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

Groups > sci.physics > #594568

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

Show all headers | View raw

On 8/24/2016 3:31 PM, benj wrote:
> On 8/24/2016 8:26 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> 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.
>
> Obviously you haven't noticed that mathematics (laws of nature) are
> analogies to reality.

Really? Who says?

> So is math more real than reality or not? I know
> what you believe.
>

No you don't. But you're prepared to lie about it.


-- 
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