Re: Formula for Decelerating Light

On May 2, 9:11 pm, jjs...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On May 2, 9:51 pm, Michael Helland <mobyd...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<snip>



Show your work, I personally don't believe you solved it both ways, I
think its a bunch of made up waffling...

I didn't solve it both ways.

I solved it my way.

Apparently no one's going to put up a number that challenges it.

Well Mike that is the challenge does your prediction match
observation, since you claim that decelerating light is the same in
static space as constant light in expanding, use the current equations
and see if your right... Solve it both ways, unless you can't....

I can't.

I can't solve it using the solution you've been taught.

But I came up with a different route, albeit only slightly:

THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EXPANSION AND DECELERATION IS
=====================
Keep w constant instead of c in the formula c = fw
=====================

I think it's pretty obvious there's nothing fatally flawed with my
solution.

Maybe the curve of my equation isn't quite right, but it can be made
to fit, and never use expansion, just deceleration.

Otherwise someone would say "Redshift for light that has traveled 5
million light years has a redshift of XXX".
.