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


Groups > sci.physics > #727599 > unrolled thread

Quasar ejected from galaxy

Started byjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
First post2019-02-16 05:17 -0800
Last post2019-02-21 12:30 +0000
Articles 20 on this page of 59 — 7 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics


Contents

  Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-16 05:17 -0800
    Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-16 19:32 -0800
      Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-17 06:53 -0800
        Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2019-02-17 14:50 -0800
          Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-17 15:54 -0800
            Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2019-02-18 00:31 +0000
            Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy pnalsing@gmail.com - 2019-02-17 17:08 -0800
              Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-18 14:45 -0800
                Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy pnalsing@gmail.com - 2019-02-18 17:59 -0800
                  Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-18 19:19 -0800
                    Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy pnalsing@gmail.com - 2019-02-18 19:32 -0800
                    Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-19 13:52 +0000
                Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2019-02-19 04:03 +0000
                Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-19 15:03 +0000
            Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-18 18:36 -0600
              Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-18 16:50 -0800
                Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2019-02-19 04:08 +0000
                Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-19 13:52 +0000
                  Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-02-19 10:06 -0500
                    Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-20 06:03 -0800
                      Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-20 15:11 +0000
                        Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-20 10:00 -0800
                          Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-20 19:06 +0000
                            Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-20 13:06 -0800
                              Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-20 23:16 +0000
                                Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-20 16:14 -0800
                                  Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 01:58 +0000
                                    Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-20 19:10 -0800
                                      Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy pnalsing@gmail.com - 2019-02-20 21:06 -0800
                                        Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 01:14 -0800
                                          Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 12:30 +0000
                                            Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 05:59 -0800
                                              Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 06:31 -0800
                                              Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 14:51 +0000
                                                Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 08:34 -0800
                                                  Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 17:15 +0000
                                                    Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 17:19 -0500
                                                      Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 14:44 -0800
                                                        Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 23:08 +0000
                                                          Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 15:51 -0800
                                                            Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-22 01:41 +0000
                                                              Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 17:47 -0800
                                                                Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-22 12:42 +0000
                                                              Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 21:19 -0500
                                                                Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-22 12:42 +0000
                                                          Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 21:13 -0500
                                                            Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-22 12:42 +0000
                                                      Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 23:08 +0000
                                                        Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 21:10 -0500
                                                Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 09:14 -0800
                                                  Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 17:21 +0000
                                                    Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 09:34 -0800
                                                      Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 18:40 +0000
                                                        Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 12:07 -0800
                                                          Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 20:30 +0000
                                                            Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 12:53 -0800
                                                              Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 21:26 +0000
                                                                Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 14:02 -0800
                                      Re: Quasar ejected from galaxy Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 12:30 +0000

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →


#727599 — Quasar ejected from galaxy

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2019-02-16 05:17 -0800
SubjectQuasar ejected from galaxy
Message-ID<9631e63f-c067-4f62-9ead-fbd9279974ca@googlegroups.com>
http://astronomy.com/news/2017/03/astronomers-spot-a-runaway-quasar?utm_source=asyfb&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=asyfb

As I have said before, Quasars are to galaxies as photons are to excited atoms.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#727706

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2019-02-16 19:32 -0800
Message-ID<54dd64e0-6e94-42f7-b32d-abe8352a3453@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#727599
Halton Arp was right

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


#727732

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2019-02-17 06:53 -0800
Message-ID<043a0f09-f444-4035-b31c-9468c6906362@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#727706
I told you guys that telescopes would lead to the truth.
Halton Arp observed a pair of Quasars that were in line with a central galaxy and equally-far from it. Using their redshifts and their angle from the galaxy, he determined that they were moving in opposite directions at 1/9c.

This is the ratio I use to determine electron radiation and proton spin, which will therefore be 9c.

Sue me

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


#727770

FromDouble-A <double-a3@hush.com>
Date2019-02-17 14:50 -0800
Message-ID<d6558c1e-7ad4-4b45-82b5-37966068e4b5@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#727732
On Sunday, February 17, 2019 at 6:53:18 AM UTC-8, john wrote:
> I told you guys that telescopes would lead to the truth.
> Halton Arp observed a pair of Quasars that were in line with a central galaxy and equally-far from it. Using their redshifts and their angle from the galaxy, he determined that they were moving in opposite directions at 1/9c.
> 
> This is the ratio I use to determine electron radiation and proton spin, which will therefore be 9c.
> 
> Sue me


Arp may well have been right, but your trying to equate the macro to the micro is not likely.

Double-A

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


#727780

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2019-02-17 15:54 -0800
Message-ID<ed557484-8468-4765-a213-62c9858495f2@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#727770
AA
“Arp may well have been right, but your trying to equate the macro to the micro is not likely. 
”
It gives a better understanding of photon production in atoms.
The photon accretes at the nucleus and pulls the electron arms in tighter until they suddenly achieve their next excited stage, which requires much less energy, and the arms suddenly relax. This sudden change kicks the photon out.

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


#727785

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2019-02-18 00:31 +0000
Message-ID<q4cudo$23n$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#727780
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>AA
>"Arp may well have been right, but your trying to equate the macro =
>to the micro is not likely.
>"
>It gives a better understanding of photon production in atoms.

How so? We're discussing this quasar which was ejected from a galaxy, which has nothing to do 
with photon production in atoms. Other than the fact that quasars produce lots and lots of 
photons.

>The photon accretes at the nucleus and pulls the electron arms in tighter
>until they suddenly achieve their next excited stage, which requires much
>less energy, and the arms suddenly relax. This sudden change kicks the photon
> out.

Word salad. No, k0okbabble. Pure k0okbabble.

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


#727794

Frompnalsing@gmail.com
Date2019-02-17 17:08 -0800
Message-ID<49cc4f97-8abb-416d-ba2f-2fbf376677bc@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#727780
On Sunday, February 17, 2019 at 3:54:52 PM UTC-8, john wrote:
> AA
> “Arp may well have been right, but your trying to equate the macro to the micro is not likely. 
> ”
> It gives a better understanding of photon production in atoms.
> The photon accretes at the nucleus and pulls the electron arms in tighter until they suddenly achieve their next excited stage, which requires much less energy, and the arms suddenly relax. This sudden change kicks the photon out.

Utter crap that John has pulled directly from his butt, without an iota of evidence.

Typical from John.

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


#727974

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2019-02-18 14:45 -0800
Message-ID<c2e73bb5-d939-4690-8137-e2b294045873@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#727794
pnal
“Utter crap that John has pulled directly from his butt, without an iota of evidence. ”
The Galaxy Model for the Atom, which I have been presenting here since 1995, equates galaxies with atoms and quasars with photons.
Unfortunately, that seems to be too difficult for some people to grasp.

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


#727997

Frompnalsing@gmail.com
Date2019-02-18 17:59 -0800
Message-ID<1fb6cf1b-4993-410e-adbc-440ef70b19df@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#727974
On Monday, February 18, 2019 at 2:45:26 PM UTC-8, john wrote:
> pnal
> “Utter crap that John has pulled directly from his butt, without an iota of evidence. ”
> The Galaxy Model for the Atom, which I have been presenting here since 1995, equates galaxies with atoms and quasars with photons.

No, John, it certainly does not, and you have not provided any evidence that what you preach is correct, not even close.

> Unfortunately, that seems to be too difficult for some people to grasp.

Unfortunately, it is YOU who does not grasp even freshman physics... and that would be high school freshmen...

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


#728005

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2019-02-18 19:19 -0800
Message-ID<98f532c7-2f35-4cd3-9c43-c3310b1ba803@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#727997
Penile
“Unfortunately, it is YOU who does not grasp even freshman physics... and that would be high school freshmen... ”
Like ‘point particles’? I’ll bet you’ll defend that concept.
Go for it, penile. Go hard

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


#728006

Frompnalsing@gmail.com
Date2019-02-18 19:32 -0800
Message-ID<15af789f-6cee-473f-ad95-f119a3bbbad0@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#728005
On Monday, February 18, 2019 at 7:19:20 PM UTC-8, john wrote:
> Penile
> “Unfortunately, it is YOU who does not grasp even freshman physics... and that would be high school freshmen... ”

> Like ‘point particles’? I’ll bet you’ll defend that concept.
> Go for it, penile. Go hard

Don't change the subject, John, we are not talking about point particles, we are talking about your bizarre "Galaxy Model for the Atom", for which you can't offer any evidence whatsoever, freshly spewed from your overactive imagination. You can shuck and jive all you want, and you can go for it, John, and you can go hard, but it is a fruitless endeavor on your part, but you still don't know what you don't know, and you just look more and more foolish as time goes by.

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


#728064

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2019-02-19 13:52 +0000
Message-ID<q4h1ml$1o6f$2@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#728005
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote:
> Penile
> “Unfortunately, it is YOU who does not grasp even freshman physics... and
> that would be high school freshmen... ”
> Like ‘point particles’? I’ll bet you’ll defend that concept.
> Go for it, penile. Go hard
> 

You can’t seem to figure out the difference between “doesn’t actually
happen in nature” (back to back photon emission from atoms) and “doesn’t
fit with Sefton’s view if what’s possible and not possible in nature”
(pointlike particles). The former is experimental evidence. The latter is
what you call using Logic. 

Now, do you think scientists refer at all to what John Sefton thinks is
possible or not possible in nature? And if not, why should they? Answer
that question with all seriousness. 

-- 
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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


#728013

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2019-02-19 04:03 +0000
Message-ID<q4fv7d$ejs$3@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#727974
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>pnal
>"Utter crap that John has pulled directly from his butt, without an iota
>of evidence. "

You insult crap pulled directly from butts, pnal.

>The Galaxy Model for the Atom, which I have been presenting here since 1995,
>equates galaxies with atoms and quasars with photons.

No predictions, no theory, no calculations, no science, no math, nothing.
You don't even have a model.

>Unfortunately, that seems to be too difficult for some people to grasp.

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


#728070

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2019-02-19 15:03 +0000
Message-ID<q4h5s4$deg$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#727974
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote:
> pnal
> “Utter crap that John has pulled directly from his butt, without an iota of evidence. ”
> The Galaxy Model for the Atom, which I have been presenting here since
> 1995, equates galaxies with atoms and quasars with photons.

And unfortunately you do not seem to know what “quasar” means or what their
properties are. 

> Unfortunately, that seems to be too difficult for some people to grasp.
> 



-- 
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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


#727988

FromSerg Io <invvalid@invalid.com>
Date2019-02-18 18:36 -0600
Message-ID<q4fj26$1dcm$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#727780
On 2/17/2019 5:54 PM, john wrote:
> AA
> “Arp may well have been right, but your trying to equate the macro to the micro is not likely. 
> ”
> It gives a better understanding of photon production in atoms.
> The photon accretes at the nucleus and pulls the electron arms in tighter until they suddenly achieve their next excited stage, which requires much less energy, and the arms suddenly relax. This sudden change kicks the photon out.
> 

like very very tiny rubber bands...

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


#727990

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2019-02-18 16:50 -0800
Message-ID<905fa052-f45e-4792-9733-60d733147a52@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#727988
Sergio
“like very very tiny rubber bands... 
 ”
What happens is, photons accrete in pairs. 
They accrete with each of their Propagation vectors pointing towards the ‘BH’.
When they get perturbed, they both flip and suddenly propagate away in opposite directions along the magnetic  field perpendicular to the disc.

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


#728014

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2019-02-19 04:08 +0000
Message-ID<q4fvg8$ejs$4@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#727990
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>Sergio
>What happens is, photons accrete in pairs.
>They accrete with each of their Propagation vectors pointing towards the 'BH'.
>When they get perturbed, they both flip and suddenly propagate away in 
>opposite directions along the magnetic  field perpendicular to the disc.

The problem (just one of many) is that photons from excited atoms are not
emitted in pairs, but singly.

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


#728063

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2019-02-19 13:52 +0000
Message-ID<q4h1mi$1o6f$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#727990
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sergio
> “like very very tiny rubber bands... 
>  ”
> What happens is, photons accrete in pairs. 
> They accrete with each of their Propagation vectors pointing towards the ‘BH’.
> When they get perturbed, they both flip and suddenly propagate away in
> opposite directions along the magnetic  field perpendicular to the disc.
> 

Doesn’t happen in atoms — back to back photons. Sorry. 

Idiot. 

-- 
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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


#728071

Frombenj <benj.fake@gmail.com>
Date2019-02-19 10:06 -0500
Message-ID<q4h60m$ddv$2@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#728063
On 2/19/2019 8:52 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sergio
>> “like very very tiny rubber bands...
>>   ”
>> What happens is, photons accrete in pairs.
>> They accrete with each of their Propagation vectors pointing towards the ‘BH’.
>> When they get perturbed, they both flip and suddenly propagate away in
>> opposite directions along the magnetic  field perpendicular to the disc.
>>
> 
> Doesn’t happen in atoms — back to back photons. Sorry.
> 
> Idiot.
> 
Bert Says that Photons always go in pairs.1 It's one of his best 
theories. It completely explains the double slit experiments. Oh Ya! Two 
Nobels is a given!

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


#728231

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2019-02-20 06:03 -0800
Message-ID<e46ea681-7ec3-440a-8c6e-0eb24dab5fc0@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#728071
benj
“Bert Says that Photons always go in pairs.1 It's one of his best 
theories. It completely explains the double slit experiments. Oh Ya! Two 
Nobels is a given! ”
Haha.
These 2 go opposite directions.

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


Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web