Quote:
Originally Posted by Nereid
Actually, in Section II of this paper, Tifft states very clearly that "bistates is simply [...] a 36 km/s periodicity not a 72 km/s one" is "inconsistent with the internal models of galaxies in DSR1 where a state spacing of 70-75 km s-1 is clear and no significant amount of 36 km s-1 periodicity is seen." And Tifft spends quite a few pages in this paper explaining his 'states' model and how he analyses the data to show consistency with his model. Do I correctly understand your post (which I have quoted here) to say that you reject Tifft's 'state' model but accept "a 36 km/s periodicity" despite your rejection?
Alternatively, if you accept this 'state' model, please state (summarise) the good observational results which are evidence for it.
I also asked about the ~18 km/s "galactic expansion" in Tifft's paper - would you like me to repeat, or clarify, my question on this?
|
Historically the 72 km/s period was found first and a number of papers on that published. I saw an article about the 72 km/s in New Scientist which set me to trying to understand it in terms of Harmonics theory. The whole problem of course is that if you interpret it as velocity, then the earth is in a special place. No-one really believes that. That is why Tifft's work is disregarded. However Arp's explanation of redshifts being steps in time not velocity totally solves the problem of geometry and our unique position - it looks the same everywhere. But I do not think that astronomers have generally understood this. Furthermore I think that their analysis of redshifts looking for distance correlations are all contaminated by that lack of understanding of Arp. That is why I want to do my own analysis with the newer data.
I do distinguish between Tifft's periodicity findings ("quanta" in his words) and his interpretations. In particular his theory was an attempt from chaos theory to explain the pattern because it has many frequency doublings. However chaos theory does not produce the combined pattern of 2s and 3s found and harmonics theory does. e.g. in km/s
72 36 18 9 ratios of 2 across
24 12 6 3 and 3 down
I think that your suggestion (if I understand it correctly) that the state model is interpretation or theory, rather than just pure observation, is a correct one. I think it is based on the history of the 72 km/s period being known for some time and then suddenly some 36 km/s steps turning up. And they did again for Napier and Guthrie. Evenetually when he found the other periods of 12, 6, 3 km/s etc then he saw the pattern clearly.
If you look at my post #94 in this thread then you will see the pattern that is expected from Harmonics teoery. If you just pick out the biggest peaks you will see a single large quantum. If you then look at the next biggest peaks you will find some smaller quanta of 1/2 and 1/4 that size and eventually 1/12 that size. This is the result of getting better data and including smaller galaxies in the sample. In the local region I have found that the smaller galaxies are at distance steps of 1/12 of the Andromeda distance, or 2,220,000 / 12 = 185,000 LY. That is pretty close to the Magellanic cloud distances from our galaxy centre. Other nearby small galaxies are at multiples of this distance from us or from M31 or M33 etc.
I am aware that to some extent harmonics theory is spilling into this thread. I suppose that does not matter a lot. It is difficult to not address those issues because they do suggest why Tifft's periods should be taken very seriously.