Reply With Quote
You obviously didn't understand my intent about the quasar.
You obviously didn't understand my intent about the quasar.
The presence of all color (ie light) is white.
The absence of all color (ie light) is black.
Hence, space is black with pinholes in it (ie light from stars, which gets reflected off other objects like comets, asteroids, planets, moons, etc).
Last edited by DarkReign; 05-31-2011 at 09:48 AM.
I guess since you didn't explain it in meaningful terms, you don't know any better than I do.
Well, in my opinion, anyone debating this topic at a level to understand the dynamics, would know what I meant.
Quasars have an enormous gravity. A black hole in their center explains how they do what they do. The energy emitted where it is emitted could easily have a red shift simply due to relativistic effects.
Because apples are not oranges? If a train is moving away from you and blowing its whistle, you get an audible Doppler affect. However, while the distance between you is increasing that does not mean that everything between the two of you is expanding.
Space occupied by the universe does not equal the universe.
Yes, and sound travels through a medium. If light doesn't travel through a medium, then there is no change if the universe is expanding.
What you are saying though is that the train (distant galaxy) is moving away from us rather than the universe expanding.
Consider the train, but it is fixed and the space is increasing. It's sound would remain the same tone if the air around it is relative to it.
Cognitive dissonance, thy name is WC.
Now:
Earlier:
So, when I don't understand you, it's my fault. But when you don't understand others, it's their fault.
Except that in this case, (if I understand it right, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), but the train is both moving away from us AND expanding the universe. Picture a train running into a giant piece of pliable material, that moves along with the train.
I think you need to rework this sentence so it makes sense.
Why start now?
Please stop cherry picking quotes and put all the context together. Fact is, nobody was able to answer some key concerns I had related to the expanding universe theory, but rather, simply put blind trust in the experts. The explanations that were given are not very good.
If the universe is nothing, how does it expand?
How is that different than actual movement?
If the universe had no medium, then how does the expansion change a wavelength? It shouldn't if there is no medium to stretch it.
I can accept the expanding universe theory, but when people say that space is nothing, it doesn't pan out.
The sound waves change lengths because the train is moving through a medium. If there is no medium to change the sound waves, they would remain the same length is they could still propagate.
Maybe that's because you're not asking the right questions.
Also, "blind trust" in the experts? First off, it's not quite "blind trust" when it's peer-reviewed. Second, unless you're actually performing these experiments yourself, how are you able to lay claim to some sort of firsthand knowledge? You're getting your info from outside sources as well.
Everyone else seemed fine with the explanations. You were the only one who didn't.
If I demand reasons on why science can't turn sand into ice cream, and the board explains it but I'm not satisfied with their answers, does that mean that the board is wrong?
Has anyone here said the universe was nothing? I don't think so, so I don't know why you're asking that question.
Again, no one has brought up that strawman.
But the universe has mediums. Even vacuums have some small amt of resistance IIRC. The only "true" vacuums are in lablike settings. (Again, IIRC.)
Who said space is nothing? I must've missed that claim.
Uh, welcome to science, Wild Cobra. We use the best model we have (i.e., what can discern with our senses, intelligence, and tools) to form an explanation for an event or series of events.
Who the believes the universe is nothing? Jeebus ing Keerist.
Because our beaches would melt. Duh!If I demand reasons on why science can't turn sand into ice cream, and the board explains it but I'm not satisfied with their answers, does that mean that the board is wrong?
Wild Cobra is the lord of the straw
God damn why can't this fool understand that Photons are different? SMH.
This is why mother ers like you shouldn't try to critique scientific theory without a proper education. You don't have to get that education at a university but these questions just show you don't have the understanding necessary to pass a basic physics course.
Photons can travel through nothing like other particles and have wave properties as well. Trying to say the red shift needs a medium with light as it does with sound ignores the above. Welcome to the you learn in freshman physics or chemistry.
This is irritating. And you want to lecture others while you spout this idiocy?
Good lord. Sound requires particles to travel through, as it's an oscillation of pressure. That's why it can't travel through a vacuum. There are no particles in a vacuum.
Photons, on the other hand, are a massless particle themselves. The only connection they have with waves is that some of the formulas you need to calculate their quantum properties are wave-like. That's where it ends.
I could create a vacuum in a lab and shine light through it. I could easily give the light a red shift. Of course, thats all impossible according to WC.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
