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

Groups > sci.physics > #559092 > unrolled thread

Hubble breaks cosmic distance record

Started bySam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
First post2016-03-03 20:20 -0600
Last post2016-03-04 17:01 -0600
Articles 20 on this page of 62 — 12 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 20:20 -0600
    Hubble breaks cosmic distance record jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-03-04 02:00 -0800
    Hubble breaks cosmic distance record HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 03:32 -0800
      Hubble breaks cosmic distance record jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-03-04 06:06 -0800
      Hubble breaks cosmic distance record HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 06:27 -0800
        Hubble breaks cosmic distance record john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 07:21 -0800
          Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 09:31 -0600
            Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 07:35 -0800
              Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 07:50 -0800
                Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 07:58 -0800
                  Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 08:20 -0800
                  Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 08:45 -0800
                    Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 13:42 -0500
                  Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 10:58 -0600
                    Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 09:06 -0800
                      Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 09:12 -0800
                        Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 09:49 -0800
                          Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 09:59 -0800
                            Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 10:32 -0800
                              Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 14:46 -0500
                            Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 13:32 -0500
                        Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 13:27 -0500
                      Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 11:22 -0600
                        Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 09:44 -0800
                          Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 13:29 -0500
                        Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 09:49 -0800
                          Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 09:51 -0800
                            Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 13:29 -0500
                          Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 12:00 -0600
                            Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 10:06 -0800
                              Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 12:15 -0600
                              Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 11:04 -0800
                                Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 14:24 -0500
                              Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 13:47 -0600
                            Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 14:36 -0500
                          Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-04 18:16 +0000
                Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 13:48 -0500
                  Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 11:32 -0800
                    Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-03-05 01:09 -0500
                      Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 22:28 -0800
                      Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 22:31 -0800
                        Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-03-05 02:23 -0500
                          Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-05 03:54 -0800
                            Re: Christianity's "God" is Ben Jacoby's pot. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 01:34 -0500
              Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 11:50 -0600
                Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 10:20 -0800
              Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-03-04 13:27 -0800
                Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 13:55 -0800
                  Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 16:02 -0600
                    Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 14:17 -0800
                      Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 17:19 -0600
                    Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-03-04 14:44 -0800
                    Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-03-05 01:31 -0500
            Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-03-04 11:59 -0800
              Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-03-04 12:25 -0800
          Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 09:41 -0600
            Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-05 12:07 +0100
          Hubble breaks cosmic distance record HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 07:45 -0800
      Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-03-04 10:50 -0800
        Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 14:42 -0500
    Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 14:38 -0800
      Re: Hubble breaks cosmic distance record Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 17:01 -0600

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

#559511

FromHVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-04 22:31 -0800
Message-ID<389316b7-5de6-472b-810e-439067368c14@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#559506
BJ quacked
I'm paranoid because you are stupid? 
--------------

No. You're paranoid because you're a kook and a religious freak

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

#559522

Frombenj <nobody@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-05 02:23 -0500
Message-ID<56da8957$0$29158$c3e8da3$38634283@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#559511
On 03/05/2016 01:31 AM, HVAC wrote:
> BJ quacked
> I'm paranoid because you are stupid?
> --------------
>
> No. You're paranoid because you're a kook and a religious freak
>
That still doesn't make sense. You are getting as wild as Treeb. You'll 
be running for mayor next! Your fantasies convince nobody here of 
anything but your mental problems.

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

#559529

FromHVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-05 03:54 -0800
Message-ID<ad69e6c4-2277-4aee-a682-4a2ebbfaefae@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#559522
BJ quacked
> 
> No. You're paranoid because you're a kook and a religious freak 
> 
That still doesn't make sense. 
---------------

There, there, lil BJ. Calm down.

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

#559922 — Re: Christianity's "God" is Ben Jacoby's pot.

Frombenj <nobody@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-07 01:34 -0500
SubjectRe: Christianity's "God" is Ben Jacoby's pot.
Message-ID<56dd2104$0$61136$b1db1813$145976f0@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#559529
On 03/06/2016 06:43 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
>
>
>     Christianity's "God" is Ben Jacoby's pot.
>
>     Problem is, it makes him too paranoid.

You been visiting HVAC at the assisted living village again?

Christ on a pogo stick, you sound just like him. I use my real name and 
ascii. HVAC is so paranoid he tries to hide his identity and posts from 
a <spit> cellphone. You two make a great pair of losers (excuse me, I 
meant Loosers).

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

#559237

FromSam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-04 11:50 -0600
Message-ID<rrednQTY2fJLV0TLnZ2dnUU7-LudnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#559196
On 3/4/16 9:35 AM, john wrote:
> Big Bang is fantasy.
>

   Fantasy for you, John, but not the astrophysics community. The
   evidence is compelling.

   WMAP: Foundations of the Big Bang theory
     http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni.html

   WMAP: Tests of Big Bang Cosmology
     http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest.html

-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

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

#559251

From"reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-04 10:20 -0800
Message-ID<693b95ea-f19b-4716-a035-341d507c5094@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#559237
Sam Radio telly can see farther than Hubble.When we have them 100s of miles apart the universe will be 22 billion LYs in diameter,and growing at a speed twice as fast as light. To say it only took 444,000,000 years to create a large galaxy with a black hole of 50,000,000 star densities is fudging.That is a given. Imperial thinkers now know this to be true. TreBert

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

#559324

FromDouble-A <double-a3@hush.com>
Date2016-03-04 13:27 -0800
Message-ID<5e691696-fd13-45e0-874a-f1e075471832@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#559196
On Friday, March 4, 2016 at 7:35:24 AM UTC-8, john wrote:
> Big Bang is fantasy.


Yes, and as Hubble soon begins seeing galaxies that are older than the currently accepted age of the universe, the Big Bangers will have to start revising their theory!  It's not as though it hasn't been stretched before.  

Double-A

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

#559345

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-04 13:55 -0800
Message-ID<c7fcbe1b-287d-4f65-aa90-74f56ae9f6b0@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#559324
"On Friday, March 4, 2016 at 7:35:24 AM UTC-8, john wrote: 
> Big Bang is fantasy. 


Yes, and as Hubble soon begins seeing galaxies that are older than the currently accepted age of the universe, the Big Bangers will have to start revising their theory!  It's not as though it hasn't been stretched before.   

Double-A "

'Extra reddening by intergalactic gas'
says they are already doing that.
They have to fudge. DM, DE, hmmm.
Wait for it: Dark.....something, let's see-
Dark Time!
That's it, you can never get to T= 0.
You enter 'Dark Time' as you approach,
which has been stretched by the BB!!
Hows that?

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

#559351

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-04 16:02 -0600
Message-ID<nbd0lm$uts$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#559345
On 3/4/2016 3:55 PM, john wrote:
> "On Friday, March 4, 2016 at 7:35:24 AM UTC-8, john wrote:
>> Big Bang is fantasy.
>
>
> Yes, and as Hubble soon begins seeing galaxies that are older
> than the currently accepted age of the universe, the Big Bangers
> will have to start revising their theory!  It's not as though it
> hasn't been stretched before.

Did you say "as Hubble soon begins" or did you mean "if Hubble soon begins"?

I think it's remarkable you know the future of what will be observed 
experimentally. Don't you?

>
> Double-A "
>
> 'Extra reddening by intergalactic gas'
> says they are already doing that.
> They have to fudge. DM, DE, hmmm.
> Wait for it: Dark.....something, let's see-
> Dark Time!
> That's it, you can never get to T= 0.
> You enter 'Dark Time' as you approach,
> which has been stretched by the BB!!
> Hows that?
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#559367

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-04 14:17 -0800
Message-ID<1f0c1900-c7e1-410e-a32d-6ec3e76fbe64@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#559351
Odd 
A little wager?

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

#559412

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-04 17:19 -0600
Message-ID<nbd55g$168a$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#559367
On 3/4/2016 4:17 PM, john wrote:
> Odd
> A little wager?
>

So are you saying you bet it will come out that way, or you know it will 
come out that way? Your statement is about the future.

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#559390

FromDouble-A <double-a3@hush.com>
Date2016-03-04 14:44 -0800
Message-ID<060f1c32-d6a8-40ac-b6be-bd9beb1b4807@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#559351
On Friday, March 4, 2016 at 2:02:38 PM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 3/4/2016 3:55 PM, john wrote:
> > "On Friday, March 4, 2016 at 7:35:24 AM UTC-8, john wrote:
> >> Big Bang is fantasy.
> >
> >
> > Yes, and as Hubble soon begins seeing galaxies that are older
> > than the currently accepted age of the universe, the Big Bangers
> > will have to start revising their theory!  It's not as though it
> > hasn't been stretched before.
> 
> Did you say "as Hubble soon begins" or did you mean "if Hubble soon begins"?
> 
> I think it's remarkable you know the future of what will be observed 
> experimentally. Don't you?


I have an intuitive mind.

Double-A

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

#559512

Frombenj <nobody@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-05 01:31 -0500
Message-ID<56da7d54$0$29116$c3e8da3$38634283@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#559351
On 03/04/2016 05:02 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 3/4/2016 3:55 PM, john wrote:
>> "On Friday, March 4, 2016 at 7:35:24 AM UTC-8, john wrote:
>>> Big Bang is fantasy.
>>
>>
>> Yes, and as Hubble soon begins seeing galaxies that are older
>> than the currently accepted age of the universe, the Big Bangers
>> will have to start revising their theory!  It's not as though it
>> hasn't been stretched before.
>
> Did you say "as Hubble soon begins" or did you mean "if Hubble soon
> begins"?
>
> I think it's remarkable you know the future of what will be observed
> experimentally. Don't you?

Come on Boinker. When a person knows the party line as well as you and 
HVAC do, there is no superpowers trick to knowing how everything is 
going to turn out before it happens. It will turn out just the way those 
in power said it was going to!

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

#559305

Fromjay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com>
Date2016-03-04 11:59 -0800
Message-ID<2c46214f-c522-4abc-a058-d1561d10ba2f@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#559193
Sam wrote...
>Perhaps, but there comes a time (about the time of this galaxy) when the first stars and galaxies formed. This find is very close to that time. 

Yes it should be make or break time soon. But the insinuation
in another of your posts on this  about a week ago said...
That the redshift put the galaxy at about 400,000 years after BB.
*But that intergalactic gases had reddened the observed spectra*  ?

What isnt clear from this part of the release is...have they decreased
the measured redshift of the object by assuming extra reddening from
intergalactic dust in the 'early universe'?

If so then the objects redshift has been adjusted to fit the BBT.

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

#559314

Fromjay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com>
Date2016-03-04 12:25 -0800
Message-ID<93d0ac46-a157-482f-8e62-ac431d221c8b@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#559305
http://phys.org/news/2015-12-hubble-spitzer-telescopes-magnified-image.html

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

#559198

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-04 09:41 -0600
Message-ID<nbcaaq$1kkr$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#559188
On 3/4/2016 9:21 AM, john wrote:
> That record will continue to be broken.
> Webb will f-en SHATTER it.
> There is no "edge" to the Universe.
> It is infinite in extent.
>

How do you know that it extends infinitely?

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#559527

FromThomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de>
Date2016-03-05 12:07 +0100
Message-ID<3829245.WxjR96r5Fi@PointedEars.de>
In reply to#559198
Odd Bodkin wrote:

> On 3/4/2016 9:21 AM, john wrote:
>> There is no "edge" to the Universe.
>> It is infinite in extent.
> 
> How do you know that it extends infinitely?

,-<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe#Size_and_regions>
| 
| […]
| 
| Observations, including the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE), Wilkinson 
| Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP), and Planck maps of the CMB, suggest 
| that the Universe is infinite in extent with a finite age, as described by 
| the Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker (FLRW) models.[44][45][46][47]
| […]
| 
| [44] “Will the Universe expand forever?”, WMAP website at NASA.
|      <http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_shape.html>
| [45] Luminet, Jean-Pierre; Weeks, Jeffrey R.; Riazuelo, Alain;
|      Lehoucq, Roland; Uzan, Jean-Philippe (2003-10-09).
|      "Dodecahedral space topology as an explanation for weak wide-angle
|      temperature correlations in the cosmic microwave background".
|      Nature 425 (6958): 593–5. arXiv:astro-ph/0310253.
|      Bibcode:2003Natur.425..593L. doi:10.1038/nature01944. PMID 14534579.
| [46] Roukema, Boudewijn; Zbigniew Buliński; Agnieszka Szaniewska; Nicolas 
|      E. Gaudin (2008). "A test of the Poincare dodecahedral space topology 
|      hypothesis with the WMAP CMB data". Astronomy and Astrophysics 482 
|      (3): 747–753. arXiv:0801.0006. Bibcode:2008A&A...482..747L. 
|      doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20078777.
| [47] Aurich, Ralf; Lustig, S.; Steiner, F.; Then, H. (2004). "Hyperbolic 
|      Universes with a Horned Topology and the CMB Anisotropy". Classical
|      and Quantum Gravity 21 (21): 4901–4926. arXiv:astro-ph/0403597. 
|      Bibcode:2004CQGra..21.4901A. doi:10.1088/0264-9381/21/21/010.


PointedEars
-- 
Q: Who's on the case when the electricity goes out?  
A: Sherlock Ohms.

(from: WolframAlpha)

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

#559199

FromHVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-04 07:45 -0800
Message-ID<62ca6fc6-0b77-4c12-921e-39068f961ffd@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#559188
10:21 AMjohn
That record will continue to be broken. 
Webb will f-en SHATTER it. 
There is no "edge" to the Universe. 
It is infinite in extent. 
---------------

I have extremely high hopes for the JW space telescope. However it is an incremental increase over the  Hubble.

You've got to realize that astronomy hadn't been given such an exponential increase in resolution since Galileo went to 10X over the power of the unaided human eye.

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

#559273

From"hanson" <hanson@quick.net>
Date2016-03-04 10:50 -0800
Message-ID<nbclf0$uvh$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#559163
Harlow Campbell "HVAC" <mr.hvac@gmail.com> wrote:
> I can't think of any other single machine that has produced 
> the bang for the buck than Hubble has.
>
hanson wrote:
Hmmm... So, Harlow, your girlfriend Felony's machinations
gave you less bang for the buck??.. That is a shame! LOL

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

#559295

Frombenj <nobody@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-04 14:42 -0500
Message-ID<56d9e539$0$1530$c3e8da3$f017e9df@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#559273
On 03/04/2016 01:50 PM, hanson wrote:
>
> Harlow Campbell "HVAC" <mr.hvac@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I can't think of any other single machine that has produced the bang
>> for the buck than Hubble has.
>>
> hanson wrote:
> Hmmm... So, Harlow, your girlfriend Felony's machinations
> gave you less bang for the buck??.. That is a shame! LOL
>
There is no "felony", Hanson.

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

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web