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

Groups > rec.arts.sf.written > #489044

Re: The Steady State Universe

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Yo!, "Keith Stein" <keithstein111@gmail.com>, Kudos!:
 I appreciated and agree with all of your incisive & poignant
comments.
>
If it tickles your fancy, belabor the mentioned link to the
concatenated ***** 1234-cosmic envelope**** expression.
(note the sequence of its exponents)
>
***  c^(1) = (GM/R)^(1/2) = (GMH)^(1/3) = (GM*b_r)^(1/4)
>
wherein the term **b_r** may confirm, bolster and give
support to your conclusion that "c may slow down", since
that b_r appears to be part of a multiple of Sommerfeld's
Finestructure constant (a), and been in use,  in many of
the venerable deSitter models, since ca. 1926.
>
To clarify my stance on (E) Experimental physics vs. (T)
Theoretical physics: Both types, E & T,  have arisen since
physics, in the broadest sense, is a social enterprise, incl.
a scathing view in <http://tinyurl.com/Best-posting-of-the-year>
>
My organization has devoted its efforts to the E-type which
has provided many hundreds of folks with a financially great
and intellectually satisfying living. I will leave the current thread
now, as I regard the issues discussed here to be a thing of the
past. But by all means, Keith, do carry on with your T-mission.
>
Your question as to what ROTFLMAO means is hilarious as
it made me "Roll On The Floor, Laughing My Ass Off".

PS: Poster "HGW" appears to be Aussie "Henry G Wilson"??
>
Take care, Keith,
-- hanson
>
"Keith Stein" <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 22/03/2018 20:25, hanson wrote:
>> "Keith Stein" <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 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!
>>>
>>> Conclusions:
>>> 1. The speed of light in intergalactic-space is slowing down.
>>> 2. There was no "Big Bang"
>>> 3. There was no "Inflation"
>>> 4. The galaxies are not accelerating away from us.
>>> 5. There is no "Dark Energy"
>>>
>>>
>> hanson wrote:
>> Very nice and cool post, Keith.,
>
> Thank you very much Mr.Hanson, i really do appreciate that.
> I thought it was pretty cool myself, to be honest, and have been surprised
> by the general lack of enthusiasm with which it has been received by
> sci.physics.relativity readers.
> Not quite all the feedback has been negative though, HGW, who i guess you
> know, did say my conclusions where correct, and we have progressed on to a
> civilized discussion of the merits of 'photons' versus 'e-m waves'
>
>> Kudos!
>
> Thank you again Mr.Hanson
> (when praise is in such short supply one does tent to milk it eh!)
>
>
>> All of your conclusions, except [ > 1.] are in vogue today.
>
> I am rather confused by what you say here, Mr.Hanson.
> If folk are not going for "1. The speed of light... is slowing down",
> and yet are rejecting the Big Bang, then what are they attributing the
> Hubble red-shifts to?
>
>> Also consider that there are very many ways to skin the cat.
>> IOW, it's story telling about nature...
>
> I suppose so, but it's surely an improvement on "The Universe Rests on the
> Back of a Turtle" eh!
>
>> It's all just theorizing.
>
> You are right, but what else is theoretical physics meant to be doing,
> Mr.Hanson.
>
>> Just like you using your MO above, all of this was done already
>> a full century ago, by folks like Hartree-Fock, etc.
>> <vergil.chemistry.gatech.edu/courses/chem6485/pdf/Hartree-Fock>
>> and <http://www.shodor.org/chemviz/overview/hfa.html> , etc
>>
>> and even earlier by D'alembert (for black holes), see:
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D'Alembert's_principle>
>>>
>> and by by others who were gesticulating in/with Gedanken-XPs,
>> using Nature's -Scaling-Laws- & it's obvious -Self-Similarity-
>> whose addressed domain or realm does always span many
>> dozens of orders of magnitudes, up or down... as exampled
>>>
>> by the great old timers of Physics such as Max Planck who
>> published stuff like the above in 1899...
>
> As you say, Mr.Hanson. Physics has a long and proud history eh!
>
>> BUT then, unfortunately,
>> in 1905 Einstein entered and his "Juden physics" got into
>> the Lime-light with its immense Zionist propaganda machine......
>> ... which was the beginning of the end of the golden age of
>> physics, which is the science of quantitatively MEASURING
>> items, events & processes, & it began to decay & to deteriorate
>> into the current free-for-all socio-physic-philosophy-palaver
>> that we see to day on social media, TV shows, and here
>
> As you say, Mr.Hanson, (but i wouldn't dare to say myself :) )
>
>> on Usenet by cranks and crackpots, who proudly state
>> that they do physics-without-math, & insist that that their
>> own Weltbild is the absolute truth which they try to cram
>> and stuff down everybody else's throat. When "dissidents"
>> laugh at the posted excrements of these Usenet cranks, the
>> cranks get vicious and criminally homicidal. The cranks
>> threaten to shit into the mouths of the dissidents and want
>> them to be murdered so that the cranks can urinate onto
>> their graves.
>
> Yes indeed Mr.Hanson, the level of discussion on the net can be a little
> coarse eh!
>
>> So much for the physics-of-the-cranks, which in a way
>> is reflected in the artistry of, e.g., the melancholy of:
>> <https://www.bing.com/search?q=dire+straits+lyrics+brothers+in+arms&FORM=AWRE>:
>
> not all your links seem to be working for me Mr.Hanson, but that's just as
> well, or it would take forever to get finished here eh!
>
>> "There's so many different worlds -- So many different suns
>> And we have just one world -- But we live in different ones..."
>
> Yes indeed Mr.Hanson, and no pain feels half as bad as our own eh!
>
>> Warnings about this sorry trend of real physics came early
>> on, out of the ivy-league of academia:
>>>
>> by John Beckman, an astronomy prof & Einstein disciple:
>> "The theory of relativity lives on. Is it a true picture of reality?
>> That is more a matter of faith than of proof."
>>>
>> or by Edward Teller, the inventor of the H-Bomb, who said:
>> "Einstein didn't know what he was talking about,
>> or that Einstein was lying, or both".
>>>
>> or Prof. Carver A. Mead of Caltech (a student of Feynman),
>> who wrote: "It is my firm belief that the 20th century will be
>> characterized in history as the dark ages of physics."
>>>
>> or F.A Hayek, Nobel laureate, who said: "In the future,
>> Humanity will see in our Epoch an Era of superstition, all
>> associated with the names of Marx, Freud and Einstein"
>
> If i were to pick a hero from history it would be Giordano Bruno,
> who said "In the future all men will believe as I believe", and do you
> know Mr.Hanson, i rather think that about light slowing down too. I hope
> they don't burn me, like they did my hero G.B. eh!
>
>> ______ The Dossier _________
>>
>> So, here is a set of links which belabor such issues:
>> <http://tinyurl.com/Hubble-Derivtn-Age-of-Universe>
>> <http://tinyurl.com/Electron-core-size-and-charge>
>> <http://www-hep.uta.edu/hep/draper/Draper.html>
>> <http://tinyurl.com/electron-is-NOT-ZERO-sized>
>> <http://tinyurl.com/Pauls-composite-volume-Belief>
>> <http://tinyurl.com/Drapers-zero-volume-Belief>
>> <http://tinyurl.com/Electron-core-size-and-charge>
>> <http://tinyurl.com/Einstein-denied-his-SR-and-GR>
>> <http://tinyurl.com/Tears-for-Einsteins-Misery>
>> <http://tinyurl.com/The-HW-Rosenthal-interview-XT>
>> <http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/0f1a7daa49aa8cf3>
>> <http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/70e4aba63b7351ba>
>> <http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/2753001d76037d04>
>>>
>> _____ Examples of quantifications: _______
>>
>> The Proton- and Electron-mass can be expressed in terms
>> of their measured properties & fundamental Physics constants:
>>>
>> m_e = [c^2/G] * [sqrt(hG/(2pi*c^3)] * [1/(f_L*F)] * a*pi*sqrt(3)/3
>>>
>> or the proton with mass m_p as:
>>>
>> m_p = [c^2/2G]*[sqrt(hG/(2pi*c^3)]*[I_H/(f_L*F)]*(3*pi^2)*sqrt(2a)
>>
>> Both of these particle masses have characteristics of nucleon-sized
>> Black holes. See detailed explanation for the above in here:
>>>
>> <http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.design/msg/53371ffd43f>
>> <http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/4ab31e372f1dfee7>
>> <http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/c78fb8dd36d24968>
>
> Thank you for all your links Mr.Hanson, and i will study them in due
> course, but must get on eh!
>
>> ...of course you can make the case/conjecture that an uncharged
>> mini-black-hole of 1 Planck-mass having the radius of 1 Planck-length,
>> is manifest/has half-life of only one 1 Planck-time-unit after which
>> it disintegrates into exactly 1 mole of particles that consist of stable,
>> charged particles with the average mass of the electron. .. in which
>>>
>> their fundamental electrical charge, will endow them with
>> "immortality", of a duration that vastly exceeds the life-time
>> span of our universe.
>> What "charge" is, or where it comes from, is unknown.
>> All we know is what the said charge does....
>
> I can see you have given quite some thought to this Mr.Hanson, which makes
> your kind reception of my little piece all the more gratifying.
>
>>>
>>>
>> _____________ Up shot: ________________
>>
>> "The only thing that new changes is Change itself"
>>
>>>
>> IOW no matter how "logical", rigorous one "calculates
>> solutions, they are always limited to comparatives
>> relative to each other, at best, but mostly just only
>> consist of belletristic philosophical palcer.
>>>
>> The Dirty little secret, that nobody likes to admit to,
>> is that no, none, not a single "absolute" is known to
>> exist. What is advertised as "absolute/s" is/are
>> edicts that are arbitrated and issued by human
>> cabals or committee and declared to be "absolutes"
>> so that searches and workers can comparatively
>> well communicate rationally with each other.
>
> Socrates put it like this:
> "I KNOW THAT I KNOW NOTHING,
> and in this i know more than any other man"
>
> Whereas i put it like this:
> "I KNOW THAT I DON'T KNOW ANY BETTER THAN YOU,
> and in this i know more than Socrates eh""
>
>> Cranks OTOH take refuge and invoke their "god"
>> of faith as the "real" manifest "absolute", instead of
>> just humbly admitting to saying: "I don't know"
>>>
>> Interestingly, faith, which is an emotional notion,
>> is a million times stronger than any obviously rational
>> logic. The force of Faith and religious beliefs are so
>> deep that societies and potentates have elected
>> to protect and enshrine Faith in societies' laws
>> and its constitutions, even in today's modern society.
>>>
>>>
>> hmmm...<snicker>...<chortle>...ahahahAHAHA...ROTFLMAO
>
>
> I really don't know Mr.Hanson,
> what does ROTFLMAO mean ?
>
> keith stein
> P.S. Remember this?
> The Big Bang Myth ... Keith Stein - Mountain Man's News Archive
> www.mountainman.com.au/news97_9.html
> Date: 22 Feb 1997 06:57:03 +0000. From: Keith Stein Organization: My
> Organisation Newsgroups: sci.physics, sci.astro, sci.physics.electromag.
> Subject: THE BIG BANG MYTH ...

Back to rec.arts.sf.written | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

The Steady State Universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-14 11:40 -0700
  Re: The Steady State Universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-14 18:24 -0700
    Re: The Steady State Universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-14 21:50 -0700
      Re: The Steady State Universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-15 23:33 -0700
        Re: The Steady State Universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-16 09:21 -0700
      Re: The Steady State Universe Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-17 14:55 +0000
        Re: The Steady State Universe Ninapenda Jibini <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-03-17 18:17 +0000
        Re: The Steady State Universe Peter Trei <petertrei@gmail.com> - 2018-03-19 10:26 -0700
      Re: The Steady State Universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-18 13:09 -0700
        Re: The Steady State Universe Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2018-03-19 15:03 +1100
          Re: The Steady State Universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-18 22:46 -0700
            Re: The Steady State Universe Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2018-03-19 19:01 +1100
              Re: The Steady State Universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-19 09:17 -0700
                Re: The Steady State Universe Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2018-03-20 19:15 +1100
                Re: The Steady State Universe Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-20 13:33 +0100
                Re: The Steady State Universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-20 09:54 -0700
                Re: The Steady State Universe Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2018-03-21 17:31 +1100
                Re: The Steady State Universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-21 14:09 -0700
                Re: The Steady State Universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-22 23:25 -0700
          Re: The Steady State Universe J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-03-19 07:53 -0400
            Re: The Steady State Universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-19 09:18 -0700
            Re: The Steady State Universe Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-20 00:44 +0100
              Re: The Steady State Universe Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2018-03-20 00:03 -0600
                Re: The Steady State Universe Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie@sometimes.sessile.org> - 2018-03-23 12:10 +0000
  Re: The Steady State Universe The  Zygon <stafford.martin@gmail.com> - 2018-03-14 19:37 -0700
    Re: The Steady State Universe Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-03-14 21:59 -0700
    Re: The Steady State Universe "Michael F. Stemper" <michael.stemper@gmail.com> - 2018-03-15 12:01 -0500
      Re: The Steady State Universe The  Zygon <stafford.martin@gmail.com> - 2018-03-15 20:39 -0700
  Re: The Steady State Universe Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-15 13:46 -0700
  Re: The Steady State Universe Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-19 09:08 +0000
    Re: The Steady State Universe "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-03-22 13:25 -0700
      Re: The Steady State Universe Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-25 08:43 +0100
        Re: The Steady State Universe "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-03-25 13:26 -0700
        Re: The Steady State Universe "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-03-25 13:26 -0700
          Re: The Steady State Universe Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-30 18:10 +0100
            Re: The Steady State Universe "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-03-31 19:20 -0700
  Re: The Steady State Universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-19 22:52 -0700

csiph-web