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

Groups > sci.physics > #594474

Re: why no astronomer and physicist talks about blueshift amount Re: TALK

Show all headers | View raw

On 8/23/2016 5:05 PM, benj wrote:
> On 8/23/2016 2:34 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> On 8/23/2016 1:03 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>>> Physics hidden embarrassement of blueshift. Astronomers for the most
>>> part believe in
>>> Doppler shift of light and they report some stars and galaxies with a
>>> blueshift.
>>>
>>> But they never make any sense on how a Cosmic expansion could ever
>>> have a blueshift,
>>> since every point on a balloon surface as example would be redshift,
>>> none blue.
>>
>> But the balloon is only an oversimplified analogy, not to be taken as
>> what the model is.
>
> So if the analogy is stupid then why use it and pretend it makes sense?
> Truth is all you establishment propagandists (what shall I call you?)
> all use the "balloon" model as "proof" that the Big Bang isn't bullshit,
> and then when it's pointed out that balloon model REQUIRES additional
> dimensions to work, you turn around and flatly deny the model is true. I
> do believe this is termed insanity.

Ben, Ben, Ben. You obviously don't have any idea what analogies are for. 
People like you think analogies are for saying "It's exactly like this." 
They're not. People like you think that analogies are for making a 
convincing argument in the truth of the proposition. They're not.  They 
are simply there to try to HELP explain by association with something 
related. Not the same, but related.

>
>>> So when one tries to find out the amount of blueshift versus redshift,
>>> there is
>>> complete silence and absence of data.
>>
>> Simply not true. There is plenty of data on which galaxies are
>> blueshifted and how many of them there are compared with those that are
>> redshifted. But, as you've encountered many times, you don't seem to be
>> able to find it.
>
> Ah, so this is like Wormley's warmball theories where "established
> science" is always determined by a democratic vote.

No, it's about Archimedes claiming that since he can't find any data, 
then the data must be hidden or nonexistent, when the fact is that the 
data are readily found and he just can't do it.

>
>>> It must be one of the most silly and embarrassing spots in astronomy
>>> and physics today.
>>
>> Not at all.
>
> Bwahahahaha! Look at the Chutzpah, archie-poo! Boinker will look you in
> the eye with any huge embarrassing lie and they without missing a beat
> look you in the eye and swear nobody is embarrassed by it.

What lie?

>
> Boinker is really a piece of work.
>
> Sorry boinker, I didn't notice you were responding to Acrchie-poo until
> it was too late. It's OK. You've got a tough hide.
>


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

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

TALK: Maxwell Equations from Pair Production&Annihilation; but now, from transverse vs. longitudinal waves?? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 02:06 -0700
  electron=longitudinal wave carrying a transverse wave inside itself; Unifying Atomic physics with Maxwell Equations Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 10:27 -0700
    electron=longitudinal wave carrying a transverse wave inside itself; Unifying Atomic physics with Maxwell Equations Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 12:11 -0700
      photon function is to carry magnetism of electromagnetism and neutrino carries the electro part Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 15:30 -0700
        photon function is to carry magnetism of electromagnetism and neutrino carries the electro part Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 16:42 -0700
          Neutrino as messenger carriers is responsible for Superconductivity Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 23:31 -0700
          how Maxwell New Equations explains the Physics Particle Zoo Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 14:16 -0700
            how Maxwell New Equations explains the Physics Particle Zoo Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 16:29 -0700
            explaining why electric current moves on the surface of conductor Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 20:12 -0700
              Law of Magnetism is div*B = r_B not div*B = 0 Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 21:48 -0700
                magnetism is photon or neutrino; electricity is photon inside a neutrino Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 23:08 -0700
                magnetism is photon or neutrino; electricity is photon inside a neutrino Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 23:58 -0700
                straightline motion in physics-- does it exist? Re: magnetism is photon or neutrino; electricity is photon inside a neutrino Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 14:11 -0700
                Rule of 200 for rest-mass in physics Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 15:05 -0700
                Rule of 200 for rest-mass in physics Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 18:15 -0700
                new Experiment-- shoot a stream of gamma photons into stream of neutrinos  Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 21:59 -0700
                Negative Ion Anomaly of hydrogen in photosphere Re: new Experiment-- shoot a stream of gamma photons into neutrino beam Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 00:57 -0700
                when neutrino tubes are open and when closed torus tube Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 15:44 -0700
                settling what happens in Pair Production Re: when neutrino tubes are open and when closed torus tube Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 20:16 -0700
                Astronomy evidence that a electron is a photon inside a neutrino torus tube-- Hydrogen ions on Sun; excess positrons Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-22 00:26 -0700
                neutrinos and photons is the same as talking about electricity and magnetism Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-22 14:30 -0700
                excess of electrons & positrons in supernova, due to neutrino tubes with photon inside Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-23 01:53 -0700
                why no astronomer and physicist talks about blueshift amount Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-23 11:03 -0700
                Re: why no astronomer and physicist talks about blueshift amount Re: TALK Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-23 13:34 -0500
                many in sci.physics that do not belong Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-23 12:48 -0700
                Re: why no astronomer and physicist talks about blueshift amount Re: TALK benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-23 18:05 -0400
                Re: why no astronomer and physicist talks about blueshift amount Re: TALK Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-24 07:26 -0500
                Re: why no astronomer and physicist talks about blueshift amount Re: TALK benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-24 16:31 -0400
                Re: why no astronomer and physicist talks about blueshift amount Re: TALK Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-24 15:59 -0500
                Re: why no astronomer and physicist talks about blueshift amount Re: TALK Michael J. Strickland <michael06582@comcast.net> - 2016-08-24 03:44 -0400
                Re: why no astronomer and physicist talks about blueshift amount Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-24 01:49 -0700
                Re: Re: why no astronomer and physicist talks about blueshift amount Re: TALK Michael J. Strickland <michael06582@comcast.net> - 2016-08-24 08:06 -0400
                a poster in sci.physics that never knew Hubble rejected Doppler redshift Re: TALK Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-24 13:29 -0700
                Re: a poster in sci.physics that never knew Hubble rejected Doppler redshift Re: TALK Michael J. Strickland <michael06582@comcast.net> - 2016-08-25 02:10 -0400
                Re: a poster in sci.physics that never knew Hubble rejected Doppler redshift Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-08-26 06:16 +0200
                Re: why no astronomer and physicist talks about blueshift amount Re: TALK Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-24 15:39 -0500
                Re: Re: why no astronomer and physicist talks about blueshift amount Re: TALK Michael J. Strickland <michael06582@comcast.net> - 2016-08-25 01:22 -0400
                Re: why no astronomer and physicist talks about blueshift amount Re: TALK Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-08-25 06:26 +0200

csiph-web