View Single Post
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 07-September-2007, 08:26 AM
lyndonashmore lyndonashmore is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Gulf
Posts: 1,275
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nereid View Post
redshifts are 'observations'?

Didn't you write, in your post, an interpretation (of redshift), not an observation?

What is 'observed' is stuff on computer monitors, or the marks made by ink on paper charts.

One must never mix up 'observations' with 'interpretations.'
Very sloppy science!
The
Quote:
stuff on computer monitors, or the marks made by ink on paper charts.
is a recording of the observations not the observation itself. To observe is to "watch carefully" and this can be done by eyes or instruments.
We watch carefully the light from distant galaxies and observe that the wavelength is longer than expected.
We may make a record of this on paper or VDU.
We then try to interpret these observations in terms of some sort of theory.
However, there is only one observation here and several differing interpretations - hence the fascinating original post and thread.
I believe that there is a tendency on this site to quote that an expanding universe is a fact when we all know that it is only one of many interpretations.
This can be misleading to those who are not scientists.
Cheers,
Lyndon