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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #478898

Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom

Show all headers | View raw

Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 03/12/2018 15:32, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 30/11/2018 14:55, Gary Harnagel wrote:
>>>> On Friday, November 30, 2018 at 7:17:36 AM UTC-7, Keith Stein wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> The frequency generated by any given atomic transition, even on
>>>>> distant galaxies many billions of years ago, is exactly the same
>>>>> as that on Earth today.
>>>> 
>>>> Frequency is not an invariant quantity.  It is frame dependent, as anyone
>>>> who has actually performed such experiments knows.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> You confuse the frequency *generated* with the frequency *measured*
>>> Gary.  Of course the frequency measured from distant galaxies with
>>> large red shifts are lower than those from equivalent sources
>>> on Earth, but you don't really believe that the frequencies generated
>>> by any given atomic transition is really lower on distant galaxies, do
>>> you Gary?
>> 
>> No of course not. But also recognize that the change in frequency can be
>> observed across a tabletop, and is known as line broadening in a heated
>> gas. So for sure THAT phenomenon has nothing to do with a change in light
>> speed over billions of years. 
> 
> No one is denying the existence of the Doppler Shift as a real phenomena 
> Odd, and yes line broadening in a heated gas is certainly due to Doppler 
> shifts, not light slowing down eh!

Which then begs the question, at what range AND WHY does the explanation
for frequency shift change from what is seen on the desktop to what you
propose? 

> 
>> So now the question is, why do you think
>> galactic frequency shift is different?
> 
> Good question, Odd...........
> 
> 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"
> ********************************************************************
> 
>>> 
>>> BUT here it is again:
>>> 
>>> On 17/11/2018 13:52, Keith Stein wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The frequency generated by any given atomic transition, even on
>>>> distant galaxies many billions of years ago, is exactly the same
>>>> as that on Earth today. The wavelength is proportional the the
>>>> velocity of light AT THE TIME IT WAS EMITTED, and This increased
>>>> wavelength is faithfully transmitted through space, where it is
>>>> measured in our observatories.
>>> 
>>>> So "How is it that the wavelength of light from distant galaxies is
>>>> INCREASED ? " you might ask, and i would reply that it is NOT that
>>>> light is stretched as it travels through intergalactic space, but
>>>> rather that it was emitted with an increased wavelength, when the
>>>> velocity of light was higher than it is now.
>>> 
>>>> 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"
> 
>>> keith stein
> 
> 
> 



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

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

Thread

Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-29 02:28 -0800
  Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom john.erik.persson@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 03:55 -0800
    Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom john.erik.persson@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 04:00 -0800
      Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom John-Erik Persson <john.erik.persson@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 04:03 -0800
        Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom John-Erik Persson <john.erik.persson@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 04:06 -0800
    Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-29 18:50 +0100
  Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 15:44 +0000
    Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 21:43 +0000
      Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-29 14:17 -0800
        Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-30 07:03 +0000
          Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-30 04:48 -0800
            Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-30 14:17 +0000
              Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-30 06:55 -0800
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-12-03 09:15 +0000
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-12-03 06:15 -0800
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-12-03 15:02 +0000
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-12-03 08:43 -0800
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-12-03 18:55 +0000
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-12-03 11:37 -0800
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-12-03 15:32 +0000
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-12-03 16:36 +0000
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-12-03 18:12 +0000
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-12-03 19:13 +0000
                Utter imbecile Keith Stein at work "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-12-03 11:32 -0800
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-12-03 11:42 -0800
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-12-03 22:04 +0000
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-12-04 10:38 -0600
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-12-05 05:35 +0000
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-12-05 12:59 -0600
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-12-05 22:33 +0000
                Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-12-05 17:53 -0600
  Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 10:02 -0800
    Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Lee Primer <itoo@wodinwnc.cg> - 2018-11-29 18:23 +0000
  Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-30 02:18 -0800
    Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-30 04:50 -0800
      Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Lee Primer <itoo@wodinwnc.cg> - 2018-11-30 15:23 +0000
    Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-30 10:43 -0800
      Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Mole Santiago <msb@awwnuvs.an> - 2018-12-01 20:20 +0000
  Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-12-03 11:14 -0800
    Re: Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Mole Santiago <msb@awwnuvs.an> - 2018-12-03 23:53 +0000

csiph-web