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

Groups > sci.physics > #547041 > unrolled thread

Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 16:17 -0600
    Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-21 23:45 +0000
      Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 10:40 -0600
        Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-23 19:03 +0000
    Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-01-22 14:29 -0800
      Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 16:32 -0600
        Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-22 22:57 +0000
          Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 15:04 -0800
            Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 12:06 -0600
        Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-01-23 14:13 -0800
      Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-23 10:05 -0800
        Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 05:19 -0800
          Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 06:27 -0800
            Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 07:31 -0800
              Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 07:56 -0800
                Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 08:20 -0800
                  Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 10:43 -0800
                    Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? "Sofa King" <invalid@example.com> - 2016-01-24 16:27 -0800
                  Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 17:40 -0800
                    Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 23:29 -0800
                  Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 01:54 -0500
                Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? "We Todd Did" <invalid@example.com> - 2016-01-24 16:29 -0800
                  Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 17:57 -0800
              Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 10:34 -0800
              Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 01:48 -0500
            Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 10:13 -0600
              Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 10:21 -0800
                Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 23:45 -0800
              Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 12:33 -0800
              Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 23:41 -0800
    Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 10:37 -0800
      Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-01-25 12:40 -0800
        Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:26 -0600
          Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:15 -0800
            Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 23:47 -0800
          Re: Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological constant? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:47 -0800

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#547942

On 01/24/2016 11:20 AM, HVAC wrote:
>> John have you ever studied orbital mechanics?
>
> Obviously John has. How about you HVAC? Where? When?
> --------------
>
> Sorry, that information is classified.
>
>
>
>
>> But here is something for you to think about.... When we launch a
>> deep space probe we always use planetary bodies and their gravity
>> wells to get a 'free' speed boost.
>
> You quoted free as 'free' for there is no Free Launch. Right?! (TM)
> -----------
>
> I put the quotes around 'free' to indicate that all physical laws apply. Energy can never be created nor destroyed in our universe.
>
No.

-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

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

#547851

Jan 24, 2016: Mahipahimal shit post number 50.


-- Mahipal “IPMM IMA LUNATIC... माहिपाल ७६३८: Still rectum lipping for my 
BMW@#... He he.”

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

#547859

On Sunday, January 24, 2016 at 7:29:20 PM UTC-5, We Todd Did wrote:
> Jan 24, 2016: Mahipahimal shit post number 50.
> 
> -- Mahipal “IPMM IMA LUNATIC... माहिपाल ७६३८: Still rectum lipping for my 
> BMW@#... He he.”

I/We know you ache for some kind of respect... good luck with that.

-- Mahipal “IPMM... माहिपाल ७६३८: Read My Lips, No New Nyms!”

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

#547805

On Sunday, January 24, 2016 at 5:31:15 PM UTC+2, HVAC wrote:
> Some idiots thought that if the outer stars 
> of galaxies had mass around the galaxy 
> to pull on them as they were 
> coming around, that could explain why 
> they go faster than they should, and they 
> ran with that idea. 
> Forgetting that as soon as the star goes 
> past, it will be decelerated by exactly that 
> same amount. 
> Idiots 
> ------------
> 
> John have you ever studied orbital mechanics?
> 
> Actually, I withdraw the question. Obviously the answer is no.
> 
> But here is something for you to think about.... When we launch a deep space probe we always use planetary bodies and their gravity wells to get a 'free' speed boost.

==============================
''gravity wells''   
hey ANONYMOUS  imbecile dreck gangster parrot 

the only wells are in you hollow skull 
greetings to P D and Wormley 
 
=================================
> 
> But according to what your said above, this would be impossible since all that speed would be lost
> as the craft rounded the planet.
> 
> If this is beyond you, ask Mr Bodkin or professor Wormley to explain in a more teacher-like manner
=================
YOU MEAN THE OTHER RETARDED  HIRED GANGSTERS 
thieves !!

Y.P
=======================================

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

#547939

On 01/24/2016 10:31 AM, HVAC wrote:
> Some idiots thought that if the outer stars
> of galaxies had mass around the galaxy
> to pull on them as they were
> coming around, that could explain why
> they go faster than they should, and they
> ran with that idea.
> Forgetting that as soon as the star goes
> past, it will be decelerated by exactly that
> same amount.
> Idiots
> ------------
>
> John have you ever studied orbital mechanics?
>
> Actually, I withdraw the question. Obviously the answer is no.
>
> But here is something for you to think about.... When we launch a deep space probe we always use planetary bodies and their gravity wells to get a 'free' speed boost.
>
> But according to what your said above, this would be impossible since all that speed would be lost
> as the craft rounded the planet.
>
> If this is beyond you, ask Mr Bodkin or professor Wormley to explain in a more teacher-like manner

That would be, John, because HVAC is a writer who is able to look up the 
term "orbital mechanics" to spell it correctly, but sure as hell could 
never explain or calculate any.

God help us if HVAC ever learns how to spell "fractal".

-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

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

#548010

On 1/24/2016 8:27 AM, john wrote:
> Dark Matter!
> Haw.
>
> Some idiots thought that if the outer stars
> of galaxies had mass around the galaxy
> to pull on them as they were
> coming around, that could explain why
> they go faster than they should, and they
> ran with that idea.
> Forgetting that as soon as the star goes
> past, it will be decelerated by exactly that
> same amount.
> Idiots
>

How does a star "go past" a dark matter distribution that is spread 
evenly around the circumference of the galaxy?

As for decelerating the same amount, I had assumed you knew about the 
slingshot maneuver, where a deep space probe is sent near a planet like 
Jupiter and Saturn to speed its travel to the outer reaches of the solar 
system. Not temporarily speed it up. Permanently speed it up. According 
to you, this can't happen, but it's been done. Explain.

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

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

#548048

It can work if everything is immersed
in Dark Matter (like in an ocean),
and the DM, itself, is in a whirlpool
configuration.

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

#548224

On Monday, January 25, 2016 at 8:21:48 PM UTC+2, john wrote:
> It can work if everything is immersed
> in Dark Matter (like in an ocean),
> and the DM, itself, is in a whirlpool
> configuration.

=======================
see my new /old (historic thread 
=================================================
SPACE MUST HAVE COMPLETE EMPTY LOCATIONS
OR ELSE
NO MOVEMENT WHATSOEVER COULD NOT BE DONE !!
===========================================

TIA
Y.Porat
=================================== 

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

#548083

gOOd problemma

> Jupiter and Saturn to speed its travel to the outer reaches of the solar 
> system. Not temporarily speed it up. Permanently speed it up. According 
> to you, this can't happen, but it's been done. Explain.
> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#548223

On Monday, January 25, 2016 at 6:13:21 PM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 1/24/2016 8:27 AM, john wrote:
> > Dark Matter!
> > Haw.
> >
> > Some idiots thought that if the outer stars
> > of galaxies had mass around the galaxy
> > to pull on them as they were
> > coming around, that could explain why
> > they go faster than they should, and they
> > ran with that idea.
> > Forgetting that as soon as the star goes
> > past, it will be decelerated by exactly that
> > same amount.
> > Idiots
> >
> 
> How does a star "go past" a dark matter distribution that is spread 
> evenly around the circumference of the galaxy?
===========================
dirty crook pig P D 
why don t you mention the originator of that  UNPRECEDENTED assertion/INSIGHT  
that 
==============================================
SPACE MUST HAVE SOME  COMPLETELY EMPTY LOCATIONS 
-OR ELSE -NO MOTION WHAT SOEVER COULD NOT BE DONE !!
=====================================================
SEE THE NEW AND ALIKE THAT IN PAST 
WAS PUBLISHED HERE 
BY AN ANONYMOUS CALLED
Eng Yehiel .Porat
============================

> 
> As for decelerating the same amount, I had assumed you knew about the 
> slingshot maneuver, where a deep space probe is sent near a planet like 
> Jupiter and Saturn to speed its travel to the outer reaches of the solar 
> system. Not temporarily speed it up. Permanently speed it up. According 
> to you, this can't happen, but it's been done. Explain.
> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#547581

On Thursday, January 21, 2016 at 2:17:04 PM UTC-8, Sam Wormley wrote:
> Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological 
> constant?
> > http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2016/jan/21/are-gravitational-waves-being-redshifted-away-by-the-cosmological-constant
> 
> 
> 
> > The theoretical framework underlying gravitational waves may have to
> > be revamped to account for dark energy and the acceleration of the
> > expansion of the universe. That's the conclusion of researchers in
> > the US, who say that while gravitational waves from nearby sources
> > will be unaffected, next-generation detectors such as the Laser
> > Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) and the Einstein Telescope -
> > which aim to detect gravitational waves from billions of light-years
> > away - may fall foul of the expansion of the universe. While such
> > telescopes will still detect gravitational waves, the signal detected
> > from more distant waves could be fairly different to what is
> > currently expected, say the researchers.
> >
> > Dark energy is best explained by a small but positive value for the
> > cosmological constant, which describes the energy density of space.
> > It was the famous factor that Albert Einstein discarded from his
> > general theory of relativity, when it was found in 1929 that the
> > universe was expanding. For the next 69 years, theorists assumed that
> > the cosmological constant was equal to zero. However, in 1998, it was
> > discovered that the expansion of the universe was accelerating,
> > driven by the mysterious dark energy, and the cosmological constant
> > was back in the running.
> >
> > Because the value of the cosmological constant is very small (10-52
> > m2), it had been assumed that it would have a negligible effect on
> > the mathematical descriptions of gravitational waves. However, Abhay
> > Ashtekar and colleagues at the Institute for Gravitation and the
> > Cosmos at Penn State University in the US believe that it throws a
> > spanner into the works of our current gravitational-wave theories.
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
> to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
> community, and physics-related social issues.

I posted my thoughts that close to the universe's horizen "GRAVITY FLIPS" and thus is expanding space at an accelerating rate. Locally gravity is an inward force.22 billion LYs out it becomes an outward force. TreBert 

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

#548087

On Saturday, January 23, 2016 at 10:37:24 AM UTC-8, reber g=emc^2 wrote:
> On Thursday, January 21, 2016 at 2:17:04 PM UTC-8, Sam Wormley wrote:
> > Are gravitational waves being 'redshifted' away by the cosmological 
> > constant?
> > > http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2016/jan/21/are-gravitational-waves-being-redshifted-away-by-the-cosmological-constant
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > The theoretical framework underlying gravitational waves may have to
> > > be revamped to account for dark energy and the acceleration of the
> > > expansion of the universe. That's the conclusion of researchers in
> > > the US, who say that while gravitational waves from nearby sources
> > > will be unaffected, next-generation detectors such as the Laser
> > > Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) and the Einstein Telescope -
> > > which aim to detect gravitational waves from billions of light-years
> > > away - may fall foul of the expansion of the universe. While such
> > > telescopes will still detect gravitational waves, the signal detected
> > > from more distant waves could be fairly different to what is
> > > currently expected, say the researchers.
> > >
> > > Dark energy is best explained by a small but positive value for the
> > > cosmological constant, which describes the energy density of space.
> > > It was the famous factor that Albert Einstein discarded from his
> > > general theory of relativity, when it was found in 1929 that the
> > > universe was expanding. For the next 69 years, theorists assumed that
> > > the cosmological constant was equal to zero. However, in 1998, it was
> > > discovered that the expansion of the universe was accelerating,
> > > driven by the mysterious dark energy, and the cosmological constant
> > > was back in the running.
> > >
> > > Because the value of the cosmological constant is very small (10-52
> > > m2), it had been assumed that it would have a negligible effect on
> > > the mathematical descriptions of gravitational waves. However, Abhay
> > > Ashtekar and colleagues at the Institute for Gravitation and the
> > > Cosmos at Penn State University in the US believe that it throws a
> > > spanner into the works of our current gravitational-wave theories.
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > 
> > sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
> > to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
> > community, and physics-related social issues.
> 
> I posted my thoughts that close to the universe's horizen "GRAVITY FLIPS" and thus is expanding space at an accelerating rate. Locally gravity is an inward force.22 billion LYs out it becomes an outward force. TreBert


A very good theory!

Double-A

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

#548113

On 1/25/16 2:40 PM, Double-A wrote:
> On Saturday, January 23, 2016 at 10:37:24 AM UTC-8, reber g=emc^2 wrote:
>>
>> I posted my thoughts that close to the universe's horizen "GRAVITY FLIPS" and thus is expanding space at an accelerating rate. Locally gravity is an inward force.22 billion LYs out it becomes an outward force. TreBert
>
>
> A very good theory!
>
> Double-A
>

   How so?


-- 

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]

#548142

Odd thought gravitons "swarm", so there's
always some acting in a direction back
towards the origin.
"Flipping" is JUST as good, Sam

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

#548225

On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 2:15:08 AM UTC+2, john wrote:
> Odd thought gravitons "swarm", so there's
> always some acting in a direction back
> towards the origin.
> "Flipping" is JUST as good, Sam
==============================
see the Y Circlon mechanism 
Y.Porat
=================================

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

#548149

On Monday, January 25, 2016 at 2:26:55 PM UTC-8, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 1/25/16 2:40 PM, Double-A wrote:
> > On Saturday, January 23, 2016 at 10:37:24 AM UTC-8, reber g=emc^2 wrote:
> >>
> >> I posted my thoughts that close to the universe's horizen "GRAVITY FLIPS" and thus is expanding space at an accelerating rate. Locally gravity is an inward force.22 billion LYs out it becomes an outward force. TreBert
> >
> >
> > A very good theory!
> >
> > Double-A
> >
> 
>    How so?
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
> to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
> community, and physics-related social issues.

AA Thank you.Your thumbs up mean a lot to me.I posted gravity flips a few years ago .Its far out but it kind of fits.TreBert  

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web