Quote:
Originally Posted by rtomes
[snip]
Consider the expected outcomes if each of the rival theories is correct.
Big Bang: If the galaxy and quasar are really at very different distances and not really associated with each other in space, then there is absolutely no real relationship between the galaxy redshift and the quasar brightness. The result should be that objects will be scattered over a rectangle with zero correlation coefficient.
Alternative: If the quasars really are associated with much closer by galaxies then the galaxy redshift is a better measure of the quasar true distance than the quasar redshift is. This means that the scatter diagram should be tighter than the scatter diagram of quasar brightness versus quasar redshift.
If either of these results happens then it is a very clear proof of that theory as regards the redshifts of quasars. There are other possible outcomes (intermediate correlations) which would indicate that both theories are wrong.
|
Would you please state whether you are prepared to answer questions on this, and address challenges to it?
For avoidance of doubt, if the answer is in the affirmative, I have many questions that I think are direct and pertinent.
Quote:
|
Would astronomers agree that this proposal is a valid test and a very clear result should be obtainable?
|
Assuming this is not a rhetorical question, then you already have answers from two BAUT members who have papers published in relevant, peer-reviewed journals ... and both answers are in the negative (it is not a valid test (though it may be interesting), clear results are unlikely to obtainable (at least as the proposal is currently formulated)).
Personally, I think a random sample of astronomers would give answers that were similar ... though I suspect many would be couched in rather colourful (shall we say) language.
Let me ask a question though: if even questions on the consistency (etc) of definition of key terms ("
quasar", "
galaxy", for example) are off the table - much less consensus on those definitions - what grounds do you have for thinking that the proposal could be "
a valid test and a very clear result should be obtainable"?
Quote:
|
Would they agree that if the alternative outcome above is found then it does disprove the big bang?
|
If no questions, or discussion, on core terms in the proposal are to be permitted, I should think they'd agree any outcomes could have no more than the most tentative of a status ...
Again, if no questions on, or discussions of, the definitions of the key terms are to be permitted, what grounds do you have for thinking that "
if the alternative outcome above is found then it does disprove the big bang"?