Re: cosmology
- From: dwhig265@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 10:39:03 -0700 (PDT)
On Mar 22, 7:15 am, "Thomas Heger" <hba...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<dwhig...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> schrieb im Newsbeitragnews:b85e0897-4bc9-4c45-bd90-8282b0e07299@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
...> At that point an establishment Einsteinian astronomer would tell you
that there is no center to the universe, and trot out the analogy of a
loaf of raisin bread rising, wherein all the raisins move away from
each other much like equipositioned dots on the surface of an
inflating balloon move away from each other. No matter there's always
one central raisin or void. Even though they readily agree the
galaxies are receding from each other in excess of light speed, that
doesn't violate the postulate that "nothing can exceed light speed"
because the galaxies are maintaining the same relative distances
between each other but the space between them is expanding. Never mind
that galaxies receding from each other in excess of twice the speed of
light would never be able to see each other. That is not observed!
sorry, but this is quite wrong. We are receiving light from where stars have
been in the past. It takes a while, but one day the light reaches earth.
This has nothing to do with the speed of the star but with the speed of
light in our reference frame. The star itself could be treated as not moving
at all in his own reference frame. This is because the star (or an observer
nearby) would define space in a way, where he is at rest.
DWH says: Thank you for your response but I must be a little slow
witted. I can't figure out if you mean the entire paragraph you have
repeated is "quite wrong" or what. The speed of light is 300m kps in
anybodys reference frame. We know the observed star (or galaxy) is
moving relative to us by its red shift. I contend that the "star" we
are talking about that is emitting superluminally red shifted light,
if it had any planetary observers, would not be able to see radiation
we emitted, because of our position at the center of the universe. I
don't mean to be rude but imho, you've got a lot of balls to even open
your mouth to me. I will pay you $100 for a verifiable transcript of
your phd. Do you have any idea who Ned Wright is? He is only one of
the entire astrophysical community that is totally nonplussed by me. I
will bet anyone or any institution up to $1,000,000 and give 2 to 1
odds and put the money up, that they can't prove me wrong and I can
prove myself raght about the center business! Dwain W. Higginbotham
I sent the above to Ned Wright last Sept and got no response. I offer
$25,000 to the first porson to prove the part about the local group
orbiting what was once the center, cannot possibly be true. D.W.H.
I would like to get some money, but I don't understand that statement " ..
the part about the local group orbiting what was once the center, cannot
possibly be true"
Thomas Heger
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: cosmology
- From: Thomas Heger
- Re: cosmology
- References:
- cosmology
- From: dwhig265
- Re: cosmology
- From: Thomas Heger
- cosmology
- Prev by Date: Re: What is Proper Time?
- Next by Date: Re: Circular motion in SR
- Previous by thread: Re: cosmology
- Next by thread: Re: cosmology
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
