Prev: 95-Particle Mass/Stability Histogram Now Available Free
Next: Online survey jobs & data entry jobs
From: Brad Guth on 30 Apr 2010 20:19
On Apr 30, 4:33 pm, "hanson" <han...(a)quick.net> wrote:
>
> Brad Guth wrote:
>
> Can we detect a blueshift of –c?
>
> hanson wrote:
>
> .... ahahahaha... Brad, you gave the answer to that already,
> above, when directed at yourself, when you, Brad Guth, wrote:
> " I'm not exactly convinced that Brad Guth took physics ".
> But, thanks for the laughs, Brad... ahahahaha... hahahanson
>
> --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: n...(a)netfront.net ---

Do all ZNR rednecks like yourself have to lie?

No doubt there’s a whole lot better talent in words and math of
applied physics wisdom, in order to explain everything better than I
can muster, but the intent or gist of what I’m saying shouldn’t be
that far off the mark or implausible, for asking ”Can we detect a
negative redshift of –c?” or “Can we detect a blueshift of –c?”.

Riding a planet or moon that’s moving you along at c or –c makes no
difference, as long as you’re not running into other stuff that
technically doesn’t exist to the local observer because of that –c
blueshift or negative redshift thing, although as for the local
observer peering up, down and side to side that’s viewing other
passing stars and galaxies should appear as only somewhat skewed but
otherwise perfectly normal for observing whatever’s within the 90 (+/-
10) degree halo. Any reasonable supercomputer as having accommodated
this 3D simulation of light speed travel proves the truth of this
analogy beyond peer reviewed objections, but then reasonable or even
logic has nothing to do with anything as far as the mainstream
mindset.

How about also accepting that we don’t directly see or otherwise
detect the quantum energy realm of actual photons until they interact
with something, whereas we only measure their speed or propagation
along with most of everything else via timing those interactions, and
therefore it’s never something entirely objective or otherwise
referenced from any given point in the universe because, everything is
continually moving and otherwise in orbit around something. In other
words, it’s all relative and subsequently subjective because there’s
not a guide star or even a guide galaxy that we can call our xyz 0,0,0
home or cosmic hub, unless it’s simply well enough hidden somewhere
within The Great Attractor along with all of those Muslim WMD and OBL
that’s invisible/stealth like nothing else.

It seems the same kinds of physics should apply to that of any fast
incoming item plus whatever’s associated that’s running towards or
away from us at 99.9999% c, whereas we can’t directly see it any
better than it can directly see us until we’re near passing along side
one another. In other words, perhaps photons are extremely slow, as
opposed to that weak force of gravity being extremely fast, because
we’d likely realize the affects of its tidal gravity long before
detecting the item itself.

Secondly, it seems any number of photons and thus infinite energy
density can safely coexist with antimatter (such as within the EH of
positron saturated black holes), where those same photons of ordinary
electron populated matter simply can not safely coexist.

Perhaps when a positron saturated black hole exceeds critical mass and
implodes, it converts its terrific density of most all those positrons
into becoming electrons and photons that instantly morph into ordinary
reactive matter. Perhaps everything at or above 99.9999% c has to
become essentially a black hole of positrons that only accepts
photons, and w/o electrons simply can not reflect or otherwise emit
photons to the +/- c observers, even though their up, down and side to
side worth of local and remote viewing should remain relatively
normal.

In other common words; at +/-c is where the opposite of having
forward/backwards tunnel vision seems to apply invisibility, whereas
instead there’s only peripheral vision allowed of noticing whatever’s
moving relative at less than +/-c. I’m also thinking the forward
shockwave of any star and its planets moving at near c might actually
to some extent clear a path.

~ BG


 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: 95-Particle Mass/Stability Histogram Now Available Free
Next: Online survey jobs & data entry jobs