Prev: Integrating differential equations
Next: Prime 89 Postulate.By Aiya-Oba
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 19 Apr 2010 15:15


Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

>
> And a counterpart who loves the Big Bang theory writing about the
> supporting
> evidence for the Big Bang theory would have only one chapter of
> supporting evidence
> in the observation of a red shift expansion of the universe. So other
> than that
> observation, the Big Bang theory has no other supporting evidence. Not
> even the
> Cosmic Microwave Radiation supports the Big Bang because it is a
> quantized
> radiation at 2.71 K and utterly uniform with no fluctuations. The
> alleged fluctuations
> in recent past years were due to the fact that the precision of the
> measuring instruments
> had been surpassed. So for the past decades of the Big Bang theory,
> they have only
> one evidence that supports the Big Bang, whereas this book has more
> than 20 different categories and subcategories of evidence to support
> the Atom Totality theory.
>

In the 1990s, it was seen that the Cosmic Microwave Background
Radiation had
become a poisoned piece of evidence for the Big Bang, in that the
radiation had
been verified as quantized blackbody radiation. Blackbody radiation
means the
Microwave is on the inside of a cavity, the inside of a big atom of
plutonium. Yet
the Big Bang people ignored the fact that the CMBR was blackbody
quantized
radiation of 2.71 degrees K. This is science fraud, when you know the
evidence
no longer is supportive of the Big Bang yet you count it as
supportive. So then
there was a huge chase to try to reveal fluctuations in CMBR in the
1990s and
2000s, hoping that such a lure would assuage the fraud of the CMBR. It
was
announced there were "fluctuations" but in the announcement, it was
not
announced that the precision of their measuring devices had been
reached and
surpassed. So when the physicists said "there are fluctuations" they
were liaring
because they should have said "there are no fluctuations and that we
had
surpassed the precision of our instruments to measure fluctuations."

So the CMBR evidence supports the Atom Totality theory, that we are on
the
inside of a big atom of plutonium whose 5f6 cavity is blackbody and
has a
microwave temperature of 2.71 K.

That leaves only one other piece of evidence for the Big Bang theory,
the redshift
of galaxies. Here, the Big Bang people almost always point out this
analogy when
talking about the redshift. They say that a approaching train whistle
of given speed is Doppler
shifted to a blueshift or a shortening of the wavelength. And the
train moving
away has a redshift of the whistle or a stretching out of the
wavelength.

The trouble with the train analogy is that it does not take into
account the geometry
of the situation. And that the Doppler redshift is only useful in very
limited circumstances
but is not a Cosmic or astronomical measure.

Here is a alternative analogy that applies to stars and star speeds
and humans
measuring those speeds.

Analogy of straw in glass of water. In an earlier post I talked about
a coin in a
pond, a deep pond and how the refraction of light would alter what we
think of
as the position of the coin. This refraction of position is equivalent
to a redshift.
But let me use the straw in a glass analogy and since the light is
refracted and bent upon entering the water, this refraction shifts the
position of the straw and this is
equivalent to redshift.

Analogy of a corrigated peice of transparent plastic such as the
roofing sheets of
corrigated plastic or the greenhouse corrigated plastic. Here I have
some in my
own house and if you hang a sheet up against a window with a view of
oncoming
traffic from the road with their white headlights. What happens is
that instead of
a blueshift of the car white headlights, the plastic corrigated always
delivers a
redshift.

So the Cosmic Redshift of galaxies was never that of a speeding away
from
us, but was merely a measure of the Cosmic Overall Geometry. That our
Cosmos
is highly bent the further away we are (corrigated sheet). And those
far distant
galaxies are not moving near the speed of light to cause such a
redshift. The redshift
is caused by the geometry of the Cosmos as a highly spherical geometry
such as the
shape of a cigar surface or a sausage surface or a elongated balloon
surface which
is called an ellipsoid. So the redshift of galaxies was never a
measure of the speed
involved with the galaxies, because they were all slow moving speeds
just like the
Milky Way and local galaxies of 100 km/sec, and nowhere near 299,792
km/sec.
Big Bangers actually believe these faraway galaxies are moving nearly
299,792 km/sec to cause the redshift.

The cause of these redshifts is that as light travels through the bent
curvature
of space (through my corrigated plastic), the light is redshifted. The
redshift
says nothing about the speed of the galaxy but says alot about how far
away
that galaxy is from Earth.

So, here, we have a case of a theory of physics, that was borne and
lived on
two pieces of evidence. The Redshift of galaxies and the Microwave
Radiation.
Both pieces of evidence have turned against the Big Bang and are now
evidences that destroy the Big Bang theory.

A Cosmic atom is highly bent and curved into spherical or ellipsoid
geometry
and that light travelling far away is going to have to be highly
refracted or
redshifted, and the small speeds that these faraway galaxies possess,
makes
no difference upon the redshift affect.

Now I also have a argument against the Big Bang redshift based upon
the
theory of Special Relativity. That in order to have Special Relativity
true, that
you need nearly every speed that is higher than 5% of the speed of
light to be
that of either light slowed down or light itself. That due to
resonance and Special
Relativity, that there are no rest mass objects moving at more than 5%
of the
speed of light. So you have the occasional or rare alpha particle
moving at 5%
the speed of light or a beta particle moving at 50% the speed of light
but those
are rare cases. In order for Special Relativity to be true, that
99.99% of the
objects in the Cosmos that are moving at more than 5% of the speed of
light
is light itself. If there exists one galaxy moving with a speed near
that of light
it would destroy the theory of Special Relativity and the theory of
resonance
in physics. Because, really, honestly, do you think any galaxy can
actually
have a speed near that of light and not have disintegrated due to
resonance.
Does anyone actually think that a car can be moving at the speed of
light
and not have disintegrated? I often wonder whether physicists who love
their
Big Bang ever really think about what they have accepted.

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: Integrating differential equations
Next: Prime 89 Postulate.By Aiya-Oba