Can we detect a negative redshift of –c? / Brad Guth
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: We see energy. But what we don't see is more important
Next: Request for Paper: J.P. Wesley "Terrestrial Aberration Cannot be Observed"
From: BURT on 28 Apr 2010 15:01 On Apr 28, 11:46 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 28, 11:02 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Apr 27, 9:50 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Apr 27, 8:14 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 27, 8:09 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Apr 27, 7:59 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Apr 27, 7:51 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Apr 27, 7:29 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Light headed inward of the event horizon would undergo an infinite > > > > > > > > energy shift as revealed by Pound Rebka light blue shift. But there > > > > > > > > can be no infinite energy light. > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > Then use -99.9999% c as the negative redshift. > > > > > > > > ~ BG > > > > > > > So energy will go to zero in your theory? > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > The full negative redshift or -c blueshift should be extreme gamma, > > > > > whereas the positive redshift would be near zero energy. > > > > > > ~ BG- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > Why are you acting like you know? > > > > > If red shift goes infinite at the event horizon then anything emitted > > > > there would have zero energy and anything comming in would have > > > > infinite. > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > Correct, perhaps as infinite as Planck wavelengths and of >1e6 K for > > > representing the incoming stuff, and otherwise near zero Hz and near > > > zero K for the outgoing phase. > > > Hawking has pointed out that these are nonsense predictions. He > > pointed it out at the heart of a black hole. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > A black hole is about all of what Hawking is. Sadly, of what little > mind there is can't hardly think or much less communicate on its own. > Hawking has a team of thinkers and communicators that use his near > functionless body as a nifty PR ruse in order to get mostly their > stuff into mainstream media. > > ~ BG- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - The math demonstrates black hole failure in terms infinities. Infinite redshifts and blueshifts have been pointed out as nonsense predictions. So is falling in at light speed at a black hole. This gravity violating of the motion laws. Mitch Raemsch
From: Brad Guth on 28 Apr 2010 18:12 On Apr 28, 12:01 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Apr 28, 11:46 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 28, 11:02 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Apr 27, 9:50 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 27, 8:14 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Apr 27, 8:09 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Apr 27, 7:59 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Apr 27, 7:51 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Apr 27, 7:29 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Light headed inward of the event horizon would undergo an infinite > > > > > > > > > energy shift as revealed by Pound Rebka light blue shift. But there > > > > > > > > > can be no infinite energy light. > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > Then use -99.9999% c as the negative redshift. > > > > > > > > > ~ BG > > > > > > > > So energy will go to zero in your theory? > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > The full negative redshift or -c blueshift should be extreme gamma, > > > > > > whereas the positive redshift would be near zero energy. > > > > > > > ~ BG- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > Why are you acting like you know? > > > > > > If red shift goes infinite at the event horizon then anything emitted > > > > > there would have zero energy and anything comming in would have > > > > > infinite. > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > Correct, perhaps as infinite as Planck wavelengths and of >1e6 K for > > > > representing the incoming stuff, and otherwise near zero Hz and near > > > > zero K for the outgoing phase. > > > > Hawking has pointed out that these are nonsense predictions. He > > > pointed it out at the heart of a black hole. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > A black hole is about all of what Hawking is. Sadly, of what little > > mind there is can't hardly think or much less communicate on its own. > > Hawking has a team of thinkers and communicators that use his near > > functionless body as a nifty PR ruse in order to get mostly their > > stuff into mainstream media. > > > ~ BG- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > The math demonstrates black hole failure in terms infinities. Infinite > redshifts and blueshifts have been pointed out as nonsense > predictions. So is falling in at light speed at a black hole. This > gravity violating of the motion laws. > > Mitch Raemsch Supposedly black holes represent a great deal of density and thus capable of representing an astronomical amount of compacted energy, as somewhat greater density and energy/cm3 than a neutron star, or perhaps they are merely spent white dwarfs that on their last combined breaths that shrunk themselves past whatever neutron density. Multiple super-massive black holes are supposedly within the core of every galaxy, and as such could pretty much override whatever surrounding gravity and orbital dynamics in order to toss in or out whatever excess or nearby mass at near c. Given the vast number of galaxies, many/most considerably more substantial than ours, whereas perhaps its a wonder we havent been introduced to a few of those rogue displaced items that most galaxies seem to have in surplus, not to mention the potential of collateral flack whenever a pair of galaxies merge or sort of go bump in the night. Next consideration is the even greater number of white dwarfs that used to be a whole lot bigger and massive enough as regular stars to hold onto a large number of planets and their moons. This might conservatively estimate as our universe hosting on average at least a million fold more lost/rogue items than galaxies, as having been set free or ejected at speeds far in excess of their respective escape velocity. Last but not least; Perhaps in order for the extremely weak force of gravity to be so capably in charge, its velocity of propagation might have to be worth 2c. If any of this seems confusing, it certainly is to me. ~ BG
From: BURT on 28 Apr 2010 22:14 On Apr 28, 3:12 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 28, 12:01 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Apr 28, 11:46 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Apr 28, 11:02 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 27, 9:50 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Apr 27, 8:14 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Apr 27, 8:09 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Apr 27, 7:59 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Apr 27, 7:51 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 27, 7:29 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Light headed inward of the event horizon would undergo an infinite > > > > > > > > > > energy shift as revealed by Pound Rebka light blue shift. But there > > > > > > > > > > can be no infinite energy light. > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > Then use -99.9999% c as the negative redshift. > > > > > > > > > > ~ BG > > > > > > > > > So energy will go to zero in your theory? > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > The full negative redshift or -c blueshift should be extreme gamma, > > > > > > > whereas the positive redshift would be near zero energy. > > > > > > > > ~ BG- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > Why are you acting like you know? > > > > > > > If red shift goes infinite at the event horizon then anything emitted > > > > > > there would have zero energy and anything comming in would have > > > > > > infinite. > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > Correct, perhaps as infinite as Planck wavelengths and of >1e6 K for > > > > > representing the incoming stuff, and otherwise near zero Hz and near > > > > > zero K for the outgoing phase. > > > > > Hawking has pointed out that these are nonsense predictions. He > > > > pointed it out at the heart of a black hole. > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > A black hole is about all of what Hawking is. Sadly, of what little > > > mind there is can't hardly think or much less communicate on its own. > > > Hawking has a team of thinkers and communicators that use his near > > > functionless body as a nifty PR ruse in order to get mostly their > > > stuff into mainstream media. > > > > ~ BG- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > The math demonstrates black hole failure in terms infinities. Infinite > > redshifts and blueshifts have been pointed out as nonsense > > predictions. So is falling in at light speed at a black hole. This > > gravity violating of the motion laws. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > Supposedly black holes represent a great deal of density and thus > capable of representing an astronomical amount of compacted energy, as > somewhat greater density and energy/cm3 than a neutron star, or > perhaps they are merely spent white dwarfs that on their last combined > breaths that shrunk themselves past whatever neutron density. > > Multiple super-massive black holes are supposedly within the core of > every galaxy, and as such could pretty much override whatever > surrounding gravity and orbital dynamics in order to toss in or out > whatever excess or nearby mass at near c. > > Given the vast number of galaxies, many/most considerably more > substantial than ours, whereas perhaps its a wonder we havent been > introduced to a few of those rogue displaced items that most galaxies > seem to have in surplus, not to mention the potential of collateral > flack whenever a pair of galaxies merge or sort of go bump in the > night. > > Next consideration is the even greater number of white dwarfs that > used to be a whole lot bigger and massive enough as regular stars to > hold onto a large number of planets and their moons. This might > conservatively estimate as our universe hosting on average at least a > million fold more lost/rogue items than galaxies, as having been set > free or ejected at speeds far in excess of their respective escape > velocity. > > Last but not least; Perhaps in order for the extremely weak force of > gravity to be so capably in charge, its velocity of propagation might > have to be worth 2c. > > If any of this seems confusing, it certainly is to me. > > ~ BG- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - The strength of gravity has a limit. Light always overcomes it. Mitch Raemsch
From: Brad Guth on 29 Apr 2010 00:08 On Apr 28, 7:14 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > The strength of gravity has a limit. Light always overcomes it. > > Mitch Raemsch Not always. ~ BG
From: BURT on 29 Apr 2010 01:27
On Apr 28, 9:08 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 28, 7:14 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > The strength of gravity has a limit. Light always overcomes it. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > Not always. > > ~ BG There are no boundaries in space. There are no event horizons. The cosmological rule applies to local gravity. Mitch Raemsch; The No Boundary Proposal Started with Albert Einstein |