Freethought & Rationalism Archive

dannyk · 08-05-2002, 06:23 PM

<a href="http://www.icr.org/newsletters/impact/impactaug02.html" target="_blank">here </a>

<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

I am correct in refuting this rubbish simply by pointing out that all observers in any position in the universe would appear to be at the center. This is because all galaxies are moving away from ALL other galaxies ?

How can they publish this rubbish ?

I am not a physics or astronomy graduate , so any feedback would be appreciated .

graeme

<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Orestes · 08-05-2002, 06:43 PM

Not all galaxies are movin away from all other galaxies. Otherwise, there wouldnt be any galaxies colliding

. Check out <a href="http://hubblesite.org" target="_blank">hubblesite.org</a> for some neat pics of this phenomenon.

There is also at least one Galaxy moving towards ours. In about 3 billion years, we'll smash into the Andromeda galaxy

.

addendum: Be sure to check out the other pics at the Hubble Site. Some of them are truly awe inspiring

.

[ August 05, 2002: Message edited by: Orestes ]</p>

Orestes · 08-05-2002, 06:48 PM

[ August 05, 2002: Message edited by: Orestes ]</p>

dannyk · 08-05-2002, 07:03 PM

My post should of read Am I correct not I am correct .

Thanks orestes , I will check them out .

Coragyps · 08-06-2002, 06:16 AM

dannyk - I have seen something on this "quantized red shift" before - maybe ten years ago. IIRC, the data that led to the idea was somewhat patchy. A couple of recent sky surveys should contain enough redshifts to make a rigorous test of the idea, though - I'll search around later today (if work will just stop interfering....)

echidna · 08-06-2002, 05:55 PM

Yes I thought it was rubbish at first until I ran a search on �quantised red shift�.

Very weird, red-shifted galaxy light appears quantised into 2.67 km/s levels throughout the universe. This would seem to fly in the face of our current understanding of the BB model.

I wasn�t aware of this. Does anyone have anything which explains this from a Big Bang context ?

From <a href="http://www.ldolphin.org/setterfield/vacuum.html" target="_blank">http://www.ldolphin.org/setterfield/vacuum.html</a> :

Quote:

This interpretation of the redshift is held by a majority of astronomers. However, in 1976, William Tifft of the Steward Observatory in Tucson, Arizona, published the first of a number of papers analysing redshift measurements. He observed that the redshift measurements did not change smoothly as distance increased, but went in jumps: in other words they were quantised [26]. Between successive jumps, the redshift remained fixed at the value it attained at the last jump. This first study was by no means exhaustive, so Tifft investigated further. As he did so, he discovered that the original observations that suggested a quantised redshift were strongly supported wherever he looked [27 - 34]. In 1981 the extensive Fisher-Tully redshift survey was completed. Because redshift values in this survey were not clustered in the way Tifft had noted earlier, it looked as if redshift quantisation could be ruled out. However, in 1984 Tifft and Cocke pointed out that the motion of the sun and its solar system through space produces a genuine Doppler effect of its own, which adds or subtracts a little to every redshift measurement. When this true Doppler effect was subtracted from all the observed redshifts, it produced strong evidence for the quantisation of redshifts across the entire sky [35, 36].

The initial quantisation value that Tifft discovered was a redshift of 72 kilometres per second in the Coma cluster of galaxies. Subsequently it was discovered that quantisation figures of up to 13 multiples of 72 km/s existed. Later work established a smaller quantisation figure just half of this, namely 36 km/s. This was subsequently supported by Guthrie and Napier who concluded that 37.6 km/s was a more basic figure, with an error of 2 km/s [37-39]. After further observations, Tifft announced in 1991 that these and other redshift quantisations recorded earlier were simply higher multiples of a basic quantisation figure [40]. After statistical treatment, that figure turned out to be 7.997 km/s. However, Tifft noted that this 7.997 km/s was not in itself the most basic result as observations revealed a 7.997/3 km/s, or 2.67 km/s, quantisation, which was even more fundamental [40]. When multiplied by 14, this fundamental value gave a predicted redshift of 37.38 km/s in line with Guthrie and Napier's value. Furthermore, when the basic 2.67 km/s is multiplied by 27, it gives the 72.12 km/s initially picked up in the Coma cluster of galaxies. Accepting this result at face value suggests that the redshift is quantised in fundamental steps of 2.67 km/s across the cosmos.

[ August 06, 2002: Message edited by: echidna ]</p>

Autonemesis · 08-06-2002, 06:16 PM

This is a very interesting puzzle. I have little doubt that believing in God will do nothing to help solve it. Rather, invoking deity is much more likely to impede the investigation than to move it along to a resolution.

Starboy · 08-06-2002, 07:34 PM

This is also a good example of the tentative nature of scientific knowledge. Just one of serveral cracks in the foundations of current understanding.

08-05-2002, 06:23 PM	#1
dannyk Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Perth, Australia Posts: 335	is it this simple ? <a href="http://www.icr.org/newsletters/impact/impactaug02.html" target="_blank">here </a> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> I am correct in refuting this rubbish simply by pointing out that all observers in any position in the universe would appear to be at the center. This is because all galaxies are moving away from ALL other galaxies ? How can they publish this rubbish ? I am not a physics or astronomy graduate , so any feedback would be appreciated . graeme <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-05-2002, 06:43 PM	#2
Orestes Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: California Posts: 349	Not all galaxies are movin away from all other galaxies. Otherwise, there wouldnt be any galaxies colliding . Check out <a href="http://hubblesite.org" target="_blank">hubblesite.org</a> for some neat pics of this phenomenon. There is also at least one Galaxy moving towards ours. In about 3 billion years, we'll smash into the Andromeda galaxy . addendum: Be sure to check out the other pics at the Hubble Site. Some of them are truly awe inspiring . [ August 05, 2002: Message edited by: Orestes ]</p>

08-05-2002, 06:48 PM	#3
Orestes Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: California Posts: 349	[ August 05, 2002: Message edited by: Orestes ]</p>

08-05-2002, 07:03 PM	#4
dannyk Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Perth, Australia Posts: 335	My post should of read Am I correct not I am correct . Thanks orestes , I will check them out .

08-06-2002, 06:16 AM	#5
Coragyps Veteran Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Snyder,Texas,USA Posts: 4,411	dannyk - I have seen something on this "quantized red shift" before - maybe ten years ago. IIRC, the data that led to the idea was somewhat patchy. A couple of recent sky surveys should contain enough redshifts to make a rigorous test of the idea, though - I'll search around later today (if work will just stop interfering....)

08-06-2002, 06:16 PM	#7
Autonemesis Contributor Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: I've left FRDB for good, due to new WI&P policy Posts: 12,048	This is a very interesting puzzle. I have little doubt that believing in God will do nothing to help solve it. Rather, invoking deity is much more likely to impede the investigation than to move it along to a resolution.

08-06-2002, 07:34 PM	#8
Starboy Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Tallahassee, FL Reality Adventurer Posts: 5,276	This is also a good example of the tentative nature of scientific knowledge. Just one of serveral cracks in the foundations of current understanding.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.