Prev: countability of real numbers? What am I missing?
Next: When is a vector field is the gradient field of a scalar function?
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 18 May 2010 14:26


Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
(snipped)
> Maybe some astronomer has noted some paradoxical object with a high
> redshift, but
> which in fact, the astronomer knows the object is moving towards
> Earth.
>
> Maybe that object was all the Supernova to date reported, since the
> explosion of a
> supernova is a stream of particles moving towards Earth, yet all those
> supernova
> were reported as highly redshifted, in contradiction to Doppler
> redshift.
>

Alright, it is safe to say that Doppler redshift is a fake science for
Cosmology.
It is safe to say that because it is inarguable that a explosion of a
supernova
is anything but moving towards Earth. And it can be calculated and
determined
of the speed of approach to Earth. So what that means is the measured
Doppler
redshift of any and all the previous Supernova explosions, could not
possibly
indicate a distance further away than that of 400 million light years
away. In other
words, the Supernova explosions are all confined to 400 million light
years
or less.

Who is going to argue that the explosion is a recession speed? Only a
really
dumb person. And although we cannot do a Eclipse test on the explosion
and that would be comical or whimsical to Eclipse an explosion
process, we
can however do numerous Eclipse testing on quasars, Great Walls and
galaxies.

It takes just one galaxy that was previously thought to be receding at
a fast
speed away from Earth and with a large Doppler redshift, to be
contradicted
by a Eclipse test showing that the galaxy has a large redshift but is
moving
towards Earth. It takes just one single report like that for the
entire house
of cards of Doppler redshift to come all falling down into a heap of
physics
shame. Supernova lead the charge. And it is utterly silly of how many
astronomers actually believes that several supernova are in the
billions of
light years away:


SN2003fg Bootes 4 billion light years


SN2005ap Coma Berenices 4.7 billion light years

Surely, they must have sometime realized that the explosion itself was
coming towards Earth and that the Cosmos is dated to be just 13.75
billion years
old and yet they reach ridiculous conclusions that a Supernova was 4
billion light
years away. I mean, are astronomers nowadays required to take a course
in Logic while in school training to be a astronomer? I mean, you
really cannot
do much science if you cannot do Logic thinking. Just because you take
some
mathematics and talk mathematics does not mean you can think
logically,
think straight and think correctly.

Supernova offer us a unique case of a distance candle. Their
explosions are
undoubtedly speeding towards Earth and if they have a Doppler
redshift, means
that this Doppler redshift is of "no indication of distance". That the
redshift of
Supernova such as Bootes and Coma Berenices is a Refraction Redshift,
not a Doppler redshift. And the redshift is not a distance indicator
but a
geometry of the Cosmos indicator.

Astronomers need only find a few cases of a quasar with a huge
redshift and yet
using the Eclipse Technique, find out that the quasar is moving
towards Earth,
just as the supernova explosion is moving towards Earth.


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: countability of real numbers? What am I missing?
Next: When is a vector field is the gradient field of a scalar function?