Re: Red shift
- From: Reentrant <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 11:05:53 +0100
On 26/07/2011 19:28, iaoua iaoua wrote:
On Jul 26, 6:58 pm, r norman<r_s_nor...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Expanding universe theory - some galaxies might show blue shift if they happen to be moving towards us.On Tue, 26 Jul 2011 10:47:55 -0700 (PDT), iaoua iaoua
<iaoua.ia...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:On Jul 26, 5:20 pm, jillery<69jpi...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:On Jul 26, 8:34 am, iaoua iaoua<iaoua.ia...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 26, 11:44 am, nos...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (J. J. Lodder) wrote:
iaoua iaoua<iaoua.ia...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Hi all,
as I understand it your position is this. Distant stars gave off light
millions of years ago and those signals reach us here on the Earth
today. However, those stars were moving away from our present position
when they were giving of light millions of years ago and so the light
signal is distorted. It is shifted to the red end of the spectrum with
respect to how the signal actually was when it left those stars
millions of years ago. The basic idea is that as the star was moving
away from us while emitting light that the frequency was stretched in
a way which is consistent with the speed the star was moving away with
us. Thus the phenomenon of redshift as diagrammed below. The arrow
showing direction of motion. The O representing the light emitter.
The /\ representing blue shifted light on one side. The / \
representing red shifted light on the other side. The + representing
our vantage point of the phenomenon.
/\/\/\/\/\ O / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ +
Now, here is my question. Why can it not be as in the following
O/\ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ /
\ / \ / \ / \ /
\ / \
That because of some feature of the way light travels over long
distances or because of some effect of the medium it travels through
that the further light travels through deep space the more red shifted
the light is. I have yet to see a compelling argument that this could
not be the case.
See under 'tired light' (hypothesis)
of for an expalnation why this is wrong,
It's not merely a tired light hypothesis. There could be something
about the medium light goes through. There could be a multitude of
reasons. It could be a combination of many factors.
There "could be" lots of reasons. Most of them are useless, in that
they are untestable or unfalsifiable. To suggest there is "something
about the medium" is also useless, as you don't say what that
something might be. OTOH doppler shift of light is observed on
Earth. So in the science corner is an argument based on evidence. In
your corner is an argument based on unfounded conjecture. No contest.
So what do you think it would take to falsify an expanding universe?
Well, a failure to observe a red shift dependent on distance would do
it. Oops, we did see a red shift dependent on distance. Scratch that
Well, a failure of general relativity would do it. Oops, we have
tested general relativity many times and it always passes.
So what would it take? What difference would an expanding universe
have from a non expanding universe that had red shift patterns
dependent on distance for some other reason? Focus on answering the
question rather than explaining why you are unwilling to consider that
you could be wrong.
Proportional to distance due to aether or whatever theory - blue-shift impossible.
And as you've been told several times, Andromeda (and a few other galaxies) shows blue shift.
- Prev by Date: Re: Speed of light in deep space
- Next by Date: Re: Response to Last Thursdayism
- Previous by thread: Re: Red shift
- Next by thread: Re: Red shift