hubble would have nothing to do with such nonsense! Maybe not at first - but then, when he did come around and embrace the proposal, Hubble gave it scientific credibility. He looked out and saw faraway galaxies that seemed to be rushing away from us at tremendous speeds. He noted that the farther away those galaxies were from us, the faster away from us they appeared to go. So he interpreted his observations of those faraway galaxies to mean that the Universe indeed *must* be expanding. And it was never questioned that those faraway galaxies' behaviors had taken place billions of years ago, that there was no way of telling what those galaxies were doing right now, that it was the height of human hubris to glean from those observations that the Universe is expanding NOW. Astronomers don't have any trouble with the thought that we see our own star, the Sun, as it was about eight minutes ago, because the Sun is about 8 light minutes away. They have no problem with the fact that if the star Sirius were to blow up today, we wouldn't know about it until about 8.6 years from now, because Sirius is 8.6 light years away. So why do they have so much trouble with the thought that if a galaxy is racing away from us, that may have been what it WAS doing billions of years ago? How can they take that observation and conclude that the Universe is expanding NOW??? Let me help you out, dumbass. When you look in every direction and all you see is Galaxies that are red shifted identically for their particular distance from us, then there is a pretty good chance that the Universe is expanding. . . . You still don't get it. You look at a galaxy that is, say, 8 billion light years away, and it has a certain red shift. You look at another galaxy that is 10 billion light years away, and it has a bigger red shift. You find a galaxy that is 6 billion light years away, and it has a smaller red shift. Those red shifts are indicators of the speed at which the galaxies are apparently moving away from us. You say that all galaxies that are 10 billion light years away have the same red shift, all galaxies that are 8 billion light years away have the same red shift, and all galaxies that are 6 billion light years away have the same red shift. So since this is what observations of galaxies at those three distances yield, then it has to be obvious that the Universe is expanding - key word, "is". The light from those galaxies has taken billions of years to reach us, either 6 billion years, 8 billion years or 10 billion years. So the glitch in your explanation seems to be that we are seeing those galaxies as they WERE billions of years ago. How can you possibly know what those galaxies are doing NOW, based on how they appeared billions of years ago? -- Indelibly yours, Paine @ http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/ "Check it out; life is either a daring adventure or nothing." |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Georges Lemaître
On 10/16/2012 11:17 PM, Painius wrote:
Maybe not at first - but then, when he did come around and embrace the proposal, Hubble gave it scientific credibility. He looked out and saw faraway galaxies that seemed to be rushing away from us at tremendous speeds. He noted that the farther away those galaxies were from us, the faster away from us they appeared to go. So he interpreted his observations of those faraway galaxies to mean that the Universe indeed *must* be expanding. And it was never questioned that those faraway galaxies' behaviors had taken place billions of years ago, that there was no way of telling what those galaxies were doing right now, that it was the height of human hubris to glean from those observations that the Universe is expanding NOW. This is what is known as the 'Hairy Eyeball At The Edge Of The Universe' theory. Is says that even tho there is absolutely ZERO physics that would support this (Painus' gay theory), there may actually be a hairy eyeball staring at us from the edge of the universe. The problem is that it will take billions of years of observation to spot it. Ipso facto, the universe may NOT be expanding, but it will take billions of years and a new set of physics to see this and resolve it's conflicts with current theory and observation. Allow me to sum up... Painus has his head so far up his ass he can chew his food twice. Once on the way in and once on the way out. Astronomers don't have any trouble with the thought that we see our own star, the Sun, as it was about eight minutes ago, because the Sun is about 8 light minutes away. They have no problem with the fact that if the star Sirius were to blow up today, we wouldn't know about it until about 8.6 years from now, because Sirius is 8.6 light years away. So why do they have so much trouble with the thought that if a galaxy is racing away from us, that may have been what it WAS doing billions of years ago? How can they take that observation and conclude that the Universe is expanding NOW??? He was also the first to derive what is now known as the Hubble's law and made the first estimation of what is now called the Hubble constant, which he published in 1927, two years before Hubble's article. Lema tre also proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe, which he called his 'hypothesis of the primeval atom'. Dubbed "Big Bang" by Fred Hoyle in ridicule of the theory! As he was a secular priest, he was called Abb , then, after being made a canon, Monseigneur." So this Jesuit priest not only proposed what became the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe, he ALSO was the first to give us the theory that the Universe is expanding! He has made fools of us all. LMBO ! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre -- "OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo .. å˜äº® http://www.richardgingras.com/tia/im...logo_large.jpg |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Georges Lemaître
On Oct 20, 9:26*am, HVAC wrote:
On 10/16/2012 11:17 PM, Painius wrote: Maybe not at first - but then, when he did come around and embrace the proposal, Hubble gave it scientific credibility. *He looked out and saw faraway galaxies that seemed to be rushing away from us at tremendous speeds. *He noted that the farther away those galaxies were from us, the faster away from us they appeared to go. So he interpreted his observations of those faraway galaxies to mean that the Universe indeed *must* be expanding. *And it was never questioned that those faraway galaxies' behaviors had taken place billions of years ago, that there was no way of telling what those galaxies were doing right now, that it was the height of human hubris to glean from those observations that the Universe is expanding NOW. This is what is known as the 'Hairy Eyeball At The Edge Of The Universe' theory. *Is says that even tho there is absolutely ZERO physics that would support this (Painus' gay theory), there may actually be a hairy eyeball staring at us from the edge of the universe. The problem is that it will take billions of years of observation to spot it. Ipso facto, the universe may NOT be expanding, but it will take billions of years and a new set of physics to see this and resolve it's conflicts with current theory and observation. Allow me to sum up... Painus has his head so far up his ass he can chew his food twice. Once on the way in and once on the way out. All was pointing out was that Hubble himself did not advocate the Hubble expansion of space. Double-A |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Georges Lemaître
On Sat, 20 Oct 2012 12:26:34 -0400, HVAC wrote:
On 10/16/2012 11:17 PM, Painius wrote: Maybe not at first - but then, when he did come around and embrace the proposal, Hubble gave it scientific credibility. He looked out and saw faraway galaxies that seemed to be rushing away from us at tremendous speeds. He noted that the farther away those galaxies were from us, the faster away from us they appeared to go. So he interpreted his observations of those faraway galaxies to mean that the Universe indeed *must* be expanding. And it was never questioned that those faraway galaxies' behaviors had taken place billions of years ago, that there was no way of telling what those galaxies were doing right now, that it was the height of human hubris to glean from those observations that the Universe is expanding NOW. This is what is known as the 'Hairy Eyeball At The Edge Of The Universe' theory. Is says that even tho there is absolutely ZERO physics that would support this (Painus' gay theory), there may actually be a hairy eyeball staring at us from the edge of the universe. The problem is that it will take billions of years of observation to spot it. Ipso facto, the universe may NOT be expanding, but it will take billions of years and a new set of physics to see this and resolve it's conflicts with current theory and observation. Allow me to sum up... Painus has his head so far up his ass he can chew his food twice. Once on the way in and once on the way out. At least you're showing some originality in your flames. Your description gives every reader an excellent mental image. But you're the one with teeth, not me. LMAO ! -- Indelibly yours, Paine @ http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/ "In all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane." |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Georges Lemaître
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 12:30:53 -0700 (PDT), Double-A
wrote: On Oct 16, 8:17*pm, Painius wrote: On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:35:07 -0700 (PDT), Double-A wrote: On Oct 16, 12:32 am, Painius wrote: From Wikipedia... "Georges Henri Joseph douard Lema tre (17 July 1894 20 June 1966) was a Belgian priest, astronomer and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Louvain (Belgium). He was the first person to propose the theory of the expansion of the Universe, widely misattributed to Edwin Hubble. Yes, Hubble would have nothing to do with such nonsense! Maybe not at first - but then, when he did come around and embrace the proposal, Hubble gave it scientific credibility. *He looked out and saw faraway galaxies that seemed to be rushing away from us at tremendous speeds. *He noted that the farther away those galaxies were from us, the faster away from us they appeared to go. Hubble never "came around". "Hubble believed that his count data gave a more reasonable result concerning spatial curvature if the redshift correction was made assuming no recession. To the very end of his writings he maintained this position, favouring (or at the very least keeping open) the model where no true expansion exists, and therefore that the redshift "represents a hitherto unrecognized principle of nature."[23]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Hubble Good catch, AA! So I guess I'm guilty of doing what most people have done? I have endowed Hubble with a discovery and belief that he did not make nor possess. Maybe like everybody else, I don't particularly care for his idea that the redshift represents an unrecognized principle of Nature? Truth is... I think he was right about that last part. You seem to think that the "tired light" idea, which has been thoroughly trounced, should be given another look-see? Why is that? So he interpreted his observations of those faraway galaxies to mean that the Universe indeed *must* be expanding. *And it was never questioned that those faraway galaxies' behaviors had taken place billions of years ago, that there was no way of telling what those galaxies were doing right now, that it was the height of human hubris to glean from those observations that the Universe is expanding NOW. Astronomers don't have any trouble with the thought that we see our own star, the Sun, as it was about eight minutes ago, because the Sun is about 8 light minutes away. *They have no problem with the fact that if the star Sirius were to blow up today, we wouldn't know about it until about 8.6 years from now, because Sirius is 8.6 light years away. *So why do they have so much trouble with the thought that if a galaxy is racing away from us, that may have been what it WAS doing billions of years ago? *How can they take that observation and conclude that the Universe is expanding NOW??? They take measurements of the relative speeds of closer galaxies and extrapolate. Actually, if closer galaxies seem to be moving apart disproportionately faster than more distant galaxies, where they know they are looking further back in time, they conclude there has been acceleration! Double-A Almost, but not quite, AA. The conclusion is not that "there *has been* acceleration", no. The conclusion is that there *IS* acceleration of the NOW expanding Universe. I have not been able to reconcile that conclusion with reality. How can a presently expanding Universe be concluded by observing galaxies that are billions of light years away, the light we observe having left those galaxies billions of years ago? -- Indelibly yours, Paine @ http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/ "In all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane." |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Lemaître’s Hubble relationship | Sam Wormley[_2_] | Amateur Astronomy | 4 | August 4th 11 01:38 AM |
AIDAN...GEORGES ' TWIN ? | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 9 | March 3rd 08 08:14 AM |