Can we detect a blueshift of –c?
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Dave Rothschild On Astro Physics & Alex Jones' "Scientific Dictatorship" Re: America: The Dark Ages For Science
Next: Two time slowdowns come together
From: Brad Guth on 27 Apr 2010 19:03 On Apr 26, 12:17 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Apr 25, 9:37 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Apr 25, 6:02 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > FM is not based on Doppler shift. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > I never said it was. > > But you implied it. > > Mitch Raemsch Folks here often take stuff out of context and otherwise incorrectly interpret what's being implied. We're not all Einsteins or linguistic wizards. ~ BG
From: Brad Guth on 28 Apr 2010 13:22 How about accepting that we dont directly see or otherwise detect the energy realm of photons until they interact with something, and we only measure their speed of light and of most everything else via timing, and therefore its never objective or otherwise referenced from any given point in the universe because, everything is continually moving and otherwise in orbit around something. Riding a planet or moon thats moving along at c or c makes no difference, as long as youre not running into other stuff that technically doesnt exist to the observer because of the +/- c thing. It seems the same kinds of physics should apply to that of any fast incoming item plus whatevers associated thats running towards or away from us at 99.9999% c, whereas we cant directly see it any better than it can directly see us. In other words, perhaps photons are extremely slow, as opposed to the weak force of gravity being extremely fast. It seems any number of photons and thus infinite energy density can safely coexist with antimatter (such as black holes of positrons), while those same photons and ordinary electron populated matter can not safely coexist. Perhaps when a positron saturated black hole implodes, it converts its terrific density of positrons into electrons and photons that become ordinary reactive matter. Perhaps everything at or above 99.9999% c becomes essentially a black hole of positrons that only accepts photons, and w/o electrons simply cant reflect or otherwise emit photons. ~ BG
From: Brad Guth on 28 Apr 2010 21:55 On Apr 28, 1:23 pm, "Anthony Buckland" <anthonybucklandnos...(a)telus.net> wrote: > "Brad Guth" <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:a7669a64-dc27-4c23-b175-6a5188aa5cd7(a)32g2000prq.googlegroups.com... > > > .... In other words, perhaps photons > > are extremely slow, as opposed to the weak force of gravity being > > extremely fast. > > ... > > I don't follow various parts of your argument, but > regarding this statement, photons in a vacuum > (which is almost everywhere in the Universe) > always move at speed c in all frames of reference, > without regard to the movement of their source > or of anything else including you. > > AFAIK, gravity also propagates at c. Black holes make photons divert and stand still. Gravity creates a lens by which photons must travel further in order to navigate through. There's on average trillions and trillions of protons plus loads of other stuff directly in the path of the average cosmic photon. Gravity seems always faster than c. ~ BG
From: Brad Guth on 29 Apr 2010 13:41 On Apr 21, 5:35 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > In other words, if something substantial (such as a 10 solar mass > super-star and its tidal swarm of Jupiter+ planets) was headed as > seemingly directly towards us at c (-299.8e3 km/sec), could that item > regardless of its size, mass and vibrance be detected? > > Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / Guth Usenet Riding a planet or moon thats moving you along at c or c makes no difference, as long as youre not running into other stuff that technically doesnt exist to the local observer because of that c blueshift or negative redshift thing, although as for peering up, down and side to side viewing of passing stars and galaxies should appear as only somewhat skewed but otherwise normal. Any reasonable supercomputer accommodated 3D simulation proves this analogy beyond peer reviewed objections. How about accepting that we dont directly see or otherwise detect the quantum energy realm of actual photons until they interact with something, and we only measure their speed or propagation along with most of everything else via timing those interactions, and therefore its 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, its all relative and subsequently subjective because theres not a guide star or even a guide galaxy that we can call our xyz 0,0,0 home or cosmic hub, unless its simply well hidden somewhere within The Great Attractor along with all of those Muslim WMD and OBL thats invisible/ stealth like nothing else. It seems the same kinds of physics should apply to that of any fast incoming item plus whatevers associated thats running towards or away from us at 99.9999% c, whereas we cant directly see it any better than it can directly see us. In other words, perhaps photons are extremely slow, as opposed to that weak force of gravity being extremely fast. Secondly, it seems any number of photons and thus infinite energy density can safely coexist with antimatter (such as within the EH of positron black holes), where those same photons and ordinary electron populated matter simply can not safely coexist. Perhaps when a positron saturated black hole implodes, it converts its terrific density of positrons into becoming electrons and photons that become 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 cant reflect or otherwise emit photons to the +/c observer, while the up, down and side to side viewing remains relatively normal. ~ BG
From: Brad Guth on 29 Apr 2010 19:26
On Apr 29, 11:11 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Apr 28, 10:45 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > I'm not the parrot here. > > Then why are you saying it? > > Mitch Raemsch Why are you quoting everything? topic at hand: "Can we detect a blueshift of c?" No doubt theres a whole lot better talent and words and math of physics wisdom in order to explain everything better than I can muster, but the intent or gist of what Im saying shouldnt be that far off the mark. Riding a planet or moon thats moving you along at c or c makes no difference, as long as youre not running into other stuff that technically doesnt 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 thats viewing other passing stars and galaxies should appear as only somewhat skewed but otherwise perfectly normal for observing whatevers within the 90 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. How about also accepting that we dont directly see or otherwise detect the quantum energy realm of actual photons until they interact with something, and we only measure their speed or propagation along with most of everything else via timing those interactions, and therefore its 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, its all relative and subsequently subjective because theres not a guide star or even a guide galaxy that we can call our xyz 0,0,0 home or cosmic hub, unless its simply well enough hidden somewhere within The Great Attractor along with all of those Muslim WMD and OBL thats invisible/stealth like nothing else. It seems the same kinds of physics should apply to that of any fast incoming item plus whatevers associated thats running towards or away from us at 99.9999% c, whereas we cant directly see it any better than it can directly see us until were 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 wed 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, whereas instead theres only peripheral vision allowed of noticing whatevers moving relative at less than +/-c. Im also thinking the forward shockwave of any star and its planets moving at near c might actually to some extent clear a path. ~ BG |