- Thank you received: 0
CBR has the answer
- Joe Keller
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
18 years 10 months ago #14672
by Joe Keller
Replied by Joe Keller on topic Reply from
It seems that extragalactic hydrogen atoms radiate at 2.80 K due to FitzGerald-Lorentz contraction of the spinning, orbiting electron. The mean free path of these photons needed, to redshift them to the CMB temperature, is confirmed, roughly, by the observed "convergence depth" of galactic, and CMB source, velocities. It is also confirmed, roughly, by Univ. of Washington theoretical calculations of the mean free path of extragalactic cosmic ray protons colliding with CMB photons; presumably CMB photons colliding with each other, have that same mean free path.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Joe Keller
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
18 years 10 months ago #17230
by Joe Keller
Replied by Joe Keller on topic Reply from
The effective nuclear charge, Z, for helium, is 1.5 due to the presence of the fellow electron, so the effective "alpha"=Z*q^2/(hbar*c), for the helium Bohr model is 1.5x larger than for hydrogen. According to the theory above, the temperature of helium should be 1.5^4=5x that of the CMB (i.e., of hydrogen); this agrees well with the far CIRB peak.
The effective Z for oxygen, acting on its inner S1 electrons, is, because of "P2 orbital" electrons, only roughly 0.005 less than 7.5. Carbon, nitrogen and neon, also abundant in the universe, broaden that peak. For oxygen, 7.495^4*2.8016=8841 K, hotter than the near CIRB+cosmic optical background peak (which is downshifted by dust and by cosmological redshift), but equal to the surface temperature of typical bright stars. It is the inflection point of the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram (plotted on log-log paper)(see below).
For iron (neglecting P, D, and outer S orbital electrons), T=1.15 million degrees and the peak is 0.30 keV. The soft cosmic X-ray background lacks Planck shape and is said to range mainly from 0.5 to 2 keV or, according to another authority, from one to ten million degrees. Copper and zinc also fall in the lower end of the range.
For lead the peak is 44.1 keV, for thorium 69.9 keV and for uranium 78.2 keV. So, the heaviest stable elements match the (also somewhat irregular) hard CXB peak of 40 keV. For these heavy elements, use the relativistic formula 3*k*T=m*c^2*(gamma-1)*(1-gamma^(-2)), where gamma=sec(arcsin(beta)) and beta=(Z-0.5)*alpha.
The effective Z for oxygen, acting on its inner S1 electrons, is, because of "P2 orbital" electrons, only roughly 0.005 less than 7.5. Carbon, nitrogen and neon, also abundant in the universe, broaden that peak. For oxygen, 7.495^4*2.8016=8841 K, hotter than the near CIRB+cosmic optical background peak (which is downshifted by dust and by cosmological redshift), but equal to the surface temperature of typical bright stars. It is the inflection point of the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram (plotted on log-log paper)(see below).
For iron (neglecting P, D, and outer S orbital electrons), T=1.15 million degrees and the peak is 0.30 keV. The soft cosmic X-ray background lacks Planck shape and is said to range mainly from 0.5 to 2 keV or, according to another authority, from one to ten million degrees. Copper and zinc also fall in the lower end of the range.
For lead the peak is 44.1 keV, for thorium 69.9 keV and for uranium 78.2 keV. So, the heaviest stable elements match the (also somewhat irregular) hard CXB peak of 40 keV. For these heavy elements, use the relativistic formula 3*k*T=m*c^2*(gamma-1)*(1-gamma^(-2)), where gamma=sec(arcsin(beta)) and beta=(Z-0.5)*alpha.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
18 years 10 months ago #17005
by Ryan2006
Replied by Ryan2006 on topic Reply from ryan Henningsgaard
Joe, I have been talking with Harry and he has been reading about the effects of plasma in the calculations of CBR have you included this in your calculations?
ryan Henningsgaard
ryan Henningsgaard
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Joe Keller
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
18 years 10 months ago #14690
by Joe Keller
Replied by Joe Keller on topic Reply from
Hi Ryan!
Nope. What effects?
- Joe
Nope. What effects?
- Joe
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
18 years 10 months ago #14693
by Ryan2006
Replied by Ryan2006 on topic Reply from ryan Henningsgaard
According to this new calculation that includes plasma it distorts the redshift analysis.
ryan Henningsgaard
ryan Henningsgaard
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Joe Keller
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
18 years 10 months ago #17308
by Joe Keller
Replied by Joe Keller on topic Reply from
Hi Ryan!
Thanks for the information!
- Joe Keller
Thanks for the information!
- Joe Keller
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.323 seconds