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


Groups > sci.physics > #680713 > unrolled thread

Dark Energy

Started byjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
First post2018-04-10 19:12 -0700
Last post2018-04-15 19:26 -0700
Articles 6 on this page of 46 — 10 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics


Contents

  Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 19:12 -0700
    Re: Dark Energy pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-04-10 19:18 -0700
      Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 19:27 -0700
        Re: Dark Energy moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-11 04:07 +0000
          Re: Dark Energy "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-11 00:16 -0700
            Re: Dark Energy Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-04-11 22:04 -0500
              Re: Dark Energy mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-04-11 20:31 -0700
            Re: Dark Energy moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-12 03:56 +0000
              Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 09:12 -0700
                Re: Dark Energy moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-12 16:54 +0000
                  Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 12:55 -0700
                    Re: Dark Energy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 23:16 +0000
                      Re: Dark Energy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 23:21 +0000
                    Re: Dark Energy "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-04-14 12:24 -0700
                      Re: Dark Energy "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-04-14 12:41 -0700
                Re: Dark Energy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 23:16 +0000
                  Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 16:22 -0700
                    Re: Dark Energy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 00:42 +0000
                      Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 18:18 -0700
                        Re: Dark Energy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 01:59 +0000
                          Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 19:17 -0700
                            Re: Dark Energy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 03:02 +0000
                              Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 08:05 -0700
                                Re: Dark Energy moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-13 15:32 +0000
                                  Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 08:44 -0700
                                    Re: Dark Energy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-14 02:06 +0000
                                      Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 19:19 -0700
                                        Re: Dark Energy moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-14 02:40 +0000
                                          Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 19:52 -0700
                                    Re: Dark Energy moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-14 02:37 +0000
                                      Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 19:49 -0700
                                        Re: Dark Energy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-14 12:23 +0000
                                          Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-14 08:00 -0700
                                Re: Dark Energy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 15:49 +0000
                        Re: Dark Energy moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-13 06:25 +0000
                    Re: Dark Energy moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-13 06:14 +0000
              Re: Dark Energy "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-12 14:18 -0700
      Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 19:29 -0700
        Re: Dark Energy pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-04-10 20:15 -0700
          Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 20:36 -0700
        Re: Dark Energy moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-11 04:14 +0000
          Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 21:30 -0700
            Re: Dark Energy moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-11 04:46 +0000
              Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 21:50 -0700
    Re: Dark Energy Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-04-15 19:21 +0100
      Re: Dark Energy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-15 19:26 -0700

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]


#680720

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2018-04-11 04:14 +0000
Message-ID<pak23t$rv4$2@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#680716
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>Pnal
>"The Scientific Method does *not* include making things up as you go 
>along, that's bad ju-ju.."
>Actually, Pnal, I'm putting some of the final pieces in the puzzle. 

You are trying to do a puzzle in a totally dark room. You can't see the
forming picture so you try to force different pieces together. Sometimes
they're even upside down when you force them together.

>Using my model.

Except, of course, that you don't even have a model.

> It's fun.

I hear insanity is frequently fun for the insane, yes.
Enjoy yourself...

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


#680721

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2018-04-10 21:30 -0700
Message-ID<5bc162d6-8354-417e-a595-566a76249584@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#680720
MM
"I hear insanity is frequently fun for the insane, yes. 
Enjoy you"
Oh, Michael, you know it!

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


#680724

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2018-04-11 04:46 +0000
Message-ID<pak3vu$pod$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#680721
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>MM
>"I hear insanity is frequently fun for the insane, yes. 
>Enjoy you"
>Oh, Michael, you know it!

I'm not the one obsessed with seeing retarded precessing spinny things 
everywhere.

Do you tell people "I'm not suffering from insanity, I'm enjoying every
single minute!"

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


#680726

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2018-04-10 21:50 -0700
Message-ID<0d56d805-084b-454f-b783-a836de703507@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#680724
MM
What about Fractal split personality?
Much more dangerous 

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


#681144

FromKeith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com>
Date2018-04-15 19:21 +0100
Message-ID<7LMAC.1594029$jx2.573439@fx03.am4>
In reply to#680713
On 11/04/2018 03:12, john wrote:
> ........ We notice the galaxies accelerating apart, and we say "expansion". But we could also say "dilution". The layers below ours could be increasing because of a flow of this smaller, unseen Matter coming into our part of the Universe. Matter/energy too small to see, therefore "dark". Dark energ
We don't REALLY "notice the galaxies accelerating apart" eh!
In fact we don't really notice the universe expanding at all.
What we do notice is a red-shift which increases exponentaly
with distance from Earth, or possibly with time since emission.

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!



On 11/04/2018 03:12, john wrote:
 > ........ We notice the galaxies accelerating apart, and we say 
"expansion". But we could also say "dilution". The layers below ours 
could be increasing because of a flow of this smaller, unseen Matter 
coming into our part of the Universe. Matter/energy too small to see, 
therefore "dark". Dark energy.


So what i was wondering John is:
	          " Do you think these increasing layers below ours
                     could possible be causing the speed of light to
                     decrease by about one part in ten billion per year?"

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


#681183

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2018-04-15 19:26 -0700
Message-ID<2e23a82a-3e7f-4731-8ac4-277fcc7f649f@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#681144
Keith
" " Do you think these increasing layers below ours
                     could possible be causing the speed of light to 
                     decrease by about one part in ten billion per year?" "
I have always thought the redshift is tired Light.
But I agree with Arp that Quasars are intrinsically redshifted. I think this is because they are moving with respect to the galaxies, once released from their host galaxies, and because they have different spin (which is why they are moving). 
In this construction each layer has its own EMR which uses the layer below as its medium. I don't know why it would slow down?!

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web