Quote:
Originally Posted by rtomes
The graphic that I produced by colouring their graphic is not what the paper was about. All I was doing was showing that this graphic has a clear 4330 km/s periodicity, and that this is one of the strong harmonica that I predicted.
Perhaps you will explain in what way you think I misunderstood the figure?
It is a histogram showing frequency of occurrence of various redshifts.
|
Let's see now ... the '
clear 4330 km/s periodicity' you state you showed exists, per the chart in your post, only with respect to the green 'smooth curve'. Figure 1 in the Giovanelli and Haynes paper does not have this 'smooth curve' in it.
Given that, what (cosmological) theory did you use to derive this 'smooth curve'? Alternatively, what - in the Giovanelli and Haynes paper - leads you conclude that any arbitrary 'smooth curve' is consistent with the paper?
The reference in the text of the paper to Figure 1 is as follows (my bold):
Quote:
|
Figure 1 displays a heliocentric radial velocity histogram, in 500 km s-1 bins, up to 30,000 km s-1. With the caveats of the inhomogeneity of the data base and of its incompleteness [...], the histogram in Figure 1 resembles the redshift distribution expected of a sample with a limiting magnitude of mpg ~15, and a depth of about 75 h-1 Mpc [...]
|
Earlier in this thread,
rtomes stated that the frame in which the redshift periodicities occur is the CMBR frame, not the heliocentric one*.
Other apparent inconsistencies include:
->
rtomes' redshift periodicities relate to the HT 'galaxy scale', which is ~0.9 Mpc and refers only to 'typical spiral galaxies' (see post #160 in the HT ATM thread). I rather doubt that the ~30,000 galaxies whose redshifts are incorporated in Figure 1 are overwhelmingly 'typical spiral galaxies'
-> no hint, by
rtomes, on how the obvious clustering of the ~30k bright galaxies relates to the theory-based "
4330 km/s periodicity"
-> no account, by
rtomes, of how (HT) theoretical predictions should take account of "
the inhomogeneity of the data base and of its incompleteness".
*
In post #13, for example: "The large surveys done over the whole sky will not show these effects if they do not correct for our motion relative to the CMBR." (my bold)