- Thank you received: 0
Quantized redshift anomaly
18 years 10 months ago #14748
by Tommy
Replied by Tommy on topic Reply from Thomas Mandel
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Enter Hyperdimensional Physics.
"The cornerstone of the hyperdimensional model (as applied to the problem of "unexplained" astrophysical energy sources) is that historically, there is a perfectly natural explanation for such "anomalous energy" appearing in celestial bodies ... which, unfortunately, hasn't been seriously considered by Science for over 100 years:
The existence of unseen hyperspatial realities ... that, through information transfer between dimensions, are the literal "foundation substrate" maintaining the reality of everything in this dimension. "
and...
<center>"My soul is an entangled knot,
Upon a liquid vortex wrought
By Intellect in the Unseen residing.
And thine doth like a convict sit,
With marlinspike untwisting it,
Only to find its knottiness abiding;
Since all the tool for its untying
In four-dimensional space are lying."
James Clerk Maxwell</center>
(From EnterpriseMission)
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
"The cornerstone of the hyperdimensional model (as applied to the problem of "unexplained" astrophysical energy sources) is that historically, there is a perfectly natural explanation for such "anomalous energy" appearing in celestial bodies ... which, unfortunately, hasn't been seriously considered by Science for over 100 years:
The existence of unseen hyperspatial realities ... that, through information transfer between dimensions, are the literal "foundation substrate" maintaining the reality of everything in this dimension. "
and...
<center>"My soul is an entangled knot,
Upon a liquid vortex wrought
By Intellect in the Unseen residing.
And thine doth like a convict sit,
With marlinspike untwisting it,
Only to find its knottiness abiding;
Since all the tool for its untying
In four-dimensional space are lying."
James Clerk Maxwell</center>
(From EnterpriseMission)
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
18 years 10 months ago #14749
by Tommy
Replied by Tommy on topic Reply from Thomas Mandel
Reading further...
Interesting how the fourth dimension became the fifth dimension of Kaluza-Kline which died down because it wasn't testable and because everyone asked "Where is it" They had proposed a dimension that was curled up inside itself...
The only other place I can think of is INSIDE space. And there is no need for it to be made of something. Bell's Theorem and Aspects twin photon experiments reveal what they call non-locality one interpretation of which is that the INSIDE of space is a single entity.
It is as Laszlo puts it, "We are like islands in a pond, separated on the surface, connected in the deep."
In other words, matter production can and does occur today. This matter is not inert stuff, but is living energy, energy doing something, and it is fueled, so to speak, from an energy INSIDE the space that it exists in.
So a Black Hole is doing exactly what it is supposed to be doing, spewing out tremendous jets/plumes/geysers/clouds/winds of energy/matter.
And if one looks closely, it looks like a white whole.
Interesting how the fourth dimension became the fifth dimension of Kaluza-Kline which died down because it wasn't testable and because everyone asked "Where is it" They had proposed a dimension that was curled up inside itself...
The only other place I can think of is INSIDE space. And there is no need for it to be made of something. Bell's Theorem and Aspects twin photon experiments reveal what they call non-locality one interpretation of which is that the INSIDE of space is a single entity.
It is as Laszlo puts it, "We are like islands in a pond, separated on the surface, connected in the deep."
In other words, matter production can and does occur today. This matter is not inert stuff, but is living energy, energy doing something, and it is fueled, so to speak, from an energy INSIDE the space that it exists in.
So a Black Hole is doing exactly what it is supposed to be doing, spewing out tremendous jets/plumes/geysers/clouds/winds of energy/matter.
And if one looks closely, it looks like a white whole.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
18 years 10 months ago #17123
by Tommy
Replied by Tommy on topic Reply from Thomas Mandel
ON THE OTHER HAND, this is what is being fed to Americans.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">“Ongoing galaxy formation” detected
Feb. 3, 2006
Courtesy Chandra X-ray Center
and World Science staff
Astronomers have reported finding a huge blob of hot gas around a spiral galaxy, evidence that galaxies like our Milky Way are drawing in material from a gradual inflow of intergalactic gas.
A composite image of the massive spiral galaxy NGC 5746 shows a large halo of hot gas, blue, surrounding the optical disk of the galaxy, white. The hot gas would not normally be visible to the eye, because it emits X-ray light, which is not visible. Its form is revealed through the X-ray detecting telescope. (Credit: X-ray: NASA/CXC/U. Copenhagen/K.Pedersen et al; Optical: Palomar DSS.)
“What we are likely witnessing here is the ongoing galaxy formation process,” said Kristian Pedersen of the University of Copenhagen, Denmark, and lead author of a paper on the finding.
Images from NASA’s orbiting Chandra X-Ray Observatory show the glob, the researchers said: it extends more than 60,000 light years on either side of the starry disk of a galaxy known as NGC 5746. A light year is the distance light travels in a year.
The discovery eases a long-standing problem for the theory of galaxy formation, the astronomers added.
Spiral galaxies are thought to form from enormous clouds of intergalactic gas that collapse to form great, spinning disks of stars and gas. The theory predicts large spiral galaxies should be immersed in blobs or “halos” of hot gas left over from the formation process.
Hot gas has been found around spiral galaxies before, but usually blowing outward rather than falling in, inconsistent with the theory, the researchers explained.
“Our observations solve the mystery of the missing hot halos around spiral galaxies,” said Pedersen. “The halos exist, but are so faint that an extremely sensitive telescope such as Chandra is needed to detect them.”
NGC 5746 is a massive spiral galaxy about a 100 million light years from Earth. Its starry disk is visible almost edge-on. The astronomers believe the hot gas their instruments detected isn’t blowing outward, because there seem to be no ongoing processes that would cause this, such as bursts of star formation or violent activity in the core of the galaxy.
If the gas isn’t going outward, it is probably moving inward, attracted by the galaxy’s gravity, they reasoned.
“What we found is in good agreement with computer simulations in which galaxies are built up gradually from the merger of smaller clouds of hot gas and dark matter,” said Jesper Rasmussen of the University of Birmingham, United Kingdom and a co-author of the report.
The simulations were carried out by Jesper Sommer-Larsen, also a co-author, and colleagues at the University of Copenhagen. The paper is to appear in the April issue of the research journal New Astronomy.
www.world-science.net/othernews/060203_hotgasfrm.htm
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Isn't it fascinating how an astronomer can twist things around so that they fit his model. They find a huge blob and that is evidence
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">... that galaxies like our Milky Way are drawing in material from a gradual inflow of intergalactic gas.“What we are likely witnessing here is the ongoing galaxy formation Hot gas has been found around spiral galaxies before, but usually blowing outward rather than falling in, inconsistent with the theory, the researchers explained.
The astronomers believe the hot gas their instruments detected isn’t blowing outward, <u><b>because there seem to be no ongoing processes that would cause this, </b></u>such as bursts of star formation or violent activity in the core of the galaxy. If the gas isn’t going outward, it is probably moving inward, attracted by the galaxy’s gravity, they reasoned.“What we found is in good agreement with computer simulations in which galaxies are built up gradually from the merger of smaller clouds of hot gas and dark matter,” <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
See what they are doing? They are making an assumption that "there is no other explanation, therefore it must be this way." They assume the halo is inflowing matter because if it were outflowing they wouldn't know how to explain it. This is exactly the same assumption being made about black holes, which must exist because there is no other explanation. And guess what, they do it again when they assume that reshift id Doppler because they know of no other reason. (There has to be a speciaL word for this kind of reasoning...)
The problem wouldn't exist if the primary assumption was that matter is produced within the center of a galaxy, and for that matter, within a star. If matter were produced on a continuous basis, then there is no need for a big bang, fast inflation, and radiation bath and expansion. There would be no need for some fantastic process that happened far in the past which produced all matter.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">“Ongoing galaxy formation” detected
Feb. 3, 2006
Courtesy Chandra X-ray Center
and World Science staff
Astronomers have reported finding a huge blob of hot gas around a spiral galaxy, evidence that galaxies like our Milky Way are drawing in material from a gradual inflow of intergalactic gas.
A composite image of the massive spiral galaxy NGC 5746 shows a large halo of hot gas, blue, surrounding the optical disk of the galaxy, white. The hot gas would not normally be visible to the eye, because it emits X-ray light, which is not visible. Its form is revealed through the X-ray detecting telescope. (Credit: X-ray: NASA/CXC/U. Copenhagen/K.Pedersen et al; Optical: Palomar DSS.)
“What we are likely witnessing here is the ongoing galaxy formation process,” said Kristian Pedersen of the University of Copenhagen, Denmark, and lead author of a paper on the finding.
Images from NASA’s orbiting Chandra X-Ray Observatory show the glob, the researchers said: it extends more than 60,000 light years on either side of the starry disk of a galaxy known as NGC 5746. A light year is the distance light travels in a year.
The discovery eases a long-standing problem for the theory of galaxy formation, the astronomers added.
Spiral galaxies are thought to form from enormous clouds of intergalactic gas that collapse to form great, spinning disks of stars and gas. The theory predicts large spiral galaxies should be immersed in blobs or “halos” of hot gas left over from the formation process.
Hot gas has been found around spiral galaxies before, but usually blowing outward rather than falling in, inconsistent with the theory, the researchers explained.
“Our observations solve the mystery of the missing hot halos around spiral galaxies,” said Pedersen. “The halos exist, but are so faint that an extremely sensitive telescope such as Chandra is needed to detect them.”
NGC 5746 is a massive spiral galaxy about a 100 million light years from Earth. Its starry disk is visible almost edge-on. The astronomers believe the hot gas their instruments detected isn’t blowing outward, because there seem to be no ongoing processes that would cause this, such as bursts of star formation or violent activity in the core of the galaxy.
If the gas isn’t going outward, it is probably moving inward, attracted by the galaxy’s gravity, they reasoned.
“What we found is in good agreement with computer simulations in which galaxies are built up gradually from the merger of smaller clouds of hot gas and dark matter,” said Jesper Rasmussen of the University of Birmingham, United Kingdom and a co-author of the report.
The simulations were carried out by Jesper Sommer-Larsen, also a co-author, and colleagues at the University of Copenhagen. The paper is to appear in the April issue of the research journal New Astronomy.
www.world-science.net/othernews/060203_hotgasfrm.htm
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Isn't it fascinating how an astronomer can twist things around so that they fit his model. They find a huge blob and that is evidence
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">... that galaxies like our Milky Way are drawing in material from a gradual inflow of intergalactic gas.“What we are likely witnessing here is the ongoing galaxy formation Hot gas has been found around spiral galaxies before, but usually blowing outward rather than falling in, inconsistent with the theory, the researchers explained.
The astronomers believe the hot gas their instruments detected isn’t blowing outward, <u><b>because there seem to be no ongoing processes that would cause this, </b></u>such as bursts of star formation or violent activity in the core of the galaxy. If the gas isn’t going outward, it is probably moving inward, attracted by the galaxy’s gravity, they reasoned.“What we found is in good agreement with computer simulations in which galaxies are built up gradually from the merger of smaller clouds of hot gas and dark matter,” <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
See what they are doing? They are making an assumption that "there is no other explanation, therefore it must be this way." They assume the halo is inflowing matter because if it were outflowing they wouldn't know how to explain it. This is exactly the same assumption being made about black holes, which must exist because there is no other explanation. And guess what, they do it again when they assume that reshift id Doppler because they know of no other reason. (There has to be a speciaL word for this kind of reasoning...)
The problem wouldn't exist if the primary assumption was that matter is produced within the center of a galaxy, and for that matter, within a star. If matter were produced on a continuous basis, then there is no need for a big bang, fast inflation, and radiation bath and expansion. There would be no need for some fantastic process that happened far in the past which produced all matter.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
18 years 10 months ago #14756
by JMB
Replied by JMB on topic Reply from Jacques Moret-Bailly
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Tommy</i>
<br />Tommy;
(1) William Tifft writes about data that shows the red shift of light coming from galaxies does not increase smoothly, instead it has been shown to change in jumps, it has periodicity or is quantized. public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/downloads/Tifft.pdf
This implies that the redshift is due to atomic (intrinsic)processes rather than Doppler effects. Tifft's work has been independantly confirmed by others
arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0008/0008026.pdf
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
The periodicity z=0.062 is easily explained by a CREIL redshift in neutral atomic hydrogen: an UV continuous spectrum pumps hydrogen to the 2P states. The spin recoupling in these states corresponds to a Raman type resonance which allows a CREIL effect. Thus Lyman alpha absorption and redshift are coupled, and the result is the periodicity. (see arxiv.org Physics/0503070).
Other periodicities may result from a similar effect in H2+, but the spectroscopy of this molecule is complicated...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
If redshift is not a measure of velocity, then a higher redshift does not mean a higher velocity.
How does this (redshift anomaly) change the standard interpretation of the expansion of the Universe?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
True.
If the redshifts are not produced by an interaction of the light with matter, the redshift periodicities generate a centre of symmetry which is the Earth... The Earth is the centre of the Universe !!!!
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
All of this would not hold true if we were at that physical center.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">I agree.<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Only then would we observe equal velocities and distances as it is being reported. What is the probability of the Earth being at the center of the Universe?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
If you have a religion it may be large...
<br />Tommy;
(1) William Tifft writes about data that shows the red shift of light coming from galaxies does not increase smoothly, instead it has been shown to change in jumps, it has periodicity or is quantized. public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/downloads/Tifft.pdf
This implies that the redshift is due to atomic (intrinsic)processes rather than Doppler effects. Tifft's work has been independantly confirmed by others
arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0008/0008026.pdf
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
The periodicity z=0.062 is easily explained by a CREIL redshift in neutral atomic hydrogen: an UV continuous spectrum pumps hydrogen to the 2P states. The spin recoupling in these states corresponds to a Raman type resonance which allows a CREIL effect. Thus Lyman alpha absorption and redshift are coupled, and the result is the periodicity. (see arxiv.org Physics/0503070).
Other periodicities may result from a similar effect in H2+, but the spectroscopy of this molecule is complicated...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
If redshift is not a measure of velocity, then a higher redshift does not mean a higher velocity.
How does this (redshift anomaly) change the standard interpretation of the expansion of the Universe?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
True.
If the redshifts are not produced by an interaction of the light with matter, the redshift periodicities generate a centre of symmetry which is the Earth... The Earth is the centre of the Universe !!!!
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
All of this would not hold true if we were at that physical center.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">I agree.<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Only then would we observe equal velocities and distances as it is being reported. What is the probability of the Earth being at the center of the Universe?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
If you have a religion it may be large...
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
18 years 10 months ago #14758
by Tommy
Replied by Tommy on topic Reply from Thomas Mandel
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">quote:
If redshift is not a measure of velocity, then a higher redshift does not mean a higher velocity.
How does this (redshift anomaly) change the standard interpretation of the expansion of the Universe?
True.
If the redshifts are not produced by an interaction of the light with matter, the redshift periodicities generate a centre of symmetry which is the Earth... The Earth is the centre of the Universe !!!!
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Someone wrote that if the Tifft periodicities were taken into account by the big bang theory, we would be at the center, AND the galaxies would form concentric rings all around us. However, I can tell you for a fact that the big bang gang will not admit that redshift quantization even exists. When I submitted my letter to them, they deleted it.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What is the probability of the Earth being at the center of the Universe?
If you have a religion it may be large...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Religion is a belief system. Around here it is based on what they call "faith" which sounds to me like "don't really know but beieve anyway." A survey of ALL the religions does not indicate this concept of faith is universal, most of the other religions depend on direct experience, and some even go so far as to say until one has that experience, one is but a seeker. Nothing wrong with that, but the point when the seeker "finds" is when the seeker realizes that he did not "know."
What we did not know was that our mind creates concepts which divide the Wholeness into parts that we can grasp. Nothing wrong with that. But then we come to believe that these divisions are real. Indeed, they are all we got to work with. After we believe our concepts are real, then we act as if these parts are in fact separate. And THAT makes it so.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">"And all the kings men couldn't put
humpty dumpty back together again"<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
The center of the Universe is a concept. If we remove the concept, then all we have that remains is the Whole. And when we realize that, then it is as Plutonis said:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">"When there is no distinction there is no difference."<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
A similar situation was spoken of by Albert Einstein's friend Pais in his book about Einstein "Inward Bound". Einstein and Pais were walking together when Einstein asked his friend, "How can they say that when I turn my back on the moon it disappears?"
Well, the "moon" is a concept, and when we no longer use the concept, then the moon is the Whole. That is, there is no longer any distinction between the Whole and the moon.
Somewhat different than what "religion" would say...
If redshift is not a measure of velocity, then a higher redshift does not mean a higher velocity.
How does this (redshift anomaly) change the standard interpretation of the expansion of the Universe?
True.
If the redshifts are not produced by an interaction of the light with matter, the redshift periodicities generate a centre of symmetry which is the Earth... The Earth is the centre of the Universe !!!!
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Someone wrote that if the Tifft periodicities were taken into account by the big bang theory, we would be at the center, AND the galaxies would form concentric rings all around us. However, I can tell you for a fact that the big bang gang will not admit that redshift quantization even exists. When I submitted my letter to them, they deleted it.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What is the probability of the Earth being at the center of the Universe?
If you have a religion it may be large...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Religion is a belief system. Around here it is based on what they call "faith" which sounds to me like "don't really know but beieve anyway." A survey of ALL the religions does not indicate this concept of faith is universal, most of the other religions depend on direct experience, and some even go so far as to say until one has that experience, one is but a seeker. Nothing wrong with that, but the point when the seeker "finds" is when the seeker realizes that he did not "know."
What we did not know was that our mind creates concepts which divide the Wholeness into parts that we can grasp. Nothing wrong with that. But then we come to believe that these divisions are real. Indeed, they are all we got to work with. After we believe our concepts are real, then we act as if these parts are in fact separate. And THAT makes it so.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">"And all the kings men couldn't put
humpty dumpty back together again"<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
The center of the Universe is a concept. If we remove the concept, then all we have that remains is the Whole. And when we realize that, then it is as Plutonis said:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">"When there is no distinction there is no difference."<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
A similar situation was spoken of by Albert Einstein's friend Pais in his book about Einstein "Inward Bound". Einstein and Pais were walking together when Einstein asked his friend, "How can they say that when I turn my back on the moon it disappears?"
Well, the "moon" is a concept, and when we no longer use the concept, then the moon is the Whole. That is, there is no longer any distinction between the Whole and the moon.
Somewhat different than what "religion" would say...
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
18 years 10 months ago #14760
by Michiel
Replied by Michiel on topic Reply from Michiel
Tommy:
"They are making an assumption that 'There is no other explanation, therefore it must be this way.' "
Or: 'It is this way, therefore there can be no other explanation'
Tommy:
"There has to be a special word for this kind of reasoning..."
Here in The Netherlands we use the word 'tunnelvision' (often in conjunction with mindboggling illogical criminal trials).
Don't worry... we all suffer from tunnelvision every once in a while, it's just a human trait.
"They are making an assumption that 'There is no other explanation, therefore it must be this way.' "
Or: 'It is this way, therefore there can be no other explanation'
Tommy:
"There has to be a special word for this kind of reasoning..."
Here in The Netherlands we use the word 'tunnelvision' (often in conjunction with mindboggling illogical criminal trials).
Don't worry... we all suffer from tunnelvision every once in a while, it's just a human trait.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.701 seconds