Big Bang Proves that Earth is at the Centre of the Universe.

Since the cosmic redshift IN OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS is assumed , nay,
KNOWN to be an exact indicator of gallactic distance, it logically
follows that PLANET Earth MUST lie at the exact position where the BB
occurred.

This directly supports the ancient theory of Earth centrism and
indirectly, the existence of god.

On 17/03/2011 23:31, Henry Wilson DSc. wrote:
Since the cosmic redshift IN OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS is assumed , nay,
KNOWN to be an exact indicator of gallactic distance, it logically
follows that PLANET Earth MUST lie at the exact position where the BB
occurred.


Given that the Big Bang occurred everywhere, what you said isn't really
anything contentious.

Unless you think that some parts of the universe weren't made in the Big
Bang.

This directly supports the ancient theory of Earth centrism and
indirectly, the existence of god.


No it doesn't

On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 23:56:41 +0000, Bob Neumann wrote:

On 17/03/2011 23:31, Henry Wilson DSc. wrote:
Since the cosmic redshift IN OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS is assumed , nay,
KNOWN to be an exact indicator of gallactic distance, it logically
follows that PLANET Earth MUST lie at the exact position where the BB
occurred.


Given that the Big Bang occurred everywhere, what you said isn't really
anything contentious.

HHHHahahahhahhahaha! What a funny thing to say!


Unless you think that some parts of the universe weren't made in the Big
Bang.

This directly supports the ancient theory of Earth centrism and
indirectly, the existence of god.


No it doesn't

If the Earth was on the outskirts of the expanding universe, then the
galaxies in one direction would barely be redshifted whilst those
opposite would have double the shifts.

Astronomers reckon the redshift is exactly the same in all directions
WHICH PUTS THE EARTH RIGHT AT THE ORIGINAL CENTR OF THE BB.

In article ,
B. Real ..@.... wrote:

On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 23:56:41 +0000, Bob Neumann wrote:

On 17/03/2011 23:31, Henry Wilson DSc. wrote:
Since the cosmic redshift IN OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS is assumed , nay,
KNOWN to be an exact indicator of gallactic distance, it logically
follows that PLANET Earth MUST lie at the exact position where the BB
occurred.


Given that the Big Bang occurred everywhere, what you said isn't really
anything contentious.

HHHHahahahhahhahaha! What a funny thing to say!


Unless you think that some parts of the universe weren't made in the Big
Bang.

This directly supports the ancient theory of Earth centrism and
indirectly, the existence of god.


No it doesn't

If the Earth was on the outskirts of the expanding universe, then the
galaxies in one direction would barely be redshifted whilst those
opposite would have double the shifts.

Astronomers reckon the redshift is exactly the same in all directions
WHICH PUTS THE EARTH RIGHT AT THE ORIGINAL CENTR OF THE BB.

Just like every other place in the universe.

Isaac

On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 21:57:28 -0700, isw wrote:

In article ,
B. Real ..@.... wrote:

On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 23:56:41 +0000, Bob Neumann wrote:

On 17/03/2011 23:31, Henry Wilson DSc. wrote:
Since the cosmic redshift IN OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS is assumed , nay,
KNOWN to be an exact indicator of gallactic distance, it logically
follows that PLANET Earth MUST lie at the exact position where the BB
occurred.


Given that the Big Bang occurred everywhere, what you said isn't really
anything contentious.

HHHHahahahhahhahaha! What a funny thing to say!


Unless you think that some parts of the universe weren't made in the Big
Bang.

This directly supports the ancient theory of Earth centrism and
indirectly, the existence of god.


No it doesn't

If the Earth was on the outskirts of the expanding universe, then the
galaxies in one direction would barely be redshifted whilst those
opposite would have double the shifts.

Astronomers reckon the redshift is exactly the same in all directions
WHICH PUTS THE EARTH RIGHT AT THE ORIGINAL CENTR OF THE BB.

Just like every other place in the universe.

by what extraordinary piece of logic did you come to that conclusion?

Isaac

On 18/03/2011 01:13, B. Real wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 23:56:41 +0000, Bob wrote:

On 17/03/2011 23:31, Henry Wilson DSc. wrote:
Since the cosmic redshift IN OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS is assumed , nay,
KNOWN to be an exact indicator of gallactic distance, it logically
follows that PLANET Earth MUST lie at the exact position where the BB
occurred.


Given that the Big Bang occurred everywhere, what you said isn't really
anything contentious.

HHHHahahahhahhahaha! What a funny thing to say!

Not if you think about it.


Unless you think that some parts of the universe weren't made in the Big
Bang.

This directly supports the ancient theory of Earth centrism and
indirectly, the existence of god.


No it doesn't

If the Earth was on the outskirts of the expanding universe, then the
galaxies in one direction would barely be redshifted whilst those
opposite would have double the shifts.

Astronomers reckon the redshift is exactly the same in all directions
WHICH PUTS THE EARTH RIGHT AT THE ORIGINAL CENTR OF THE BB.


Think again.

Are you interested in learning about this, or is your mind made up already?
If the former, we can try to help your understanding; but if you've
already made your mind up there's no point in it.

On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 09:14:03 +0000, Bob Neumann wrote:

On 18/03/2011 01:13, B. Real wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 23:56:41 +0000, Bob wrote:

On 17/03/2011 23:31, Henry Wilson DSc. wrote:
Since the cosmic redshift IN OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS is assumed , nay,
KNOWN to be an exact indicator of gallactic distance, it logically
follows that PLANET Earth MUST lie at the exact position where the BB
occurred.


Given that the Big Bang occurred everywhere, what you said isn't really
anything contentious.

HHHHahahahhahhahaha! What a funny thing to say!

Not if you think about it.


Unless you think that some parts of the universe weren't made in the Big
Bang.

This directly supports the ancient theory of Earth centrism and
indirectly, the existence of god.


No it doesn't

If the Earth was on the outskirts of the expanding universe, then the
galaxies in one direction would barely be redshifted whilst those
opposite would have double the shifts.

Astronomers reckon the redshift is exactly the same in all directions
WHICH PUTS THE EARTH RIGHT AT THE ORIGINAL CENTR OF THE BB.


Think again.

I have already thunk

Are you interested in learning about this, or is your mind made up already?
If the former, we can try to help your understanding; but if you've
already made your mind up there's no point in it.

You mean you realise I'm right. Is that what you are trying to say?

On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 10:31:13 +1100, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) wrote:

Since the cosmic redshift IN OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS is assumed , nay,
KNOWN to be an exact indicator of gallactic distance, it logically
follows that PLANET Earth MUST lie at the exact position where the BB
occurred.

This directly supports the ancient theory of Earth centrism and
indirectly, the existence of god.

For a moment, tune your thinking down to a two dimensional surface
such as the surface of the earth. One could point to any landmark and
declare that it was the "center" of this curved two-dimensional
surface of the earth.

Or, partially inflate a spherically shaped balloon, then put a dot on
it somewhere. Then inflate it some more. The dot could be anywhere and
the rest of that curved two-dimensional surface would appear to be
expanding away from the dot.

On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 17:17:04 -0500, Antares 531
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 10:31:13 +1100, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) wrote:

Since the cosmic redshift IN OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS is assumed , nay,
KNOWN to be an exact indicator of gallactic distance, it logically
follows that PLANET Earth MUST lie at the exact position where the BB
occurred.

This directly supports the ancient theory of Earth centrism and
indirectly, the existence of god.

For a moment, tune your thinking down to a two dimensional surface
such as the surface of the earth. One could point to any landmark and
declare that it was the "center" of this curved two-dimensional
surface of the earth.

Or, partially inflate a spherically shaped balloon, then put a dot on
it somewhere. Then inflate it some more. The dot could be anywhere and
the rest of that curved two-dimensional surface would appear to be
expanding away from the dot.

What a BRILLIANT OBSERVATION!

Unfortunately it has nothing to do with the position and movements of
objects INSIDE an expanding sphere.

In sci.astro message , Fri,
18 Mar 2011 10:31:13, Henry Wilson DSc. posted:

Since the cosmic redshift IN OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS is assumed , nay,
KNOWN to be an exact indicator of gallactic distance, it logically
follows that PLANET Earth MUST lie at the exact position where the BB
occurred.

Indeed. Except that it is not known to be exact; measurements are never
exact.

Consider a giant ruler stretched out from Earth in both +X and -X
directions to the edge of the detectable universe, and marked at every
one-seventieth of a kiloparsec with the redshift speed in the +X
direction in metres per second, including its sign.

From a sufficient +Y distance it will look like (you can imagine the
rest)
... -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 ...
Imagine a resident at, say, the +N mark, constructing his own parallel
ruler by reference to the observable readings of ours (which Mr. +Y can
see). He will calculate a similar sequence with himself at zero - and
so will people at all places of the line.

So we were all at the exact point of the initially point-like Big Bang.

--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQqish topics, acronyms and links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.