Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #476953 > unrolled thread

?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  ? Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 08:52 +0000
    Re:? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-11-13 10:44 +0100
      Re: ? Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 10:02 +0000
        Re: ? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-11-13 11:10 +0100
          Re: ? Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 11:13 +0000
            Re: ? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-13 12:59 -0800
              Re: ? Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 00:06 +0000
    Re:? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-11-13 10:55 +0100
      Re: ? Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 14:47 +0000

#476953 — ?

                ?

Will you understand the music better
If you study the atoms in the air
Witch carry the music from strings
and horn and drum to ear,and herE.




The Answer:



                IS



                NO


YOU WILL NOT  eh!

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#476955

Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
>                 ?Will you understand the music betterIf you study the atoms in the air ?

Physics is not about high level music content, but about mechanisms
music can even reach our ears.

Will you understand physics better by discussion instead of studying ?




-- 
Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)

"Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
Miloš Forman


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#476957

On 13/11/2018 09:44, Libor Striz wrote:
> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
>>                  ?Will you understand the music betterIf you study the atoms in the air ?
> 
> Physics is not about high level music content, but about mechanisms
> music can even reach our ears.
> 
> Will you understand physics better by discussion instead of studying ?

Not by discussing music eh!
BUT IF we were to discuss maybe
  for example,
       The  BID BANG
         - THEN -
Maybe we would, Mr.Striz.


Searching for an alternative explanation of the Hubble Red Shifts, it 
occurred to me that if the speed of light is slowing down, then this 
will necessarily lead to increasing red-shift with increasing distance,
as observed by Hubble et. al., without any expansion at all.

Merely by assuming      dc = -K c dt ..................(1)
I was led to             c = c(0) e^-Kt ...............(2)
and on to               Red-Shift = e^-Kt - 1 .........(3)

     K ~= 10^-10 /year
     t = time in years

Only after starting the PHYSICS PRIZE thread, in which i was trying to 
enlist the help of sci.physics.relativity readers to obtain a more 
accurate value of K, did the obvious solution occur to me...........

                        K = H = Hubble's Constant
and                    t = -t  ( so times past become +ve)

which substituted in (3) gives:

             Red-Shift = e^Ht - 1 .........(4)

then for times which are small compared to 1/H (i.e. small compared
to the 'age of the universe'), we may use the approximation:
             e^x ~= 1 + x .................(5)

So for t << 1/H we have:

             Red-Shift = H * t ............(6)

which is of course the normal "Hubble's Law", valid only
for modest times into the past ( t < ~5 billion years).

As our telescopes manage to see further out into space, and therefore 
further back in time, we will find that the normal linear Hubble's Law 
expressed in equation(6), will have to be replaced by the more accurate
exponential form expressed in equation(4). This is indeed what is found
in observatories all around the world eh!

Conclusions:
     1. The speed of light in intergalactic-space is slowing down.
     2. There was no "Big Bang"
     3. There was no "Inflation"
     4. The galaxies are not accelerating away from us.
     5. There is no "Dark Energy"
********************************************************************

**********************************************************************
         A GOOD QUESTION

When light slows down by entering a more dense medium such as glass, or
water, the frequency stays the same and the WAVELENGTH REDUCES.

So how is it that when light slows down traveling across intergalactic 
space,the the WAVELENGTH INCREASES ?

good question!

when light slows down entering a more dense medium, the front of the 
wave train hits the more dense medium first. The front therefore slows 
before the rear of the wave train, resulting in the rear of the wave 
catching up to some extent with the front. Thus the wave train 
compresses and the WAVELENGTH REDUCES.

When light slows down in intergalactic space, on the other hand, there 
is no difference in the conditions at the front or back of the wave 
train. At any one time the front and back are indeed traveling at the 
same speed, and therefore the length of the wave train stays constant as 
it travels through intergalactic space.

So "How is it that the wavelength of light from distant galaxies is 
INCREASED ? " you might ask, and i would reply that it is NOT that light 
is stretched as it travels through intergalactic space, but rather that 
it was emitted with an increased wavelength, when the velocity of light 
was higher than it is now.

The frequency generated by any given atomic transition, even on distant 
galaxies many billions of years ago, is exactly the same as that on 
Earth today. The wavelength is proportional the the velocity of light AT 
THE TIME IT WAS EMITTED, and This increased wavelength is faithfully 
transmitted through space, where it is measured in our observatories.

keith stein

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#476958

Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
>
Not by discussing music eh!BUT IF we were to discuss maybe  for
 example,       The  BID BANG         - THEN -Maybe we would,
 Mr.Striz.

Copy-pasting and discussing air-castles leads nowhere ,
if  studying of current models and known evidence are ignored.

 
-- 
Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)

"Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
Miloš Forman


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#476959

On 13/11/2018 10:10, Libor Striz wrote:
> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
>>
> Not by discussing music eh!BUT IF we were to discuss maybe  for
>   example,       The  BID BANG         - THEN -Maybe we would,
>   Mr.Striz.
> 
> Copy-pasting and discussing air-castles leads nowhere ,
> if  studying of current models and known evidence are ignored.
> 
>   
> 
What evidence do you have that light is not slowing down
by one part in 14,000,000,000 per year, do you think,Mr.Striz?


keith stein

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#477000

On Tuesday, November 13, 2018 at 4:13:51 AM UTC-7, Keith Stein wrote:
>
> What evidence do you have that light is not slowing down
> by one part in 14,000,000,000 per year, do you think,Mr.Striz?
> 
> 
> keith stein

I gave it to you.  The fine-structure constant is alpha = e^2/(2*h*eps0*c).

"were α to change by 4%, stellar fusion would not produce carbon, so that
carbon-based life would be impossible. If α were greater than 0.1, stellar
fusion would be impossible and no place in the universe would be warm
enough for life as we know it."

"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-structure_constant#Anthropic_explanation

has changed by (-5.7 +/- 1.0)x10^-6 over the past 10 to 12 billion years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-structure_constant#Past_rate_of_change

So if c were slowing down to the extent you speculate, the fine-structure
constant early in the universe would have been smaller by more than 4%
there could have been no stars until recently, which we know is false.
Therefore your speculation is refuted.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#477026

On 13/11/2018 20:59, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 13, 2018 at 4:13:51 AM UTC-7, Keith Stein wrote:
>>
>> What evidence do you have that light is not slowing down
>> by one part in 14,000,000,000 per year, do you think,Mr.Striz?

> I gave it to you.  The fine-structure constant is alpha = e^2/(2*h*eps0*c).


But what you are missing Gary is that the theory i am presenting is

a macroscopic theory.  The only reason that the speed of light in

the intergalactic medium changes is because the macroscopic medium

is changing. I think there is in fact very good evidence that at the

atomic level things do indeed remain constant, and if you look at your

formula for the fine-structure constant it is obvious that alpha

is an atomic constant, and these i grant are indeed constant eh!


keith stein

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#476956

Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
>                 ?Will you understand the music betterIf you study the atoms in the air ?

 I could turn the table:
Would you understand the way how sound is propagated by molecule
 collisions better, if you listen music ?

-- 
Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)

"Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
Miloš Forman


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#476966

Adrian Berry wrote:


       Daily Telegraph,3rd January 1995,

"ASTRONOMERS have found the most distant known galaxy....
"BC 1435 + 63, found by the Keck telescope...........
"is 15 billion light years away..............
"Even more remarkable, this newly found galaxy appears to contain stars 
"that were already old when their light signals started their journey 
"towards us. It also appears to be a "normal galaxy", like the Milky "Way.

  Adrian Berry,Science Correspondent

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web