Re: Gravitational redshift Query

This message is brought to you by Androcles
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/

"WG" <wgilmour@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:fv88g2$hei$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Androcles" <Headmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%5JRj.151921$cj2.86125@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


--
This message is brought to you by Androcles
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/

"WG" <wgilmour@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:fv7l2d$oms$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Can someone here shed some light on why the gravitational potential well
equation gives a answer that is close to what is observed, but maybe it
should not be.

While there is no center of the universe, from an observational point of
view every point in the universe is at the center. We even have a name for
it, the Visible Horizon. The Visible Horizon is a sphere of mass
surrounding
every point in the universe. While there may be mass beyond this sphere,
it
is forever hidden since any effects, (light, gravity etc) can not have
reached us yet.

Each point in the universe has a different Visible Horizon that is
displaced
by the distance between the two points, (i.e. there is a small wedge of
mass
in each sphere whose effects cannot be felt by the other). It is this
displacement which introduces an asymmetry into the argument.
Now for you and me this displacement is negligible, but for distant QSOs
the
asymmetry is significant.
I have posted a dia at http://tinyurl.com/3uzqkf .
Of course this a static picture and a dynamic one would look different,
[i.e. the photon travels, the radius expands], but the underlying
asymmetry
must still remain.

Now if we treat the photon at its point of emission as traveling out from
the center of its Visible Horizon, or climbing out of a potential well it
will be gravitationally redshifted according to Zg=4.19GDr^2/C^2.

One might argue that if the photon is climbing out of a potential well at
point of emission it would be falling into the potential well of the
observer, and thus the effects cancel, but this is incorrect due to the
inherent asymmetry. The photon can only ever be climbing out, never
falling
in due to the some mass being hidden (hatched area in dia).

Plugging in the values for observed values of Z, say Z = 1 thru 5 (I
believe up to 7 has been observed)
yields a Radius of the universe in the order of 10^26 meters, which is
curiously close to the radius calculated by other methods. Radius taken
from John Baez FAQ at http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/distances.html .

Now this may be just a coincidence, but I sure hate it when its this
close.

P.S. I am well aware I am using a Newtonian, flat, Euclidian, isotropic
calculation, and that a treatment under GR might be different.

Cheers

The hatched area is only hidden for the QSO, not for the photon.
Once it reaches A then its horizon is A's horizon, and so it is a
moving horizon. There is no asymmetry.


| This is incorrect.... The visible horizon at point A is not a static
sphere, it is expanding
| (cosmologically) as well.
| So in the dia,,, you get a photon traveling from right to left,

(and getting slower and slower, hence the red shift...)

| chasing its own horizon which is expanding right to left,

If dx/dt = ax where a some ill-defined constant as claimed,
then d^2x/dt^2 = a and is non-zero, the QSO is accelerating away.
Since acceleration requires a force and gravity works in the
opposite direction you'll have to invent a dark force to account
for it. That's not physics, that pure bloody-minded mysticism.

Prove expansion.
Just because every other crackpot goes along with the first crank like
a load of silly sheep (including you) doesn't mean you are right.

What is more, this picture clearly shows the speed of light differs
depending on frequency:
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap070411.html

The arms of the galaxy appear displaced because IR takes
a different time to reach us than X-ray.
This popular blind faith in only one speed of light is total nonsense.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Orbit/Orbit.htm
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Algol/Algol.htm

Also disproved by Sagnac:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Sagnac/Sagnac.htm


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Gravitational redshift Query
    ... view every point in the universe is at the center. ... The Visible Horizon is a sphere of mass surrounding ... displacement which introduces an asymmetry into the argument. ... Now if we treat the photon at its point of emission as traveling out from ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Gravitational redshift Query
    ... view every point in the universe is at the center. ... The Visible Horizon is a sphere of mass surrounding ... displacement which introduces an asymmetry into the argument. ... Now if we treat the photon at its point of emission as traveling out from ...
    (sci.astro)