Prev: A question about a set of primes
Next: Perseus-Pisces Supercluster tells us the Cosmos is Elliptic not Euclidean Chapter 3 #87; ATOM TOTALITY
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 15 May 2010 13:11


Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Now according to Jarrett's website:
>
> --- quoting ---
> http://spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/jarrett/papers/LSS/
>
> The seventh layer (0.05 < z < 0.06) contains the backside of the
> Shapley Concentration, while the Sculpter supercluster dominates the
> southern hemisphere. The eighth and final layer (z > 0.06) contains
> the most distant structures that 2MASS resolves, including the Pisces-
> Cetus (located behind P-P), Bootes (located behind Hercules),
> Horologium and Corona Borealis galaxy clusters. At these faint flux
> levels, the photometric redshifts are losing their ability to discern
> the cosmic web beyond 300 Mpc, smearing and degrading the resolution
> of the 3-D construct.
> --- end quoting ---
>
> He claims the photometric redshifts are too degraded beyond 300 Mpc
> which is about
> 1 billion light years distance. Yet many reported distances are far
> beyond 1 billion
> light years such as the two supernova reported at 4 billion light
> years or the
> quasars routinely reported beyond 1 billion light years.
>
> What I am argueing in this chapter is that the telescope itself, the
> finest available
> telescope cannot see beyond 400 million light years due to the Cosmic
> density
> of atoms of about 1 atom per cubic meter of space. The light from a
> quasar at
> 1 billion light years away is never able to form a image since every
> one of its
> photons will be blocked as it travels through space after 400 million
> light years
> distance. (This upper limit distance goes for radio telescopes also.)
>
> Now probability theory is not what convinces most people that a idea
> is true.
> Some would hanker to say that the atom in each cubic meter lattice
> cell are
> all in one position which allows light to travel any distance without
> being
> interfered or blocked.
>
> But I would rejoinder with this arguement, that the Probability
> theory, called
> Orchard Visibility Problem and its related problems, make several
> predictions
> of note. One such prediction is that the Upper Limit of Viewing
> results in a
> RING structure. And we see this RING structure in Jarrett's third
> layer.
>
> Which to me would then mean that the mapping of the Cosmos by Jarrett
> is no further than the 400 million light year distance and that all
> the other
> layers beyond the third lie within those first three layers. The
> quasars and
> Great Walls are actually much closer to Earth than what Jarrett's
> mapping
> conveys. If you can see a image of a distant object in the telescope
> (radio
> or otherwise) then it means the object is 400 million or less light
> years away.
>
> Now, another prediction of a Orchard Visible Problem is that at the
> furthest
> reaches of the Orchard, in the case of astronomy and Jarrett's
> mapping, the
> objects look all identical in terms of size and proportion and what
> they are.
> So at the end of the Orchard, we see all the trees of the same small
> size
> and forming that RING boundary.
>
> Now do we see the same in Astronomy? Of course we do, for we see at
> the
> last layer almost nothing but quasars. Jarrett thinks they are highly
> energetic
> fastly moving away from Earth with their redshift. I think they are
> fastly moving
> towards Earth with a refraction redshift, and are normal galaxies much
> closer
> to Earth and are about 200 to 400 million light years away. They are
> the ring
> of orchard trees at the edge of visibility.
>
> Now there are other predictions of the Orchard Visibility Problem, but
> I have
> to work on them.
>
> Archimedes Plutonium
> http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/
> whole entire Universe is just one big atom
> where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: A question about a set of primes
Next: Perseus-Pisces Supercluster tells us the Cosmos is Elliptic not Euclidean Chapter 3 #87; ATOM TOTALITY