Re: Redshift without expansion


Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (23 Jun 2006 09:09:04 -0700) it happened "sean"
<jaymoseley@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
<1151078944.415112.324190@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

Well yes and Id like to see more discussion as to how EM waves
propagate
in the vacuum. After all theyve ignored answering that question since
Maxwells time.

I once did read something like:
The changing electric field creates a magnetic field at 90 degrees, when
that magnetic field finally collapses (=changes) it creates an changing
electric field again, etc etc the wave rolls along....
Fun, do not know (was that Maxwell too?) who it was that wrote that.

brightness over distance. And notice how even on my basic
graph posted here that each succesive
doubling of frequency(redshift) sees a proportionate halving
of lines . That is if one looks at observor C , every second
* has gone since observor B`s line. Thats brightness
decreasing inversely proportional to distance. And isnt
that whats observed?

I think you are mixing up 2 things here that perhaps are better kept
separate, frequency and amplitude (brightness).
Even though photon energy is Planck's constant x frequency, that 'energy'
is not the same as the 'amplitude' of the EM wave.
W = h.v
It is tricky material, and I myself have some questions as to the character
of 'photon', but the difference between wavelength and amplitude of a wave,
to bring it back to that swinging rope, the distance between 2 maxima,
(wavelength) or the height of the swinging from top to bottom of a wave
(amplitude).
These are neither related nor depending on each other, you can choose any
value for each any time.
The amplitude will decrease over distance, but the frequency will not.
Well, I am a bit at the end of what I can tell you, I am reading up on the
stuff myself atm., as I clearly could not counter some argument Bilge made
about EPR.
I can understand you not posting further on this as none of us seem to
know what EM is.
All we know is that it does appear to propogate over distance. And more
importantly Im pointing out that there is no reason why EM cannot
lengthen wavelength over distance theoretically without resorting to
expansion. Not because QM states it cant lengthen but rather because QM
cannot rule out that it can lengthen.
But one correction to your above post. I didnt mix up frequency and
amplitude, or say they were the same.
Read my quote again. I relate the two only by saying that over distance
flux decreases with an observed corresponding decrease in frequency.
Isnt that true? Thats whats observed. And actually
youve got it wrong on another point. You say amplitude will decrease in
time but not frequency?
Thats not whats observed. In fact frequency is also seen to decrease
with distance. Its called redshift. And as no-one knows how EM waves
propogate energy over distance. No one can rule out that it doesnt
include a lengthening of wavelength as part of the process.
I know you and others will disagree. But think about it. Everyone
pretends something is a known fact when it isnt. Everyone says that EM
waves cannot lengthen as they propogate yet they dont know how it
propogates. Its a strange contradiction. Everyone beieves that it cant
lengthen yet everyone has no explanation as to why it cant. Usually
scientists accuse Creationists as wrong to rely on faith with no
evidence. Yet that is exactly what the Standard model does.
In fact I realize that one theoretical way to deal with this is to
break the golden rule thatEM waves propogate without an increase in the
time of the oscillation cycle of the magnetic field.
Currently the standard model has the cycle oscilallate constantly
through time and space. But this breaks one of the basic rules of
Physics doesnt it? There is no such thing as perpetual motion and I
thought that was part of Newtons laws.
So why not have the oscillation cycle slow over distance at a constant
rate in the same way that
flux amplitude decreases over distance. Coupled with a constant speed
of propogation of the wave at c then one can explain redshifting
without expansion and any new physics or particles.
So if the magnetic field oscilation slows by a constant defined by a
very small fraction x(-1,0000000000000) lets say then we get no
observable negligible chaneg in small scale behaviour of light and only
obserbvable stretching on cosmological distances.
Sean
www.gammarayburst.com

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Redshift without expansion
    ... wave vanishes for no apparent reason. ... think what would happen to the next duck if every ... But look at the duck at observor 3 cycle before, ... also as bar charts showing energy loss over distance. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Redshift without expansion
    ... etc etc the wave rolls along.... ... That is if one looks at observor C, ... decreasing inversely proportional to distance. ... The amplitude will decrease over distance, ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Redshift without expansion
    ... The EM wave *moves*, and you will see amplitude variations, ... c can allow the observed frequency to diminish with distance. ... shows that light travels at constant speeds in a non expanding ... That is if one looks at observor C, ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Vertical Monopole Radiation Characteristics
    ... field intensity at a given distance over real ground, ... distance over real ground as being that of the radiation launched by ... except only the people who misunderstand surface wave propagation are being misled. ...
    (rec.radio.amateur.antenna)
  • Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
    ... are calling wavelength. ... wave stuff if you have something else that works. ... The distance between the two points varies with rope ... starts out in phase but which travels at different speeds with no ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast