Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum - Against the Mainstream http://www.bautforum.com/ Post here if you want to discuss a theory that goes against the astronomical mainstream. Have a beef with relativity, heliocentrism, the Big Bang? This is the place. en Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:46:47 GMT vBulletin 60 http://www.bautforum.com/images/misc/rss.jpg Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum - Against the Mainstream http://www.bautforum.com/ Clocks and movement, moved posts. http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96913-clocks-movement-moved-posts.html Thu, 19 Nov 2009 12:22:25 GMT
Quote:
Originally Posted by macaw (Post 1625729)

Imagine that your clock is an atomic one. Atomic clocks have no moving parts.
Time is an independent coordinate.
Motion is a dependent entity, you can't insist on reducing time to motion.
ALL clocks have moving parts.
Atomic clocks measure the movement (oscillation)of atoms or parts of atoms.
Time is part of the description of the movement of things. ]]> Against the Mainstream undidly http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96913-clocks-movement-moved-posts.html <![CDATA[Einstein's Gravity]]> http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96659-einsteins-gravity.html Sun, 15 Nov 2009 15:02:27 GMT INTRODUCTION

People tend to think the speed of light is constant, and Einstein said it. It isn't exactly true. Yes, he started with this as a postulate in 1905, but in 1911 he wrote On the Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light, where you can see his ideas evolving as he talks about c = c0 (1 + Φ/c˛). Then in 1916 in section 22 of Relativity: The Special and General Theory he explains the limitations of the SR postulate:

"In the second place our result shows that, according to the general theory of relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the special theory of relativity and to which we have already frequently referred, cannot claim any unlimited validity. A curvature of rays of light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light varies with position. Now we might think that as a consequence of this, the special theory of relativity and with it the whole theory of relativity would be laid in the dust. But in reality this is not the case. We can only conclude that the special theory of relativity cannot claim an unlimited domain of validity; its results hold only so long as we are able to disregard the influences of gravitational fields on the phenomena (e.g. of light)".

People see the word "velocity" in the 1920 translation without seeing the context, and without seeing that Einstein wasn't talking about velocity as a vector quantity. He didn't speak English in 1920, it was a popular science book, this was the common usage of velocity, as in high-velocity bullet. What he said was die Ausbreitungsgeschwindigkeit des Lichtes mit dem Orte variiert. This translates into the speed of light varies with the locality. He was saying the speed varies with position, and so the light curves like a car veers when the near-side wheels encounter mud at the side of the road.

It comes as something as a shock for people to realise Einstein was talking about the variable speed of light. It doesn't fit with the relativity they think they know. And that's the size of it. Relativity today is something different, and people don't know it. People think Einstein told us about curved spacetime, but when you read The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity it's just not there. Yes, he talks about geometry, but he also talks about the equations of motion, through space, because you can't move through spacetime. It's just where we plot our lines. There's other things that people don't know. They don't know that Einstein was derided by some theoreticians even in 1923. You can see a reference to this on page 53 of Graham Farmelo's The Strangest Man:

"At that time, Cunningham and Eddington were streets ahead of the majority of their Cambridge colleagues, who dismissed Einstein's work, ignored it, or denied its significance".

Many people don't know that despite the media accolades and public adulation, Einstein drifted out of the mainstream from 1927 when he fell out with Bohr and others over quantum mechanics. They don't know that General Relativity was a "cottage industry" until the sixties, when the Golden Age of General Relativity kicked in with paradigm shifts that changed it more than people know:

"The Golden Age of General Relativity is the period roughly from 1960 to 1975 during which the study of general relativity, which had previously been regarded as something of a curiosity, entered the mainstream of theoretical physics. During this period, many of the concepts and terms which continue to inspire the imagination of gravitation researchers (and members of the general public) were introduced, including black holes and 'gravitational singularity'. At the same time, in closely related development, the study of physical cosmology entered the mainstream and the Big Bang became well established... A number of simultaneous paradigm shifts characterize the Golden Age of general relativity. First and foremost, the Big Bang became the canonical cosmological model. Other paradigm shifts included a growing appreciation of the: Role of curvature in general relativity; Theoretical importance of the black holes; Importance of geometrical machinery and levels of mathematical structure, especially local versus global spacetime structure; Overall legitimacy of cosmology by the wider physics community".

Nor do they know how in 1949 Einstein and Godel worked out that time is cofounded with motion through space, not with space. It's there in A World without Time: The Forgotten Legacy of Godel and Einstein by Palle Yourgrau. But perhaps the signal most important thing people don't know, is that whilst aether is a taboo word which is most definitely out of the mainstream, Einstein's gave his Leyden address in 1920. And the title is Ether and the theory of relativity. There's Einstein, talking about inhomogeneous space and calling it an aether:

"Mach’s idea finds its full development in the ether of the general theory of relativity. According to this theory the metrical qualities of the continuum of space-time differ in the environment of different points of space-time, and are partly conditioned by the matter existing outside of the territory under consideration. This space-time variability of the reciprocal relations of the standards of space and time, or, perhaps, the recognition of the fact that ‘empty space’ in its physical relation is neither homogeneous nor isotropic, compelling us to describe its state by ten functions (the gravitation potentials gμν), has, I think, finally disposed of the view that space is physically empty".

All in all it adds up to something rather strange. It seems that Einstein's gravity has always been fighting against the mainstream, and still is. When you work it back all the way to the original electrodynamics and m=E/c˛ and look at what Einstein actually said, the realisation dawns that relativity is the Cinderella of modern physics, and she has some ugly sisters. What follows is a layman's overview of what I consider to be Einstein's gravity. See what you think. ]]> Against the Mainstream Farsight http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96659-einsteins-gravity.html ...thoughts on gravity revisited. http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96599-thoughts-gravity-revisited.html Sat, 14 Nov 2009 06:39:18 GMT So the "thoughts on gravity" thread is closed after only FIVE DAYS?

Was it me stating the usual methodology of ATM in an unflatering way? AAWWW. Ya'll need to grow a thicker skin.:silenced: ]]> Against the Mainstream aastrotech http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96599-thoughts-gravity-revisited.html Why are H1 clouds evenly spaced (on average) in an expanding universe? http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96510-why-h1-clouds-evenly-spaced-average-expanding-universe.html Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:39:27 GMT In another thread about a non expanding universe I cited a link to mainstream evidence regarding Hydrogen cloud separation data.
I was shocked to receive the comment from the moderator
[QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain swoop (Post 1620482)
Then start your own thread, don't hijack this one. Thank You
All I was doing was contributing to a discussion by referring folk to published, accepted, evidence one way or the other and had no intention of hijacking anyone. Data is data and not a hijack.
But....
Just why is it that on average, hydrogen clouds are evenly spaced even though the redshifts indicate expansion?
AND. Why is it that the region where the H1 clouds are, on average, evenly spaced, include quite a lot of the supernovae that are supposed to demonstrate time dilation.
http://vixra.org/abs/0909.0040 ]]> Against the Mainstream Noble Ox http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96510-why-h1-clouds-evenly-spaced-average-expanding-universe.html Gas Giants and the Great Year http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96480-gas-giants-great-year.html Thu, 12 Nov 2009 00:58:51 GMT A model of the solar system indicates resonance between gas giant cycles modulated by Neptune and the spin wobble of the earth. http://www.rtulip.net/astronomy Robert Tulip A model of the solar system indicates resonance between gas giant cycles modulated by Neptune and the spin wobble of the earth.

http://www.rtulip.net/astronomy

Robert Tulip ]]> Against the Mainstream Robert Tulip http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96480-gas-giants-great-year.html Stephen Hawkins and White Holes http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96479-stephen-hawkins-white-holes.html Thu, 12 Nov 2009 00:43:16 GMT In 1983 i sent to Hawkins the theory of White Holes. He then presented his theory of White Holes as his creation. FACTS How the particles move by resonating through the JAH Field at v=c is set by the maximum constant linear relative velocity moment spin of each JAH, which is stationary in the JAH Field and with all alpha degrees of spin moment which is equal to the frequency of the isospin states. This theory is believed to provide answers to all the unanswered questions in physics that are centered on the seminal equation :the cube root of 10^-50ccm/10.^50 JAH=10-^331/3cm, which governs the smallest possible associated diameter with universal energy, EE. The smallest dimension in space-time is the JAH frequency at alpha equal to 90 degrees, which equals 10^-50m=JAH lambda (wave length). PREDICTIONS 1. Galaxies reaching near light expansion velocity at the edge of the universe disintegrate back to the JAH Field, leaving gamma ray bursts and non-existent optical galaxy photons, solving the mystery of the missing galaxies. 2.Where such gamma ray bursts occur, the background radiation will show a slight increase relative to the average 3 degree MBR, as the burst permeates to the center of our universe. 3.That Black Holes are areas where gravity has been focused, ie.. Center of a galaxy, and the JAH Field is not able to resonate any groups of JAH (matter) through the field, causing no transfer of light photons. This applies to any large areas of focused gravity, ie.. galaxy clusters, creating a universe of many Black Holes of all magnitudes. The same force, gravity-inertia, exists between resonating JAH and the JAH Field, which is caused by the attraction force of one resonating JAH passing behind another. The Cosmological constant negative force is caused by the repulsion of resonating JAH with the JAH Field. 4.That because the JAH are stationary within the JAH Field, the Michelson-Morley experiment does not apply as a method of determining the JAH Field existence. Nor does the operator the square root of one minus v squared divided by c square apply to the JAH Field. 5. That the General Theory of Relativity applies to the physics of the JAH Field but not the groups of JAH(matter) within the Field. 6. That Quantum Mechanics and Relativity can be married in this theory once the non-relative parts are excluded. 7. That the bending of light photons in a magnetic field is caused by the local inability of JAH to resonate groups of matter through the Field and not because there is a guiding warp of space-time. 8. That the alleged missing matter is not dark matter but is the Zero Point creations of hydrogen and virtual particles. 9. That there is only one true particle which is combined intogroups (matter) by threes and all others are fragments which cease to resonate as a group. Depending on the up-down, cw-ccw rotation, the quarks are formed at the forced disassociation of the three true particles, as well as all other fragments, ie.. glueons, Z, graviton, etc. and cease to resonate as a group in the JAH Field. 10. In the beginning there was a naked singularity of the JAH Field. Through Zero Point Vacuum Energy activity, hydrogen is formed throughout the universe and collected into gravity formed star masses, which, formed the galaxies. As the universe expanded, new galaxies filled the voids creating a perpetually changing but static universe. This theory presents The Perfect Cube which creates absolute physics constants to within four significant figures. THE Perfect Cube Equal the cube root of the fraction 10^-50ccm/ 10^50 JAH = 10^-33 1/3cm so every 10^-50ccm of space/time contains 10^50 JAH (true energy EE) Each JAH spins = X /d Then rho = 2.998x10^8 m/s /10-^33 1/3cm = JAH Spin = 9.54x10^42 1/3Hz Because each JAH has equal spin, its True Energy EE = Planck Constant = 6.625 x 10^ -34 J.s / 9.54 x 10^ 42 1/3 s. JAH EE = 6.949 x 10^-77 1/3 J. The electron volt equivalent = h J/ev. The JAH eV = 6.949 x10^-77 1/3 J x 1.602 x 10 ^-19 J/ev = 4.343 x 10 ^-58 1/3 eV/JAH The mass of each JAH = JAH eV x m e/MeV m JAH = 9.11 x 10^ -31 Kg x 4.343 x 10^ -52 1/3 MeV / 5.11 x 10^ 6 MeV = 7.742 x10^ -89 1/3 Kg, where : me =9.11 x 10^ -31 Kg . e MeV = 4.343 x 10 ^-52 MeV The number of JAH/e = 9.11 x 10^ -31 Kg / 7.742 x 10 ^-89 1/3 Kg. = 1.177 x 10^ 58 1/3 JAH/e The 10^ 1/3 JAH/e = the binding energy EE between adjacent resonating JAH = .177 x 10 ^58 1/3 JAH. Therefore, the absolute electron mass = m e = 1.177 x 10^ 58 / 7.742 x 10^-89 1/3 Kg. m e = 9.0994 x 10 ^-31 1/3 Kg. which is approx. that of the standard constant E. Proton mass = 1836 x 9.0994 x 10 ^-31 1/3 Kg. Therefore, the Proton absolute mass =1.67244 x 10 ^-27 1/3 Kg. , which is approx. that of the standard constant. Mass of hydrogen = Hm = 1.672 x 10^ -27 Kg + 9.0994 x 10^ -31 1/3 Kg. =1.682 x 10 ^-27 Kg. Diff. between JAH E ( E=Mc^2 ) and JAH EE is =( 7.742 x 10 ^-89 Kg )(2.998 x 10^ 8 m/s )2 = 6.9488 x 10^ -73 J.s The electromagnetic spectrum runs from 6.625 x 10 ^-34 J.s ( 137 ), therefore, JAH EE max = 9.076 x 10 ^-34 J.s. There are 137 prime relative gradations in the JAH EE spectrum = 9.0763 x 10^ -30 J.s at 90o relative and 6.625 x 10 ^-34 J.s at 0 degrees relative. These set the Fine Line Constant distances. Copywrite 1968-2007 As you can see,the mysteries do not exist in this model and Hawkins was presented with White Hole Theory in 1983. In 1983 i sent to Hawkins the theory of White Holes.
He then presented his theory of White Holes as his creation.

FACTS
How the particles move by resonating through the JAH Field at v=c is set by the maximum constant linear relative velocity moment spin of each JAH, which is stationary in the JAH Field and with all alpha degrees of spin moment which is equal to the
frequency of the isospin states.

This theory is believed to provide answers to all the unanswered questions in physics that are centered on the seminal equation :the cube root of 10^-50ccm/10.^50 JAH=10-^331/3cm, which governs the smallest possible associated diameter with universal energy, EE.

The smallest dimension in space-time is the JAH frequency at alpha equal to 90 degrees, which equals 10^-50m=JAH lambda (wave length).

PREDICTIONS
1. Galaxies reaching near light expansion velocity at the edge of the universe disintegrate back to the JAH Field, leaving gamma ray bursts and non-existent optical galaxy photons, solving the mystery of the missing galaxies.
2.Where such gamma ray bursts occur, the background radiation will show a slight increase relative to the average 3 degree MBR, as the burst permeates to the center of our universe.
3.That Black Holes are areas where gravity has been
focused, ie.. Center of a galaxy, and the JAH Field is not able to resonate any groups of JAH (matter) through the field, causing no transfer of light photons. This applies to any large areas of focused gravity, ie.. galaxy clusters, creating a universe of many Black Holes of all magnitudes. The same force, gravity-inertia, exists between resonating JAH and the JAH Field, which is caused by the attraction force of one resonating JAH passing behind another. The Cosmological constant negative force is caused by
the repulsion of resonating JAH with the JAH Field.
4.That because the JAH are stationary within the JAH
Field, the Michelson-Morley experiment does not apply as a method of determining the JAH Field existence.
Nor does the operator the square root of one minus v
squared divided by c square apply to the JAH Field.
5. That the General Theory of Relativity applies to the physics of the JAH Field but not the groups of JAH(matter) within the Field.
6. That Quantum Mechanics and Relativity can be married in this theory once the non-relative parts are excluded.
7. That the bending of light photons in a magnetic field is caused by the local inability of JAH to resonate groups of matter through the Field and not because there is a guiding warp of space-time.
8. That the alleged missing matter is not dark matter but is the Zero Point creations of hydrogen and virtual particles.
9. That there is only one true particle which is combined intogroups (matter) by threes and all others are fragments which cease to resonate as a group. Depending on the up-down, cw-ccw rotation, the quarks are formed at the forced disassociation of the three true particles, as well as all other fragments, ie.. glueons, Z, graviton, etc. and
cease to resonate as a group in the JAH Field.
10. In the beginning there was a naked singularity of the JAH Field. Through Zero Point Vacuum Energy activity, hydrogen is formed throughout the universe and collected into gravity formed star masses, which,
formed the galaxies. As the universe expanded, new
galaxies filled the voids creating a perpetually changing but static universe.
This theory presents The Perfect Cube which creates absolute physics constants to within four significant figures.

THE Perfect Cube Equal the cube root of the fraction
10^-50ccm/ 10^50 JAH = 10^-33 1/3cm
so every 10^-50ccm of space/time contains 10^50 JAH (true energy EE)
Each JAH spins = X /d
Then rho = 2.998x10^8 m/s /10-^33 1/3cm = JAH Spin = 9.54x10^42 1/3Hz
Because each JAH has equal spin, its True Energy EE = Planck Constant
= 6.625 x 10^ -34 J.s / 9.54 x 10^ 42 1/3 s.
JAH EE = 6.949 x 10^-77 1/3 J.
The electron volt equivalent = h J/ev.
The JAH eV = 6.949 x10^-77 1/3 J x 1.602 x 10 ^-19 J/ev = 4.343 x 10 ^-58
1/3 eV/JAH
The mass of each JAH = JAH eV x m e/MeV
m JAH = 9.11 x 10^ -31 Kg x 4.343 x 10^ -52 1/3 MeV / 5.11 x 10^ 6 MeV =
7.742 x10^ -89 1/3 Kg, where : me =9.11 x 10^ -31 Kg . e MeV = 4.343 x 10 ^-52 MeV
The number of JAH/e = 9.11 x 10^ -31 Kg / 7.742 x 10 ^-89 1/3 Kg. = 1.177 x 10^ 58 1/3 JAH/e
The 10^ 1/3 JAH/e = the binding energy EE between adjacent resonating
JAH = .177 x 10 ^58 1/3 JAH.
Therefore, the absolute electron mass = m e = 1.177 x 10^ 58 / 7.742 x 10^-89 1/3 Kg.
m e = 9.0994 x 10 ^-31 1/3 Kg. which is approx. that of the standard constant E.
Proton mass = 1836 x 9.0994 x 10 ^-31 1/3 Kg. Therefore, the Proton absolute mass =1.67244 x 10 ^-27 1/3 Kg. , which is approx. that of
the standard constant.
Mass of hydrogen = Hm = 1.672 x 10^ -27 Kg + 9.0994 x 10^ -31 1/3 Kg. =1.682 x 10 ^-27 Kg.
Diff. between JAH E ( E=Mc^2 ) and JAH EE is =( 7.742 x 10 ^-89 Kg )(2.998 x 10^ 8 m/s )2 = 6.9488 x 10^ -73 J.s
The electromagnetic spectrum runs from 6.625 x 10 ^-34 J.s ( 137 ), therefore, JAH EE max = 9.076 x 10 ^-34 J.s.
There are 137 prime relative gradations in the JAH EE spectrum = 9.0763 x 10^ -30 J.s at 90o relative and 6.625 x 10 ^-34 J.s at 0 degrees relative. These set the Fine Line Constant distances.
Copywrite 1968-2007
As you can see,the mysteries do not exist in this model and Hawkins was presented with White Hole Theory in 1983. ]]> Against the Mainstream Paul Bechtel http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96479-stephen-hawkins-white-holes.html Expansion of Universe(Probably Static??) http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96444-expansion-universe-probably-static.html Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:10:51 GMT We know further the objects or light source go away from us , we get a red light freq. It has been seen that the galaxies are moving away from each other, only wuth a few exceptions. So, it is quite likely these galaxies are moving in the pool of dark matter with a large orbit. If this assumption goes true then there is no chance of singularities or big bang.Everything wraped in space - time dimension is predefined and present always. Thus present is just an illusionary status which is possible for humans to see.Past and future are present here in the same environment by not visible to human eyes,since it has a huge change of freq. Seen in an experiment sub - elementary particles knowsthere present and past states. taking things into considerations,most priobably universe did not originate from singularities but is always present the dimensions foreever. Please clarify me more details of this theory if you have any idea about it??? We know further the objects or light source go away from us , we get a red light freq. It has been seen that the galaxies are moving away from each other, only wuth a few exceptions. So, it is quite likely these galaxies are moving in the pool of dark matter with a large orbit.
If this assumption goes true then there is no chance of singularities or big bang.Everything wraped in space - time dimension is predefined and present always.
Thus present is just an illusionary status which is possible for humans to see.Past and future are present here in the same environment by not visible to human eyes,since it has a huge change of freq.
Seen in an experiment sub - elementary particles knowsthere present and past states.
taking things into considerations,most priobably universe did not originate from singularities but is always present the dimensions foreever.
Please clarify me more details of this theory if you have any idea about it??? ]]> Against the Mainstream avighan http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96444-expansion-universe-probably-static.html hubble data in non expanding universe http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96417-hubble-data-non-expanding-universe.html Wed, 11 Nov 2009 02:44:05 GMT I want to separate this post into 3 different sections.

1. The mainstream point of view.
this is done to define the topic, and give it an historical frame of reference. It also gives a view of how the main stream viewpoint came to be.

2. Criticism on the main stream point of view.
this is a sort of reverse treatment method. (What if the mainstream point of view was represented as an ATM on the forum. How would people react to it's weak points?) don't worry. I'll try to keep it civil and non offending.

3. The ATM theory (not no capital T)
In this section I'm representing my own explanation for Hubbles observations. (although I don't have the any data). So it's more like a my interpretation of the hubble diagram instead of my interpretation of the hubble data. (surprisingly this ATM has some math involved)

1.The Mainstream point of view.

Edwin Hubble discovered the relationship between the distance of a galaxy and it's redshift. He reasoned that the the more distant a galaxy was the faster it was away from us. This results in Hubbles law

V = H D

V = velocity
H = Hubbles constant
D = distance

The distance was measured using standard candles method (Cepheid variable stars to be more precise ).


2. Criticism on the main stream point of view.

I'm going to use a parable to make my point. (for those not interested in literatuere I recomand a skip to the Moral of the parable rather then reading the short story below)

parable
A quite lazy student wanted to become an astronomer. So he went to the astronomy school. After a few lessons the topic of the expanding universe and the big bang was lectured. Along with his fellow students he asked the lecturing professor "what is the universe expanding into"(A) (like where is it going?). The professor smiled and said it's expanding into a higher dimension. (and then used a analogy of a one dimensional universe). All the students were a bit baffled but most of them accepted the analogy, and over time most of them would be able to grasp the expanding into another dimension quite well (not relevant to the story but some of them those students would later solve the string theory).
After about a year the annual exams are taken but our lazy student was not up to the test. The professor asked him "where is the sun's energy coming from". The lazy student hesitated, he smiled and answered in a questioning tone "It comes from the dimension the universe is expanding into.".

Morale
Although the observations clearly dictate an expanding of the universe, the consequences are terrifying for science, it's expanding into somewhere else then normal. (into an unseen and undetectable dimension). Further studies and observations around the expansion made it clear that Dark energy must be out there . Note the surprising correlation of properties between the higher dimension and the dark energy. (They are both entities that can not be observed directly). the words epicycles and turtles all the way might ring some bells. Any ATM theorist would overwhelmed whit questions for proof or photo's maybe of the dark energy or at least a drawing of formula for the higher dimension. (and with reason because we can't believe just words).

I hope I didn't offended anybody with the story above, it just was created by being on auto write mode.

An expanding universe is far more interesting (from a marketing point of view)

(A) (probably the most asked question in astronomy classes not related to black holes.

my ATM interpretation of the data

statement
light waves lose a fraction of their energy over a period of time (while they travel trough intergalactic space). The loss of period is has a linear relationship to time.

under this presumption the redshift of galaxies can be explained without the universe expanding into the unknown higher dimension. A result of this would also be that the steady state universe is more likely then the expanding big bang universe.

mathematically the observed redshift could be described like this

1+z = Q * D / c (1)

z = redshift
Q = Quadrazars constant of energy loss of light waves in intergalactic space (1/s)
D = distance (s)
c = speed of light (m/s)


a light wave travelling trough intergalactic space has it wavelength increased between the time of emission and observation. (it leaks a bit of energy along the way.)


λ observed=λemitted * Q * t (2)


the time between emission and observation can be written like this

t = D / c (3)


so instead of writing (the normal redshift equation)

1+z = λ observed / λemitted (4)

one could write

1+z = λemitted * Q * D / ( λemitted * c ) (5)

after elimination of the λemitted on gets the formula (1)

formula (1) could be called the energy loss of light by travelling trough intergalactic space.

notes:
I'm using the term intergalactic space in order to reduce the amount of negative responses to this post. (otherwise I would get a simple and clear answer right away, "such a loss of energy is not recorded in labs, so you are mistaken". my answer would be "dark energy is not recorded in labs either".) this could get an unproductive discussion in a very short period of time.

About the burden of proof. (I'm going to say this right here so I don't offend and individual poster later). There is no proof I can give to support the leakage of energy other than to say it doesn't require a Higher dimension to accommodate for expansion. A higher dimension already excepted without proof by the mainstream. (no offence intended.)

late note:
after typing all of this I came across the "tired light model" that is very similar (although exponential not linear). I still wanted to discuss the subject so posted it anyway

regards Steve De Haes. ]]> Against the Mainstream Quadrazar http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96417-hubble-data-non-expanding-universe.html Sound is the key http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96325-sound-key.html Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:29:18 GMT MODERATOR INTERJECTION: Post moved from this thread.


I see this thread could use an update about WMAP.
From NASA's own site about WMAP.
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/news/index.html#timeline

Sound waves in the early universe? :hand:

Quote:
Much of what WMAP reveals about the universe is because of the patterns in its sky maps. The patterns arise from sound waves in the early universe. As with the sound from a plucked guitar string, there is a primary note and a series of harmonics, or overtones. The third overtone, now clearly captured by WMAP, helps to provide the evidence for the neutrinos.
SOUND is the KEY, like I have been suggesting all along.
http://kachina2012.wordpress.com/cat...include-sound/

So there now exists proof that SOUND waves in space play a role in how the creation/universe evolved.
NASA and their toy WMAP help prove it.

The results being provided by WMAP suggests mainstream science/astronomy needs to update their hard drives. :whistle:
And WMAP also suggests the universe is finite?

WMAPs Top Ten
http://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov/

namaste ]]> Against the Mainstream Raphael http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96325-sound-key.html What does 1/2 mean, exactly? http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96277-what-does-1-2-mean-exactly.html Mon, 09 Nov 2009 15:27:25 GMT So, let's examine the fraction 1/2 for a moment.

Exactly what does the fraction 1/2 mean? What does 1 divided by two equal? .5.

Ok, fair enough, and .5 means 50 percent.

I ask you, 50 percent of what? 50% of the mass? How about 50 % of the volume? How about 50% of the distance?

One piece of two. That is what 1/2 means. Take a lemon pie, or even just one piece of pie, and cut it into two pieces. Take one and I'll take one. We each have 1/2 of the pie (or piece of pie.)

Do we each have 50% of the mass of the pie? No. We each have one piece of two pieces. Nobody ever said the pieces had to be equal, or ever could be. ]]> Against the Mainstream MDT-1 http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96277-what-does-1-2-mean-exactly.html Gravity Race http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96270-gravity-race.html Mon, 09 Nov 2009 12:54:46 GMT Let's just ASSUME the Earth has the mass of 5,974,200,000,000,000,000,000,000 kg.

We are going to compare impact times of two different objects when dropped from an exact height of 16.087 feet.

Object A has a mass of 1 kg
Object B has a mass of 10 kg

Using the formula A=(L-S)/R2

Object A has a "A value" of 371,368,185,491,390,563,809,286.93976503

Object B has a "A value" of 371,368,185,491,390,563,809,286.38030708

A previous test was done with object A. It was determined that object A took exactly 1 second to impact the ground when dropped from a height of 16.087 feet, which is an acceleration of 32.174 ft/sec^2.


That means an “A value” of 1, has an acceleration of
32.174/371,368,185,491,390,563,809,286.93976503=

.0000000000000000000000866363928224699541361186580 02141 ft/sec^2

If you multiply that by Object B’s “A value”, you find an acceleration of 32.173999999999999999999951530582 ft/sec^2 for object B.

Now, let’s look at the time it takes for each object to hit the ground, when dropped from the 16.087 feet.

Object A- 1.0000000000000000000000000000000 seconds
Object B- 1.0000000000000000000000007532389 seconds ]]> Against the Mainstream MDT-1 http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96270-gravity-race.html What Paradox? http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96269-what-paradox.html Mon, 09 Nov 2009 12:52:10 GMT Twin brothers are standing next to each other on Earth. One brother is showing the other brother his new rocket ship. He says "this baby will go from 0 to 93,000 miles per second (.5c) in one second." He explains to the brother that an acceleration rate of 93,000 miles/sec^2 is the rate of change of velocity. If an object's initial velocity is zero, and the object accelerates (thrusts) at the rate of 93,000 mi/sec^2 for one second, one second later the object will have traveled a distance of 46,500 miles, and will be traveling at the velocity of 93,000 mi./sec.

The brother says, "cool, can I take a spin?" The other brother says, "no problem." The brother immediately jumps into the rocket, ready to go. The rocket ship has on board data acquisition systems that will record the exact distance traveled per time interval, and a state of the art time device. The ship also has a accelerometer that records the acceleration of the ship at all times in every direction.

The brother flips the switch that activates the data acquisition systems and the max thrust engines at the same time. He turns off the thrust when one second has elapsed. He is now traveling at the velocity of 93,000 miles/sec. The brother continues to travel at that velocity for 10 seconds at which time he reverses thrust and "decelerates" at the rate of 93,000 miles/sec^2 for a duration of 1 second.

His velocity is now zero miles per second and he is 1,023,000 miles away from his brother. He just traveled a total of 1,023,000 miles in the duration of 12 seconds. The brother decides to get some sleep.

Exactly 8 hours after arriving, the brother activates all systems, including max thrust that starts the return journey. The brother accelerates at the same rate (93,000 miles/sec^2) for one second. After one second has elapsed he turns off thrust. He again travels at the velocity of 93,000 miles per second for 10 seconds, at which time he "decelerates" at the rate of 93,000 miles per second^2 for one second (reverse thrust). Total elapsed time of return travel is 12 seconds, and again, the distance traveled is 1,023,000 miles.

The ship traveled 1,023,000 miles in 12 seconds in one direction, and 8 hours later traveled 1,023,000 miles in 12 seconds in the opposite direction.

Actual travel distance- 2,046,000 miles
Actual travel time- 24 seconds
Layover time- 8 hours
Total time- 8 hours 24 seconds
Max acceleration- 93,000 mi/sec^2
Min acceleration-0
Maximum velocity- 93,000 mi./sec
Minimum velocity-0
Average speed- 85,250 mi./sec ]]> Against the Mainstream MDT-1 http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96269-what-paradox.html My own theory and thoughts on gravity. http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96264-my-own-theory-thoughts-gravity.html Mon, 09 Nov 2009 07:23:00 GMT heh looks like the guy below me has something simular, and what I've seen from a few mainstream stuff that it seems they either already close to this, or dismissed this idea, but don't know enough to be sure. I realize this easily may be wrong, wich is why I'm looking for someone that knows enough about physics, especially in the way of quantum, astro, and such. I have the idea, a few thoughts on how to test it, but I'm not that great with math and don't know the actual numbers I need...even though I have tried.

But from what I understand of gravity, the laymans description being something like, a trampoline placed out with a bowling ball placed ontop of it to repersent say the sun, the dip in the trampoline is the effect of gravity caused by the bowling ball, but done in a three dimensional way in reality. That matter some how causes space to warp toawrds it, or pulled towards it some how. Well my theory...wich is kinda weird, but seen a few videos particularly one by larwence *forget his full name* that seemed to make this idea plausible, and it is....remove the bowling ball, it doesn't exist, there isn't something that pulls space towards it to create matter. But there is another way to get the same effects on the trampoline of the bowling ball being there, without it being there.. ]]> Against the Mainstream wolfwing http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96264-my-own-theory-thoughts-gravity.html A Luminiferous Aether, Neutrinos and the Galilean Transformation http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96226-luminiferous-aether-neutrinos-galilean-transformation.html Sun, 08 Nov 2009 12:31:43 GMT I know I promised to study and not to open another thread, but some further study led me to what I believe is the answer to unanswered questions posed in my previous thread 'Cosmic Rays, Photons, and the Magnetic Dipole". So I had to make one last attempt at explaining the theory. My dilemma has been knowing that an ocean of something existed in space, an Aether of some kind, but wasnt sure what. Eventually recognizing that neutrinos were a part of it but that there still seemed to be something else, an interaction of some kind. I think I have finally found the answer in the work of Henri Poincar'e and Lorentz-Fitzgerald. Specifically the theory of a Luminiferous Aether.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether

Quote:
The key difficulty with the aether hypothesis arose from the juxtaposition of the two well-established theories of Newtonian dynamics and Maxwell's electromagnetism. Under a [B]Galilean transformation the equations of Newtonian dynamics are invariant, whereas those of electromagnetism are not. Basically this means that while physics should remain the same in non-accelerated experiments, light would not follow the same rules because it is traveling in the universal "aether frame"
Quote:
However it wasnt until a last minute attempt at salvaging the Aether theory by the team of Lorentz-Fitzgerald and their contraction hypothesis that I believe the true nature was revealed. And that is that its a "LUMINIFEROUS AETHER" and that everything is affected by travel through the aether.

One more attempt at salvaging was Fizeau's 1851 confirmation of Fresnels predictions that " A medium with a refraction index n moving with a velocity v would INCREASE THE SPEED OF LIGHT traveling through the medium in the same direction. According to SNELLS LAW Movement adds a fraction of the velocity to the light. Dragging the Aether along with a portion of the mediums velocity.
Pioneer Anomoly?

(1-1/n^2)v




Quote:
It was Albert Einstein in 1905 who abandoned the (classical) aether and emphasized the significance of relativity of simultaneity to our understanding of space and time. He deduced the failure of absolute simultaneity from two stated assumptions.

the principle of relativity—the equivalence of inertial frames, such that the laws of physics apply equally in all inertial coordinate systems;
the constancy of the speed of light detected in empty space, independent of the relative motion of its source.

As for the concept of "In Vacua" per Einstein, I believe the experiments to be fatally flawed.
Removing the air or pressure from a space would not void it of the refracting aether or neutrinos,
and the MSW effect would alter the results.

MSW Effect
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSW_effect

Quote:
The presence of electrons in matter changes the energy levels of the propagation eigenstates of neutrinos due to charged current coherent forward scattering of the electron neutrinos (i.e., weak interactions). The coherent forward scattering is analogous to the electromagnetic process leading to the refractive index of light in a medium. This means that neutrinos in matter have a different effective mass than neutrinos in vacuum, and since neutrino oscillations depend upon the squared mass difference of the neutrinos, neutrino oscillations may be different in matter than they are in vacuum. With antineutrinos, the conceptual point is the same but the effective charge ('weak isospin') that the weak interaction couples to, has opposite sign.
The problem of mass increasing with velocity is caused by mass taking on energy as it moves through the aether and absorbing the same frequencies corresponding to the elemental composition of the mass. Or refracting others depending on composition.

Basically we live in a sea of leftover EM radiation from star nucleosynthesis and the neutrinos provide the bridge to the creation of matter, most recently organic matter. The Aether fills all space and the EM on our planet sits within it. Lights interaction with the aether is dependent on its frequencies heat signature or color temperature and the absorbitive or refractive qualities of the mass it bombards. A particle for each frequency of light.The absorption lines are like a grey scale of the variable temperatures involved in the creation of each element. The majority of which were created long ago in stars but interaction between neutrinos and the remaining EM radiation is what gives life to our planet.

The magnetic dipole effect I mentioned in my previous thread is also answered by this theory. As neutrinos have a dipole moment they would be able to transfer energies between mass and the aether via the MSW effect.

Thermodynamically speaking the processes in both space and on Earth are initiated by four things, Heat, Light, Dark (Refractive) and Cold.

Quote:
Newton's Opticks (1704) postulated an "Aethereal Medium" transmitting vibrations faster than light, by which light, when overtaken, is put into "Fits of easy Reflexion and easy Transmission", which caused refraction and diffraction. Newton believed that these vibrations were related to heat radiation.

The modern understanding is that heat radiation is, like light, electromagnetic radiation. However, Newton considered them to be two different phenomena. He believed heat vibrations to be excited "when a Ray of Light falls upon the Surface of any pellucid Body". He wrote, "I do not know what this Aether is", but that if it consists of particles then they must be "exceedingly smaller than those of Air, or even than those of Light.
I also believe light may be propagated via a transverse wave in two circular polarizations, rather than a longtitudal wave. Or 3 phases as related to color charge in quarks. These polarizations may be directly connected to the neutrino or atomic particles via the MSW effect. I may have a few things twisted around but this all ties in to my earlier discussions concerning GRB Baryonic/Non Baryonic matter interaction and my ideas of all radiation being ionizing.

The main thing is that our space is a transparent and refractive medium that even light resides within. And that the speed of light is determined by whether or not it is in the universal reference frame or not.
By directing this aetherial refraction, I believe we may be able to travel faster than light? If anamolies such as the Pioneer events are due to this acceleration, it would only seem practical that that energy could be harnessed and redirected.

? ]]> Against the Mainstream coliver http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96226-luminiferous-aether-neutrinos-galilean-transformation.html Theory of everything http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96003-theory-everything.html Tue, 03 Nov 2009 23:40:38 GMT In a flash of inspiration i stumbled upon an idea that unifies quantum mechanics with gravity and also explains things like dark matter

This Realy could be it ! (greatly simplified )

1 Imagine a greater universe inhabited by membranes floating around
2 each membrane is inhabited by a particular type of stringlet
3 As with chemistry some some elements reacts some done (think lock and key)

this means each membrane has its own laws of physics that may or may not react with others

consider our universe as being constructed of 3 membranes each with different laws (of bonding)

See Pic


the green membrane represents quantum mechanics
the blue represents Einsteins gravity laws
the red membrane can talk to both allowing the green and blue to interact INDIRECTLY

we may not be seeing just one set of laws in our observable universe but several joined at the hip

if the ratios of stringlets on each membrane did not match the excess could be observed as dark energy & dark matter (as bonded stringlets bumped into unbonded stringlets on their home membrane )
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version Name: Bonding Membranes3.jpeg Views: N/A Size: 16.5 KB ID: 11175  
]]> Against the Mainstream TESLACOIL http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/96003-theory-everything.html