Prev: Verlinde Floats Off Earth!
Next: Question about relativity
From: mpc755 on 14 Jul 2010 08:36
On Jul 14, 3:56 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote:
> mpc755 schrieb:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 14, 2:45 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote:
> >> mpc755 schrieb:> On Jul 14, 2:23 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote:
> >>>> Hi Ng
> >> ..
> >>>> Relativity says now, that the change of the timeline lets space
> >>>> contract. In the inverse, space seen from one of those other axes, the
> >>>> space expands,  what makes it look like coming out of a singularity.
> >>>> TH
> >>> The following is an image of a jet stream:
> >>>http://aether.lbl.gov/image_all.html
> >> This is the famous big-bang illustration, where could see the alleged
> >> calender-like evolution.
> >> But universe means everything and that cannot move in various directions
> >> at the same time, only parts of it can move, like the Earth does.
> >> Seen from a specific point of view, we could ascribe a calender to the
> >> universe, but that is our view and our calender.
> >> But we had to consider all other possible calenders, too, because
> >> universe means everything - and not only our view.
>
> >>> The Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is, a jet stream.
> >> Well, there is a difference between everything and our local universe.
> >> The latter is, what we could see and could think, it is all that exists.
> >> But this is - of course - wrong.
>
> >> TH
>
> > 'Mysterious Cosmic 'Dark Flow' Tracked Deeper into Universe'
> >http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/releases/2010/10-023.html
>
> > 'The clusters appear to be moving along a line extending from our
> > solar system toward Centaurus/Hydra, but the direction of this motion
> > is less certain. Evidence indicates that the clusters are headed
> > outward along this path, away from Earth, but the team cannot yet rule
> > out the opposite flow. "We detect motion along this axis, but right
> > now our data cannot state as strongly as we'd like whether the
> > clusters are coming or going," Kashlinsky said.'
>
> > The clusters are headed along this path because the Universe is, or
> > the local Universe we exist in is, is a jet stream.
>
> > Matter and dark matter are constantly emitted into the jet stream our
> > Universe is.
>
> > Eventually the matter and dark matter 'go over the water fall' and
> > wind up at the Rindler Horizon:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rindler_coordinates#Geodesics
>
> > The matter and dark matter then exist in the disk of the jet stream:
>
> >http://structureofentropy.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/blackhole.jpg
>
> > Where it will once again, eventually, be re-emitted into the jet
> > stream.
>
> I think the pictures you have chosen aren't good examples.
> Maybe this one here is better:http://www.astronomy.com/asy/objects/images/milky_way_galaxy_w_spire_...
>
> This is a picture made with the Herschel Teleskop.
> This measures far infrared also, than that picture is superimposed with
> a picture of the visible spectrum.
> Now we could see, that the structures in the visible range are part of
> something way larger, where only a part is visible, that seem to point
> in our direction.
> This means the angle of observation has an influence on the frequency of
> observed light.
> Since visible light has higher frequency, the part pointing in our
> direction is actually blueshifted and the whole structure is one large
> thing, that emits  generally far infrared.
> To have such a behavior, the timeline should point in our direction, but
> only for the part that is moving towards us. This looks like the
> structure would receive light fom here. This means the structure is
> actually spherical shaped, but the frequency of observed radiation
> depends on the direction of observation. This makes the structure look
> like kind of explosion in spacetime.
> This could only be possible, if time is actually multidimensional and is
> 'pointing' in different directions, but this would violate the big-bang
> idea, because that would require only one single line.
>
> TH

'New Proof Unknown "Structures" Tug at Our Universe'
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/03/100322-dark-flow-matter-outside-universe-multiverse/

"In 2008 scientists reported the discovery of hundreds of galaxy
clusters streaming in the same direction at more than 2.2 million
miles (3.6 million kilometers) an hour."

The following theory is incomplete:

"This mysterious motion can't be explained by current models for
distribution of mass in the universe. So the researchers made the
controversial suggestion that the clusters are being tugged on by the
gravity of matter outside the known universe."

The clusters are not so much being tugged by the gravity of matter
outside the known universe. The clusters are traveling in the
direction of the flow of the jet stream. The tug of the Universal
black hole which exists at the emission point of the jet stream may be
causing the waterfall effect and causing matter and dark matter to be
pulled towards the Rindler Horizon. The structure is spherical.

Superimpose this image:

http://structureofentropy.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/blackhole.jpg

On this one:

http://essayweb.net/astronomy/images/black_hole_large.jpg

Time is a concept.
From: mpc755 on 14 Jul 2010 08:39
On Jul 14, 3:56 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote:
> mpc755 schrieb:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 14, 2:45 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote:
> >> mpc755 schrieb:> On Jul 14, 2:23 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote:
> >>>> Hi Ng
> >> ..
> >>>> Relativity says now, that the change of the timeline lets space
> >>>> contract. In the inverse, space seen from one of those other axes, the
> >>>> space expands,  what makes it look like coming out of a singularity.
> >>>> TH
> >>> The following is an image of a jet stream:
> >>>http://aether.lbl.gov/image_all.html
> >> This is the famous big-bang illustration, where could see the alleged
> >> calender-like evolution.
> >> But universe means everything and that cannot move in various directions
> >> at the same time, only parts of it can move, like the Earth does.
> >> Seen from a specific point of view, we could ascribe a calender to the
> >> universe, but that is our view and our calender.
> >> But we had to consider all other possible calenders, too, because
> >> universe means everything - and not only our view.
>
> >>> The Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is, a jet stream.
> >> Well, there is a difference between everything and our local universe.
> >> The latter is, what we could see and could think, it is all that exists.
> >> But this is - of course - wrong.
>
> >> TH
>
> > 'Mysterious Cosmic 'Dark Flow' Tracked Deeper into Universe'
> >http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/releases/2010/10-023.html
>
> > 'The clusters appear to be moving along a line extending from our
> > solar system toward Centaurus/Hydra, but the direction of this motion
> > is less certain. Evidence indicates that the clusters are headed
> > outward along this path, away from Earth, but the team cannot yet rule
> > out the opposite flow. "We detect motion along this axis, but right
> > now our data cannot state as strongly as we'd like whether the
> > clusters are coming or going," Kashlinsky said.'
>
> > The clusters are headed along this path because the Universe is, or
> > the local Universe we exist in is, is a jet stream.
>
> > Matter and dark matter are constantly emitted into the jet stream our
> > Universe is.
>
> > Eventually the matter and dark matter 'go over the water fall' and
> > wind up at the Rindler Horizon:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rindler_coordinates#Geodesics
>
> > The matter and dark matter then exist in the disk of the jet stream:
>
> >http://structureofentropy.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/blackhole.jpg
>
> > Where it will once again, eventually, be re-emitted into the jet
> > stream.
>
> I think the pictures you have chosen aren't good examples.
> Maybe this one here is better:http://www.astronomy.com/asy/objects/images/milky_way_galaxy_w_spire_...
>
> This is a picture made with the Herschel Teleskop.
> This measures far infrared also, than that picture is superimposed with
> a picture of the visible spectrum.
> Now we could see, that the structures in the visible range are part of
> something way larger, where only a part is visible, that seem to point
> in our direction.
> This means the angle of observation has an influence on the frequency of
> observed light.
> Since visible light has higher frequency, the part pointing in our
> direction is actually blueshifted and the whole structure is one large
> thing, that emits  generally far infrared.
> To have such a behavior, the timeline should point in our direction, but
> only for the part that is moving towards us. This looks like the
> structure would receive light fom here. This means the structure is
> actually spherical shaped, but the frequency of observed radiation
> depends on the direction of observation. This makes the structure look
> like kind of explosion in spacetime.
> This could only be possible, if time is actually multidimensional and is
> 'pointing' in different directions, but this would violate the big-bang
> idea, because that would require only one single line.
>
> TH

Instead of thinking of the structure as a kind of explosion of
spacetime, think of the structure as the expansion of dark matter.

What is often discussed as the curvature of spacetime due to its
interaction with matter is the displacement of dark matter by matter.
From: oriel36 on 14 Jul 2010 08:49
On Jul 14, 7:23 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote:
> Hi Ng
>
> Please, have a look at this Wikipedia page:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang
> You see this picture:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Universe_expansion2.png
>
> What is missing there?

Absolutely nothing is missing there,it is fine if you like the 'no
center/no circumference' ideology of 'big bang' where you agree to
believe that every-valid-point-is-the-center of the Universe,it
mightn't be particularly sane and a few might wonder where the hell it
comes from but I can spare you the suspense and tell you that it is
basically a logical conclusion of stellar circumpolar motion,sidereal
time reasoning or inertial frames as relativists like to call it.Even
if you haven't a clue what I am saying,you probably can see something
familiar in the words of Archbishop Cusa who was one of the first to
encourage Copernicus in finding a resolution to apparent observations
-


Thereupon you will see-- through the intellect..that the world and its
motion and shape cannot be apprehended. For the world/universe will
appear as a wheel in a wheel and a sphere in a sphere-- having its
center and circumference nowhere. . . " Nicolas of Cusa 16th century

Here is what big bang actually looks like as a description -



http://www.realclearsports.com/blognetwork/buccaneer_bow_shots/train-wreck.jpg









We miss a 'z'-axis!
> Now we cannot simply add a z axis, because the picture describes
> spacetime and the z axis would fit, where there is now the t axis.
> So, how do we get z back into the scheme?
>
> Actually we had to multiply the picture by three, because there are
> three combinations of two axis (as depicted in that diagram) out of three..
> These are x/y, x/z and y/z. Since the timeline is multiplied by this
> process, too, we cannot have the calender-like relation as in the
> big-bang theory.
>
> So there are actually three timelines (or components of temporal
> 'movement') and any worldline is actually a manifestation of a certain
> combination of all three. But the universe itself could not move along a
> single line, as a material body could, but has to behave in all three
> ways simultaneously.
> Relativity says now, that the change of the timeline lets space
> contract. In the inverse, space seen from one of those other axes, the
> space expands,  what makes it look like coming out of a singularity.
>
> TH

From: Thomas Heger on 14 Jul 2010 11:23
oriel36 schrieb:
> On Jul 14, 7:23 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote:
>> Hi Ng
>>
>> Please, have a look at this Wikipedia page:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang
>> You see this picture:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Universe_expansion2.png
>>
>> What is missing there?
>
> Absolutely nothing is missing there,it is fine if you like the 'no
> center/no circumference' ideology of 'big bang' where you agree to
> believe that every-valid-point-is-the-center of the Universe,it
> mightn't be particularly sane and a few might wonder where the hell it
> comes from but I can spare you the suspense and tell you that it is
> basically a logical conclusion of stellar circumpolar motion,sidereal
> time reasoning or inertial frames as relativists like to call it.Even
> if you haven't a clue what I am saying,you probably can see something
> familiar in the words of Archbishop Cusa who was one of the first to
> encourage Copernicus in finding a resolution to apparent observations
> -
If the universe seems to have an origin in a singularity for us, moving
along our wordline, to other observers this should be the same
experience, but not the same bang.
This is why I think that theory is wrong, because the validity of the
big-bang-theory would -of course- require only one of such events.

> Thereupon you will see-- through the intellect..that the world and its
> motion and shape cannot be apprehended. For the world/universe will
> appear as a wheel in a wheel and a sphere in a sphere-- having its
> center and circumference nowhere. . . " Nicolas of Cusa 16th century

Well, this seems to be a good description for what I call a fractal
behavior. Where things evolve at a spiral form, moving 'outwards', while
the inverse is contracting at the same time.

TH
From: Thomas Heger on 14 Jul 2010 11:29
mpc755 schrieb:
> On Jul 14, 3:56 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote:
>> mpc755 schrieb:
>>

>> To have such a behavior, the timeline should point in our direction, but
>> only for the part that is moving towards us. This looks like the
>> structure would receive light fom here. This means the structure is
>> actually spherical shaped, but the frequency of observed radiation
>> depends on the direction of observation. This makes the structure look
>> like kind of explosion in spacetime.
>> This could only be possible, if time is actually multidimensional and is
>> 'pointing' in different directions, but this would violate the big-bang
>> idea, because that would require only one single line.
>>
>> TH
>
> Instead of thinking of the structure as a kind of explosion of
> spacetime, think of the structure as the expansion of dark matter.
>
> What is often discussed as the curvature of spacetime due to its
> interaction with matter is the displacement of dark matter by matter.

I personally prefer energy streams of dark energy and radiant energy as
dominant factors. The superposition of both behaviors is what we call
matter, what are in fact three-dimensional patterns of standing waves,
generated by spiraling in dark energy and spiraling out radiant energy.

TH
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Verlinde Floats Off Earth!
Next: Question about relativity