Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Bad Astronomer
Time for me to step in again.
I'll note that despite numerous posts asking for a full-up quantitative calculation on the part of lyndonashmore, none has been given.
Is this calculation available on the web page you said was no longer online, lyndonashmore? If so, put it online and describe it, or post it here.
This is an extremely reasonable request, given that it appears to me that you have been obfuscating and avoiding answering questions for weeks now. When people argue for theories that are against the mainstream, I give them plenty of leeway (or rope, if you prefer that metaphor). But my patience is now up.
It's time to sit still, lyndonashmore, and answer the questions.
|
I must apologise
BA for your having to intervene in this thread on two occasions now, but I assure you that it is not because of anything of my doing (or ‘not doing’ as the case may be).
I believe that
This will answer your query in full and brings me up to date in answering all points regarding Tired Light on this thread.
The problem has been that this particular point regarding a conservation of energy and momentum budget is not directly related to my theory. We know that electromagnetic waves cause electrons to oscillate in a direction perpendicular to that in which the wave travels and then the electron re-radiates this energy. I assume this result and use it. To question this result is to question not my theory but the theory of transmission of light itself.
However, with the above reference I believe that everything is now in order. In my theory I say that in IG space, these electrons recoil as well as oscillate and this results in the redshift.
Once again, apologies for your being troubled,
Cheers,
Lyndon