Quote:
Originally Posted by paul schroeder
Your questions about the various longer redshift radiation are interesting. As you realize, I am not the one to answer them. There are many who analyze various transmissions. We do see some near and far infrared, but maybe dispersion minimizes the number coming through.
|
If you wish to retract your previous assertions, or modify them, please say so (and do so).
Otherwise, they stand, as your presentation of your ATM idea.
As such, BAUT members are encouraged to question and challenge them, and you are required to answer their questions and challenges in a timely manner.
If you do not know how to answer a direct, pertinent question about an aspect of your ATM idea, as presented, please say so.
If you cannot answer such a question, please say so.
So, let's try again, shall we?
Here's your ATM assertion (my bold): "
Over long transmission periods the waves of the light radiation will stretch back out and become paeps. An interim step in this process is* the microwave background. Microwaves have longer wavelengths than light and are partially stretched out light waves. They are the first stage in the reason that the night sky is not solid starlight as asked by Olber in his paraox."
Here are my questions on this (I've added numbering):
1)
Why isn't the intensity of the microwave background infinite?
2)
How does your ATM idea account for the actual, observed intensity of the microwave background?
3)
Why is the 'interim step in this process [...] the microwave background'?
4a)
Why isn't it a near-infrared one? 4b)
or a far-infrared one? 4c)
or a VLF radio one?
Please answer these questions.
Quote:
|
As we know today, fusion generate the sun's heat. It is the instigating of the fusion event in which paeps play a role by striking nuclei just right.
|
How do paeps '
strik[e] nuclei just right'?
*
There is no ambiguity here; per your post in the other thread ("I am [...] connecting my ideas together with logic"), there must be a firm logical link for you to write "is"!