| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Ralph Hertle" |
| Date: |
17 Aug 2004 08:24:57 PM |
| Object: |
The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for. |
To AA (alt.astronomy) and HPO (humanities.philosophy.objectivism):
Someone asked me for sources that would document the discovery of the
reduction of the energy level of light photons as they pass through the
space of the universe.
Lord Rayleigh, John William Strutt, is of particular interest as an
early discoverer of the phenomenon. He found that the energy level of
photons is reduced in collisions with hydrogen molecules.
See additional general information regarding Lord Rayleigh, at:
http://www.almaz.com/nobel/physics/1904a.html .
Several other scientists have done prior contributory work by
discovering certain principles of physics.
Scientist, Dr. Paul Marmet, also made published predictions of a
non-Doppler explanation for the Apparent Red Shift of the spectral lines
of light as early as 1988 and 1989. Dr. Marmet's writings appear to be
worth some serious thought.
A number of his papers and books on that and related topics are
available at, http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/hydrogen/ .
Apparently, E.A. Valentijn, of Infrared Space Observatory fame, has
discovered H2 in space in huge amounts. See http://isowww.estec.esa.nl/
.. It was operational from 1995 to 1998. The space vehicle's data prove
that the H2 is there.
The problems of the missing mass of the universe and of the physical
material causes of Apparent Red Shift of light spectra appears to have
been solved.
The Big Bang theory based on the Doppler - Hubble hypothesis is done for.
I'm not a physicist, and I am merely an observer and fan of science and
astronomy who is interested in the development of an Objectivist [e.g.,
a factual and rational] philosophy of science.
I see that these events have resulted in a number of discoveries of huge
importance to science. Scientists everywhere will be evaluating the new
discoveries in a serious light.
Congratulations, gentlemen, on your marvelous new discoveries.
Ralph Hertle
.
|
|
| User: "Old Man" |
|
| Title: Re: The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for. |
17 Aug 2004 09:39:55 PM |
|
|
"Ralph Hertle" <ralph.hertle@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:4122AFE8.6070604@verizon.net...
To AA (alt.astronomy) and HPO (humanities.philosophy.objectivism):
Hertle's subject line, "The Doppler - Hubble hypothesis is
done for" reveals his ignorance of cosmological red shift.
It isn't a Doppler shift. The Doppler shift predicts an
incorrect expansion rate. Space is expanding whilst light is
in transit. Source and receiver are co-moving inertial
reference frames.
Hertle is either intellectually dishonest or stupid, probably
both, and he's not clever. Hertle's mistake was to submit
his garbage to sci.physics.
[Old Man]
Someone asked me for sources that would document the discovery of the
reduction of the energy level of light photons as they pass through the
space of the universe.
Lord Rayleigh, John William Strutt, is of particular interest as an
early discoverer of the phenomenon. He found that the energy level of
photons is reduced in collisions with hydrogen molecules.
See additional general information regarding Lord Rayleigh, at:
http://www.almaz.com/nobel/physics/1904a.html .
Several other scientists have done prior contributory work by
discovering certain principles of physics.
Scientist, Dr. Paul Marmet, also made published predictions of a
non-Doppler explanation for the Apparent Red Shift of the spectral lines
of light as early as 1988 and 1989. Dr. Marmet's writings appear to be
worth some serious thought.
A number of his papers and books on that and related topics are
available at, http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/hydrogen/ .
Apparently, E.A. Valentijn, of Infrared Space Observatory fame, has
discovered H2 in space in huge amounts. See http://isowww.estec.esa.nl/
. It was operational from 1995 to 1998. The space vehicle's data prove
that the H2 is there.
The problems of the missing mass of the universe and of the physical
material causes of Apparent Red Shift of light spectra appears to have
been solved.
The Big Bang theory based on the Doppler - Hubble hypothesis is done for.
I'm not a physicist, and I am merely an observer and fan of science and
astronomy who is interested in the development of an Objectivist [e.g.,
a factual and rational] philosophy of science.
I see that these events have resulted in a number of discoveries of huge
importance to science. Scientists everywhere will be evaluating the new
discoveries in a serious light.
Congratulations, gentlemen, on your marvelous new discoveries.
Ralph Hertle
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for. |
17 Aug 2004 10:02:10 PM |
|
|
Old Man wrote:
Hertle is either intellectually dishonest or stupid, probably
both, and he's not clever. Hertle's mistake was to submit
his garbage to sci.physics.
Hertle is (or was) an artist. He is an ignoramus in matters of physics
and mathematics. He likes Aristotle's philosophy which gives you some
idea of Hertle's thinking. I don't think he is either dishonest or
stupid, but he is profoundly ignorant of the subject matter. Anyone who
can take Aristotle seriously in matters of physics is about 2200 years
behind the curve. Several medieval scholars such as Phillip the
Grammarian (circa 650 c.e.) identified several "howlers" in Aristotle's
theory of motion. The medieval scholars created the concept of impetus
which is midway between inertia and momentum as we understand it. This
represented a significan movement away from Aristotle's nonses and
balderdash concerning motion of bodies. So Hertle has not yet caught up
with the seventh century of the common era. For that reason, cut him
some slack. In about 200 years he might catch up to the present.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franco" |
|
| Title: Re: The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for. |
18 Aug 2004 01:42:06 PM |
|
|
Robert J. Kolker ha scritto nel messaggio ...
CUT
.. So Hertle has not yet caught up
with the seventh century of the common era. For that reason, cut him
some slack. In about 200 years he might catch up to the present.
Not to mention the lack of mathematics, the use of mathematics language to
explain phenomena!!
Bye Bob:)
Franco
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Australopithecus Afarensis" |
|
| Title: Re: The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for. |
17 Aug 2004 11:30:46 PM |
|
|
The Doppler shift still predicts a correct expansion rate for low redshift
galaxies.
The scenario of expansion of space is the same as the scenario with
shrinking objects located in this space. So, the incredible shrinking Old
Man should increase his wisdom due to extra energy generated.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Old Man" <nomail@nomail.net>
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 07:39 PM
Subject: Re: The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for.
"Ralph Hertle" <ralph.hertle@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:4122AFE8.6070604@verizon.net...
To AA (alt.astronomy) and HPO (humanities.philosophy.objectivism):
Hertle's subject line, "The Doppler - Hubble hypothesis is
done for" reveals his ignorance of cosmological red shift.
It isn't a Doppler shift. The Doppler shift predicts an
incorrect expansion rate. Space is expanding whilst light is
in transit. Source and receiver are co-moving inertial
reference frames.
Hertle is either intellectually dishonest or stupid, probably
both, and he's not clever. Hertle's mistake was to submit
his garbage to sci.physics.
[Old Man]
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dirk Van de moortel" |
|
| Title: Re: The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for. |
18 Aug 2004 01:33:56 PM |
|
|
"Ralph Hertle" <ralph.hertle@verizon.net> wrote in message news:4122AFE8.6070604@verizon.net...
To AA (alt.astronomy) and HPO (humanities.philosophy.objectivism):
Someone asked me for sources that would document the discovery of the
reduction of the energy level of light photons as they pass through the
space of the universe.
Lord Rayleigh, John William Strutt, is of particular interest as an
early discoverer of the phenomenon. He found that the energy level of
photons is reduced in collisions with hydrogen molecules.
See additional general information regarding Lord Rayleigh, at:
http://www.almaz.com/nobel/physics/1904a.html .
Several other scientists have done prior contributory work by
discovering certain principles of physics.
Scientist, Dr. Paul Marmet, also made published predictions of a
non-Doppler explanation for the Apparent Red Shift of the spectral lines
of light as early as 1988 and 1989. Dr. Marmet's writings appear to be
worth some serious thought.
Marmet?
The one with the transformation that is only valid for v=0?
http://groups.google.com/groups?&threadm=%Ttc9.98417$8o4.13693@afrodite.telenet-ops.be
Grrreat! Nice!
Dirk Vdm
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bjoern Feuerbacher" |
|
| Title: Re: The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for. |
18 Aug 2004 02:51:29 AM |
|
|
Ralph Hertle wrote:
What's the "Doppler-Hubble Big Bang theory"?
To AA (alt.astronomy) and HPO (humanities.philosophy.objectivism):
Someone asked me for sources that would document the discovery of the
reduction of the energy level of light photons as they pass through the
space of the universe.
Oh my goodness. Yet another tired light freak.
Lord Rayleigh, John William Strutt, is of particular interest as an
early discoverer of the phenomenon. He found that the energy level of
photons is reduced in collisions with hydrogen molecules.
That would be news to me. AFAIK, in Rayleigh scattering, the energy
of the photons is conserved.
Also note that Rayleigh scattering causes a change in the *direction*
of the photons. So if the red shift is caused by Rayleigh scattering:
why do all the photons emitted by a star or galaxy still come from the
same direction?
Additionally, an energy loss caused by scattering would depend on the
frequency of the light (compare the formula for Compton scattering).
But the red shift which is observed is the *same* for all frequencies.
See additional general information regarding Lord Rayleigh, at:
http://www.almaz.com/nobel/physics/1904a.html .
Nice. Now, where is the evidence for your assertion above that
collisions with hydrogen molecules reduce the energy of photons?
Several other scientists have done prior contributory work by
discovering certain principles of physics.
Scientist, Dr. Paul Marmet, also made published predictions of a
non-Doppler explanation for the Apparent Red Shift of the spectral lines
of light as early as 1988 and 1989.
Hint: the BBT does not say that the red shift is due to the Doppler
effect.
Dr. Marmet's writings appear to be worth some serious thought.
A number of his papers and books on that and related topics are
available at, http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/hydrogen/ .
I notice that Dr. Marmet repeats several times the *false* claim
that the red shift is attributed to the Doppler effect in cosmology.
Also, he ignores several other lines of evidence for an expanding
universe (the CMBR, its changing temperature, the time dilation
in supernova light curves, the surface brightness of galaxies,
the fact that galaxies far away look quite different from "modern"
ones and contain only young stars, the fact that no stars older than
about 13.5 billion years have ever been observed etc.), and (at least on
this page) does not bother to explain *how* the universe could be
stable, in light of the gravitational attraction between the galaxies.
###
Apparently, E.A. Valentijn, of Infrared Space Observatory fame, has
discovered H2 in space in huge amounts. See http://isowww.estec.esa.nl/
. It was operational from 1995 to 1998. The space vehicle's data prove
that the H2 is there.
Nice. Does he provide a calculation anywhere which shows that that
H_2 is enough to explain e.g. the rotation curves of galaxies?
The problems of the missing mass of the universe and of the physical
material causes of Apparent Red Shift of light spectra appears to have
been solved.
If one ignores a lot of other pieces of evidence...
The Big Bang theory based on the Doppler - Hubble hypothesis is done for.
Hint: the BBT was never based on the Doppler effect.
I'm not a physicist, and I am merely an observer and fan of science and
astronomy who is interested in the development of an Objectivist [e.g.,
a factual and rational] philosophy of science.
Then you are not in the position to judge the validitiy of the BBT,
plain and simple.
[snip]
Bye,
Bjoern
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wilson" |
|
| Title: Re: The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for. |
20 Aug 2004 01:38:16 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 09:51:29 +0200, Bjoern Feuerbacher
<feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
Ralph Hertle wrote:
What's the "Doppler-Hubble Big Bang theory"?
To AA (alt.astronomy) and HPO (humanities.philosophy.objectivism):
Someone asked me for sources that would document the discovery of the
reduction of the energy level of light photons as they pass through the
space of the universe.
Oh my goodness. Yet another tired light freak.
Lord Rayleigh, John William Strutt, is of particular interest as an
early discoverer of the phenomenon. He found that the energy level of
photons is reduced in collisions with hydrogen molecules.
That would be news to me. AFAIK, in Rayleigh scattering, the energy
of the photons is conserved.
Also note that Rayleigh scattering causes a change in the *direction*
of the photons. So if the red shift is caused by Rayleigh scattering:
why do all the photons emitted by a star or galaxy still come from the
same direction?
Additionally, an energy loss caused by scattering would depend on the
frequency of the light (compare the formula for Compton scattering).
But the red shift which is observed is the *same* for all frequencies.
See additional general information regarding Lord Rayleigh, at:
http://www.almaz.com/nobel/physics/1904a.html .
Nice. Now, where is the evidence for your assertion above that
collisions with hydrogen molecules reduce the energy of photons?
Several other scientists have done prior contributory work by
discovering certain principles of physics.
Scientist, Dr. Paul Marmet, also made published predictions of a
non-Doppler explanation for the Apparent Red Shift of the spectral lines
of light as early as 1988 and 1989.
Hint: the BBT does not say that the red shift is due to the Doppler
effect.
Dr. Marmet's writings appear to be worth some serious thought.
A number of his papers and books on that and related topics are
available at, http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/hydrogen/ .
I notice that Dr. Marmet repeats several times the *false* claim
that the red shift is attributed to the Doppler effect in cosmology.
Also, he ignores several other lines of evidence for an expanding
universe (the CMBR, its changing temperature, the time dilation
in supernova light curves, the surface brightness of galaxies,
the fact that galaxies far away look quite different from "modern"
ones and contain only young stars, the fact that no stars older than
about 13.5 billion years have ever been observed etc.), and (at least on
this page) does not bother to explain *how* the universe could be
stable, in light of the gravitational attraction between the galaxies.
You're a bit out of gate on that one.
It was convincingly knocked on the head quite recently.
###
Apparently, E.A. Valentijn, of Infrared Space Observatory fame, has
discovered H2 in space in huge amounts. See http://isowww.estec.esa.nl/
. It was operational from 1995 to 1998. The space vehicle's data prove
that the H2 is there.
Nice. Does he provide a calculation anywhere which shows that that
H_2 is enough to explain e.g. the rotation curves of galaxies?
The problems of the missing mass of the universe and of the physical
material causes of Apparent Red Shift of light spectra appears to have
been solved.
If one ignores a lot of other pieces of evidence...
The Big Bang theory based on the Doppler - Hubble hypothesis is done for.
Hint: the BBT was never based on the Doppler effect.
I'm not a physicist, and I am merely an observer and fan of science and
astronomy who is interested in the development of an Objectivist [e.g.,
a factual and rational] philosophy of science.
Then you are not in the position to judge the validitiy of the BBT,
plain and simple.
[snip]
Bye,
Bjoern
Henri Wilson.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
See proof that light speed is source dependent.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bjoern Feuerbacher" |
|
| Title: Re: The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for. |
20 Aug 2004 02:49:27 AM |
|
|
Henri Wilson wrote:
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 09:51:29 +0200, Bjoern Feuerbacher
<feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
[snip]
Also, he ignores several other lines of evidence for an expanding
universe (the CMBR, its changing temperature, the time dilation
in supernova light curves, the surface brightness of galaxies,
the fact that galaxies far away look quite different from "modern"
ones and contain only young stars, the fact that no stars older than
about 13.5 billion years have ever been observed etc.), and (at least on
this page) does not bother to explain *how* the universe could be
stable, in light of the gravitational attraction between the galaxies.
You're a bit out of gate on that one.
On which one? I mentioned several different things in this paragraph.
It was convincingly knocked on the head quite recently.
Where and when?
[snip]
Bye,
Bjoern
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for. |
17 Aug 2004 08:35:20 PM |
|
|
Ralph Hertle wrote:
Someone asked me for sources that would document the discovery of the
reduction of the energy level of light photons as they pass through the
space of the universe.
Photons were unknown prior to Einstein's 1905 paper on the photo
electric effect. The theory was not accepted until Millikan verified it
in 1916. Compton measured the interaction between x-rays and free
electrons in 1920. What year did Strutt do all this stuff?
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Australopithecus Afarensis" |
|
| Title: Re: The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for. |
17 Aug 2004 10:58:57 PM |
|
|
I believe it was Newton who modeled light as a particle. He called it
quanta which is essentially a photon.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert J. Kolker" <robert_kolker@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 06:35 PM
Subject: Re: The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for.
Ralph Hertle wrote:
Someone asked me for sources that would document the discovery of the
reduction of the energy level of light photons as they pass through the
space of the universe.
Photons were unknown prior to Einstein's 1905 paper on the photo
electric effect. The theory was not accepted until Millikan verified it
in 1916. Compton measured the interaction between x-rays and free
electrons in 1920. What year did Strutt do all this stuff?
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "DAH" |
|
| Title: re:The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for. |
18 Aug 2004 09:48:44 AM |
|
|
Ralph,
I have been involved in Raman LIDAR research, both in the lab and in
the field. We used UV lasers to excited Raman spectra, which we
analyzed for particular molecular signatures using
pattern-recognition software. The excitation wavelength is called
the "Rayleigh". It is advantageous to excite Raman spectra in the UV
because Raman amplitude is proportional to the forth power of the
Rayleigh, but Raman spectra can also be excited in the optical and
infrared bands, with the Raman amplitude reduced accordingly.
Excitation of Raman spectra reduces the energy of the Rayleigh
slightly. In the absense of "Resonant Raman phenomena", the excited
Raman spectra is of the order of a million times less than the
Raleigh which excites it. Considering the density of molecular
hydrogen in interstellar/ intergalactic space, the Raman
cross-section would be quite small, but the path lengh would be quite
large.
One could calculate the "Raman red shift". However, I think a word of
caution is in order if you wish to proliferate such information. The
negative feedback you have received in this forum is nothing compared
to what lurks in the professional arena. They will eat you alive if
you question their precious law!
best,
DAH 8/18/04
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DAH" |
|
| Title: re:The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for. |
18 Aug 2004 09:48:45 AM |
|
|
Ralph,
I have been involved in Raman LIDAR research, both in the lab and in
the field. We used UV lasers to excited Raman spectra, which we
analyzed for particular molecular signatures using
pattern-recognition software. The excitation wavelength is called
the "Rayleigh". It is advantageous to excite Raman spectra in the UV
because Raman amplitude is proportional to the forth power of the
Rayleigh, but Raman spectra can also be excited in the optical and
infrared bands, with the Raman amplitude reduced accordingly.
Excitation of Raman spectra reduces the energy of the Rayleigh
slightly. In the absense of "Resonant Raman phenomena", the excited
Raman spectra is of the order of a million times less than the
Raleigh which excites it. Considering the density of molecular
hydrogen in interstellar/ intergalactic space, the Raman
cross-section would be quite small, but the path lengh would be quite
large.
One could calculate the "Raman red shift". However, I think a word of
caution is in order if you wish to proliferate such information. The
negative feedback you have received in this forum is nothing compared
to what lurks in the professional arena. They will eat you alive if
you question their precious law!
best,
DAH 8/18/04
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DAH" |
|
| Title: re:The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for. |
18 Aug 2004 09:48:44 AM |
|
|
Ralph,
I have been involved in Raman LIDAR research, both in the lab and in
the field. We used UV lasers to excited Raman spectra, which we
analyzed for particular molecular signatures using pattern
recognition software. The excitation wavelength is called the
"Rayleigh". It is advantageous to excite Raman spectra in the UV
because Raman amplitude is proportional to the forth power of the
Rayleigh, but Raman spectra can also be excited in the optical and
infrared bands, with the Raman amplitude reduced accordingly.
Excitation of Raman spectra reduces the energy of the Rayleigh
slightly. In the absense of "Resonant Raman phenomena", the excited
Raman spectra is of the order of a million times less than the
Raleigh which excites it. The Raman cross section for interstellar
molecular hydrogen would be quite small, but the path lengh would be
quite large. One could calculate the "Raman red shift". However, I
think a word of caution is in order if you wish to proliferate such
information. The negative feedback you have received in this forum
is nothing compared to what lurks in the professional arena. They
will eat you alive if you question their precious law!
best,
DAH 8/18/04
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Australopithecus Afarensis" |
|
| Title: Re: The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for. |
17 Aug 2004 10:57:07 PM |
|
|
The problem with modeling the molecular hydrogen with Snell's Law is that
the speed of light in molecular hydrogen should be distance independent.
Therefore, it would not account for the observed redshift versus distanace
in accordance with Hubble's Law.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ralph Hertle" <ralph.hertle@verizon.net>
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 06:24 PM
Subject: The Doppler - Hubble Big Bang theory is done for.
To AA (alt.astronomy) and HPO (humanities.philosophy.objectivism):
Someone asked me for sources that would document the discovery of the
reduction of the energy level of light photons as they pass through the
space of the universe.
Lord Rayleigh, John William Strutt, is of particular interest as an
early discoverer of the phenomenon. He found that the energy level of
photons is reduced in collisions with hydrogen molecules.
See additional general information regarding Lord Rayleigh, at:
http://www.almaz.com/nobel/physics/1904a.html .
Several other scientists have done prior contributory work by
discovering certain principles of physics.
Scientist, Dr. Paul Marmet, also made published predictions of a
non-Doppler explanation for the Apparent Red Shift of the spectral lines
of light as early as 1988 and 1989. Dr. Marmet's writings appear to be
worth some serious thought.
A number of his papers and books on that and related topics are
available at, http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/hydrogen/ .
Apparently, E.A. Valentijn, of Infrared Space Observatory fame, has
discovered H2 in space in huge amounts. See http://isowww.estec.esa.nl/
.. It was operational from 1995 to 1998. The space vehicle's data prove
that the H2 is there.
The problems of the missing mass of the universe and of the physical
material causes of Apparent Red Shift of light spectra appears to have
been solved.
The Big Bang theory based on the Doppler - Hubble hypothesis is done for.
I'm not a physicist, and I am merely an observer and fan of science and
astronomy who is interested in the development of an Objectivist [e.g.,
a factual and rational] philosophy of science.
I see that these events have resulted in a number of discoveries of huge
importance to science. Scientists everywhere will be evaluating the new
discoveries in a serious light.
Congratulations, gentlemen, on your marvelous new discoveries.
Ralph Hertle
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
