IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 3rd December 2020, 05:46 AM   #121
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,319
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
That formula is proposed to be a new law of physics.
And how does this new law of physics affect things other than cosmology?

Quote:
It clearly violates relativity.
Yes, it does. And that's a problem for you.

Quote:
An even bigger problem is that is violates inertia, a body in motion should remain in motion.
Remember me mentioning Noether's theorem? Well, if you discard conservation of momentum, then your theory can't have translational symmetry.

So how does that violation happen?

Quote:
That just means physics needs innovation. Which we should assume is always true anyways.
Physicists do. But you seem to want to throw the baby out with the bath water. You're trying to solve one problem, but you're introducing 100 new ones. That's not a step forward.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 05:46 AM   #122
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
In other words, if relativity is based on world lines with a speed of light c, to accommodate my hypothesis the world lines would be a function of distance that contains Hubble's constant, c - H * D.
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 05:47 AM   #123
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,319
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
My theory doesn't say anything about gravity.
It needs to, or it cannot account for cosmology. And that's the problem you claim you're trying to solve.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 05:53 AM   #124
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
And how does this new law of physics affect things other than cosmology?
Where redshifts are not observed, H * D = 0, so that domain doesn't change.

Quote:
Remember me mentioning Noether's theorem? Well, if you discard conservation of momentum, then your theory can't have translational symmetry.
In my theory, the photon doesn't interact with anything.

It loses energy, so its speed changes, but its direction doesn't change.

Keep in mind, in QM, the momentum of a photon isn't calculated the same way as for classical objects.

In any case, I'm saying that Newton's laws of motion have a limited domain, at least for a photon, it doesn't remain in constant motion to infinity.

And I think that's more of the issue than any other incompatibility.
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 05:55 AM   #125
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
It needs to, or it cannot account for cosmology. And that's the problem you claim you're trying to solve.
The problem is how to account for the observation of redshifts.

If gravity isn't causing the redshifts, it doesn't need to be in the explanation.
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 06:04 AM   #126
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
All of cosmology (expansion, singularity, inflation, dark energy, dark matter, multiverse) as based on one assumption and one observation:

Assumption: light travels at c to infinity
Observation: light is redshifted after million of years

How to hold onto the assumption and explain the observation has lead to the elaborate and exotic conjectures that define the field of cosmology today.

The assumption is wrong.
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 06:16 AM   #127
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,319
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
In my theory, the photon doesn't interact with anything.
That doesn't matter. Noether's theorem applies to any possible theory of physics, regardless of how photons interact. If momentum is not conserved, then translation symmetry must be violated. There is no way around that. So how is it violated? Your theory has a glaring hole in it if you cannot say.

Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
The problem is how to account for the observation of redshifts.

If gravity isn't causing the redshifts, it doesn't need to be in the explanation.
The problem?

No, that's a problem. It's not the only one. Gravity will affect cosmology, for reasons that should be obvious. If you cannot describe that effect, then your theory is obviously incomplete, and you have a new and unsolved problem. You are substituting one explanation you are unsatisfied with with another explanation that covers only a fraction of what the theory you were unsatisfied with covers.

Again, that's not a step forward. It's two steps back.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 06:24 AM   #128
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
That doesn't matter. Noether's theorem applies to any possible theory of physics, regardless of how photons interact.
"Noether's theorem dictates that the angular momentum of the system be conserved, as a consequence of its laws of motion"

Neother's theorem applies to Newton's laws of physics.

I'm saying that constant motion to infinity is impossible, placing Newton in a limited domain of applicability.

Anything based on Newton's laws therefore is limited to that domain as well.

This disagree with Newton. Anything based on that, yeah, that's gonna a problem too.

That includes Einstein and Noether.
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 06:26 AM   #129
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
And this isn't just because I don't like the big bang.

I grew up believing it was true.

But today is different:

https://www.newscientist.com/article...ite-cosmology/

"Different measurements of the Hubble constant, the rate of space-time expansion, refuse to agree – meaning we may have to look beyond Einstein’s theories to explain the universe"
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 06:43 AM   #130
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,319
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
"Noether's theorem dictates that the angular momentum of the system be conserved, as a consequence of its laws of motion"

Neother's theorem applies to Newton's laws of physics.
No, Mike. Noether's theorem applies to all physics, including quantum mechanics and general relativity.

Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
"Different measurements of the Hubble constant, the rate of space-time expansion, refuse to agree – meaning we may have to look beyond Einstein’s theories to explain the universe"
The 20th century saw two major revolutions in physics which upended Newtonian mechanics: relativity and quantum mechanics. Both of these proposed laws which were radically different from Newton's laws.

But here's the thing: in both cases, the limiting behavior of quantum mechanics and of relativity was still Newtonian. And that makes sense: Newtonian mechanics is accurate over a wide range of phenomenon. You have to get to areas where it was previously hard to test (the very small or the very fast) in order to find the discrepancies, but any successful theory which can explain those discrepancies must still be able to explain everything that Newtonian mechanics explained. So it must still look like Newtonian mechanics, in the limit of conditions where Newtonian mechanics previously worked.

And the same thing will be true with general relativity. It is an extremely well tested theory, over a very wide range of conditions. Anything that replaces it must resemble it under the conditions in which it has been successfully tested, because there's no other way to match the already successful predictions of general relativity except to closely resemble it.

But your theory... doesn't do that. Your theory doesn't turn into general relativity in any limit. Hell, you don't even know what your theory does.

That's never going to work.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 06:50 AM   #131
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
And the same thing will be true with general relativity. It is an extremely well tested theory, over a very wide range of conditions. Anything that replaces it must resemble it under the conditions in which it has been successfully tested, because there's no other way to match the already successful predictions of general relativity except to closely resemble it.

But your theory... doesn't do that. Your theory doesn't turn into general relativity in any limit. Hell, you don't even know what your theory does.

It does exactly that.

If every place in GR where there is a "c" gets replaced by "c - H * D", and H * D = 0 everywhere its been tested (Mercury's orbit is not affected by the Hubble flow), then everything still works.

QM, GR were big deals.

I'm saying the discovery of redshift is the same.

QM, GR, and Redshift all diverging from Newton.

If redshift was discovered in 1915 and GR published in 1929, the history of physics might be totally different.

Also, they stopped work on cosmology in the 30's to make weapons for the war. Hubble worked in a wind tunnel after he discovered the universe outside the Milky Way.
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 06:56 AM   #132
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Noether's theorem applies to all physics, including quantum mechanics and general relativity.

All physics where an object in motion continues at its current rate to infinity.

My theory breaks inertia fundamentally, and thus anything on it, when we're talking about hundreds of millions of light years.
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 07:20 AM   #133
Reformed Offlian
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 349
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
Let's define the observable region as including any place light keep reach us.

Just beyond that, the Hubble Limit, light cannot reach us.

Seems like that would be pretty black, eh?
CMB is light that *has* reached us, so how would your proposal produce it?
Reformed Offlian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 07:31 AM   #134
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
Originally Posted by Reformed Offlian View Post

Quote:
Let's define the observable region as including any place light keep reach us.
Just beyond that, the Hubble Limit, light cannot reach us.
Seems like that would be pretty black, eh?
CMB is light that *has* reached us,
True. And any light headed its way would disappear beyond the limit.

Quote:
so how would your proposal produce it?
I don't have a quantitative answer.

Wikipedia says this:

"1930s – Cosmologist Erich Regener calculates that the non-thermal spectrum of cosmic rays in the galaxy has an effective temperature of 2.8 K"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic...interpretation

I guess I could look at his process, because he seemed to nail it.
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 07:38 AM   #135
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
I found this paper:

Quote:
Ein HimmelskSrper, der die zur Absorption der Ultrastrahlung notwendi-
ge Dimension hat (...) wird sich durch die Ultrastrahlung erw/irmen. Die
Erw/irmung wird proportional der zugestrahlten Ultrastrahlungsenergie
Su und der Oberflgche O sein. Er wird sich so lange erw/~rmen, bis
die emittierte Wgrmestrahlung, bei schwarzer Strahlung also = aT40,
ebensogro~ geworden ist. Es ergibt sich die E n d t e m p e r a t u r T = ˘/~-/~r.
Das gibt nach Einsetzung der Zahlenwerte 2.8 K. 1
Which translates to

Quote:
A celestial body, which has the necessary to absorb the ultra-radiation
ge dimension (...) will be heated by the ultra-radiation. The
Warming is proportional to the radiated ultra-radiation energy
Su and the surface O be. He will warm up until
the emitted thermal radiation, for black radiation = aT40,
has become just as big. The result is the E n d t e m p e r a t u r T = ˘ / ~ - / ~ r.
After inserting the numerical values, this gives 2.8 K. 1
http://www.ifi.unicamp.br/~assis/Ast...3-24(1995).pdf

page 3
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 08:02 AM   #136
Reformed Offlian
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 349
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
True. And any light headed its way would disappear beyond the limit.



I don't have a quantitative answer.

Wikipedia says this:

"1930s – Cosmologist Erich Regener calculates that the non-thermal spectrum of cosmic rays in the galaxy has an effective temperature of 2.8 K"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic...interpretation

I guess I could look at his process, because he seemed to nail it.
Nailed what? The temperature of cosmic rays? Those aren't the same thing as the CMB. Cosmic rays aren't a blackbody, either.
Reformed Offlian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 08:12 AM   #137
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
Originally Posted by Reformed Offlian View Post
Nailed what? The temperature of cosmic rays? Those aren't the same thing as the CMB. Cosmic rays aren't a blackbody, either.


"Similarly, the work by the likes of Regener and Nernst, although painstakingly close to the eventual interpretation of the blackbody radiation in 1965, was not developed in a time when questions of the large scale structure of the universe, or the early history of the dynamic universe were being problematized in the cosmological community"

https://www.semanticscholar.org/pape...06ad79b89?p2df

It looks like the CMB was predicted by Regener, but being a German in the 1930's probably didn't help it's widespread recognition.
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 08:25 AM   #138
Reformed Offlian
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 349
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
"Similarly, the work by the likes of Regener and Nernst, although painstakingly close to the eventual interpretation of the blackbody radiation in 1965, was not developed in a time when questions of the large scale structure of the universe, or the early history of the dynamic universe were being problematized in the cosmological community"

https://www.semanticscholar.org/pape...06ad79b89?p2df

It looks like the CMB was predicted by Regener, but being a German in the 1930's probably didn't help it's widespread recognition.
An estimate of the temperature of space is not a prediction of the CMB.
Reformed Offlian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 08:42 AM   #139
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
Originally Posted by Reformed Offlian View Post
An estimate of the temperature of space is not a prediction of the CMB.
He is noting that the cosmic rays are in equilibrium with star light temperature:

"However, the density of energy produced by cosmic
rays, which is nearly equal to the density of light and
heat emitted by the fixed stars, is very interesting from
an astrophysical point of view. A celestial body with
the necessary dimensions to absorb the cosmic rays—in
case of a density of 1, a body with a diameter of several
meters (5 meters of water absorb 10 9 of the cosmic
rays)—will be heated by cosmic rays. The increase in
temperature will be proportional to the energy of ab-
sorbed cosmic rays (S U ) and the surface (O). The
temperature of the body will increase until the heat it
emits—in case of black body radiation σ ⋅ T 4 ⋅ O —
reaches the same value. We then obtain a final tem-
perature of T = 4 S U σ . Substituting numerical
values we obtain 2.8 K"
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 08:48 AM   #140
Reformed Offlian
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 349
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
He is noting that the cosmic rays are in equilibrium with star light temperature:
Exactly. Which is not the same thing as predicting the CMB.
Reformed Offlian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 08:50 AM   #141
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
Originally Posted by Reformed Offlian View Post
Exactly. Which is not the same thing as predicting the CMB.
"... The increase in
temperature will be proportional to the energy of ab-
sorbed cosmic rays (S U ) and the surface (O). The
temperature of the body will increase until the heat it
emits—in case of black body radiation σ ⋅ T 4 ⋅ O —
reaches the same value. We then obtain a final tem-
perature of T = 4 S U σ . Substituting numerical
values we obtain 2.8 K"


Black body radiation at 2.8K sounds like the CMB to me.
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 08:59 AM   #142
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 32,363
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
"... The increase in
temperature will be proportional to the energy of ab-
sorbed cosmic rays (S U ) and the surface (O). The
temperature of the body will increase until the heat it
emits—in case of black body radiation σ ⋅ T 4 ⋅ O —
reaches the same value. We then obtain a final tem-
perature of T = 4 S U σ . Substituting numerical
values we obtain 2.8 K"


Black body radiation at 2.8K sounds like the CMB to me.
Your quote doesn't say that cosmic rays are black body radiation; it says, in effect, that the irradiance of cosmic rays is equal to the irradiance of the light produced at the surface of a black body at 2.8K. Your statement that the two are the same is as absurd as claiming that, because a cat weighs the same as two large bags of flour, then two large bags of flour is the same as a cat.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021

Last edited by Dave Rogers; 3rd December 2020 at 09:02 AM.
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:01 AM   #143
Reformed Offlian
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 349
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
"... The increase in
temperature will be proportional to the energy of ab-
sorbed cosmic rays (S U ) and the surface (O). The
temperature of the body will increase until the heat it
emits—in case of black body radiation σ ⋅ T 4 ⋅ O —
reaches the same value. We then obtain a final tem-
perature of T = 4 S U σ . Substituting numerical
values we obtain 2.8 K"


Black body radiation at 2.8K sounds like the CMB to me.
It doesn't to me. Just because the words "black body radiation" appear in a sentence doesn't mean we're talking about an actual blackbody. Blackbody radiation is an idealization. It is a derived quantity, like equilibrium temperature, not an observed one.

The earth is described as having a a black body temperature of -23C. That's not a reference to any observed temperature of that quantity; it is an estimate of the temperature the earth's surface *would* have if it didn't have an atmosphere. And it still wouldn't be a near-perfect blackbody like the CMB even in that case; nothing known is, not the earth or moon, not stars, not cosmic rays, not the interstellar medium.

What made Penzias and Wilson's discovery most interesting wasn't that they found a "blackbody radiation at 2.8K"; it is that the spectrum of that observed radiation actually matched the idealization far more closely than any known object or medium could, and that wasn't something any of the people you have referenced were expecting.

Last edited by Reformed Offlian; 3rd December 2020 at 09:02 AM.
Reformed Offlian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:04 AM   #144
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Your quote doesn't say that cosmic rays are black body radiation; it says, in effect, that the irradiance of cosmic rays is equal to the irradiance of the light produced at the surface of a black body at 2.8K. Your statement that the two are the same is as absurd as claiming that, because a cat weighs the same as two large bags of flour, then two large bags of flour is the same as a cat.

No one said they were the same thing. Just similar temps.

That's objectively true.

Could be a coincidence.
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:05 AM   #145
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
Originally Posted by Reformed Offlian View Post
It doesn't to me. Just because the words "black body radiation" appear in a sentence doesn't mean we're talking about an actual blackbody.
Then what was he talking about?

"However, the density of energy produced by cosmic
rays, which is nearly equal to the density of light and
heat emitted by the fixed stars, is very interesting from
an astrophysical point of view. A celestial body with
the necessary dimensions to absorb the cosmic rays—in
case of a density of 1, a body with a diameter of several
meters (5 meters of water absorb 10 9 of the cosmic
rays)—will be heated by cosmic rays. The increase in
temperature will be proportional to the energy of ab-
sorbed cosmic rays (S U ) and the surface (O). The
temperature of the body will increase until the heat it
emits—in case of black body radiation σ ⋅ T 4 ⋅ O —
reaches the same value. We then obtain a final tem-
perature of T = 4 S U σ . Substituting numerical
values we obtain 2.8 K"
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:10 AM   #146
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 32,363
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
No one said they were the same thing. Just similar temps.

That's objectively true.
No, it isn't. You don't understand your own quote. It says that the absorption of cosmic rays at the surface of an object will be balanced by the emission of black body radiation from that surface when the temperature of the object is about 2.8K. That is not a statement of the temperature of cosmic rays, but of their irradiance.

You don't appear to know anything whatsoever about the black body radiation spectrum or its relationship to temperature, and as a result you're making yourself look extremely foolish.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:15 AM   #147
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
No, it isn't. You don't understand your own quote. It says that the absorption of cosmic rays at the surface of an object will be balanced by the emission of black body radiation from that surface when the temperature of the object is about 2.8K. That is not a statement of the temperature of cosmic rays, but of their irradiance.

You don't appear to know anything whatsoever about the black body radiation spectrum or its relationship to temperature, and as a result you're making yourself look extremely foolish.

Well, if standard cosmology is to be believed, maybe a parallel universe bumped into our universe and created the CMB cold spot?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/s...-a7743216.html

Does the Cold Spot and asymmetric hemispheric temps still mean the CMB is a perfect black body?
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:17 AM   #148
Pixie of key
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,287
Expanding background radiation comes from a very very very distant objects.

Very much from more distant objects than the most distant observable galaxies.

Expanding background rays in space arose when supermassive objects in the centers of galaxies arose in infinite ever-existing space in their own 3 D "initial explosions."

"In" the space expanding supermassive objects were born far apart from each other, so no hokkus pokkus starting point has existed.

Expanding galaxies emerged from the center outward when the trajectories of two supermassive objects collided, resulting in collisions from these expanding supermassive objects that unleashed much expanding dark matter that gave rise to rapidly expanding stars in space.

Of course, there are also expanding gas clouds of expanding gas consisting of observable expanding matter.

All of the expanding background radiation has interacted with the expanding background radiation they encounter, accelerating each other’s expansion.

Expanding space is naked empire!!!

��
__________________
http://www.onesimpleprinciple.com/l4

"Math without words is meaningless.
Words without math can have meaning."
by Maartenn100

Last edited by Pixie of key; 3rd December 2020 at 09:22 AM.
Pixie of key is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:18 AM   #149
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
https://physicsworld.com/a/the-endur...mic-cold-spot/

Quote:
"At first glance, the CMB has a nearly perfect black-body spectrum (uniform temperature), and looks isotropic to scales of around 10–5 K. "
Ok, so to start off with... the CMB is not a perfect black body.

EDIT: Nearly perfect is not perfect.

Quote:
"But it has also thrown up some perplexing mysteries and anomalies, such as a significant discrepancy of the CMB as observed in the two opposite hemispheres of the sky.

Perhaps the most intriguing mystery concerns a large and unusually cold patch on the CMB, more than a billion light-years across. First observed by NASA’s Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) in 2004, and later confirmed by the European Space Agency’s Planck satellite, the so-called “CMB cold spot” is about 70 μK colder than the average CMB temperature, and appears in the southern celestial hemisphere."

So, if I got this right... I should show how the CMB is a perfect black body... when it's not observed to be a perfect black body?

Last edited by Mike Helland; 3rd December 2020 at 09:19 AM. Reason: nearly
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:19 AM   #150
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 32,363
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
Well, if standard cosmology is to be believed, maybe a parallel universe bumped into our universe and created the CMB cold spot?
Changing the subject when you get confused isn't going to make you look any less foolish. Do you actually know what black body radiation is, and how it relates to temperature?

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:22 AM   #151
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Changing the subject when you get confused isn't going to make you look any less foolish. Do you actually know what black body radiation is, and how it relates to temperature?

I don't know much about black body's, but is the CMB an absolutely perfect black body?

Or just close?
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:23 AM   #152
Reformed Offlian
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 349
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
Then what was he talking about?
Dave Rogers already explained that at least as well as I could.
Reformed Offlian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:23 AM   #153
Pixie of key
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,287
The supermassive object in the center of the galaxy expands and radiates discrete expanding densities of expanding dark matter that transmit an expanding pushing force away from the center of the expanding galaxy.

When the expanding planet is in the region between the expanding Sun and the expanding supermassive object, the expanding pushing force densities from the expanding Sun collide in the center of the expanding planet with massive and dense separate expanding pushing force densities of the expanding dark matter from the expanding supermassive object.

As they collide with the counterball, the expanding atomic nuclei of the expanding planet are subjected to a more pushing force that pushes away from the center of the expanding galaxy.

Thus, the momentum of the expanding planet accelerates away from the center of the galaxy relative to the expanding Sun.

The expanding planet passes along the curved orbit of the expanding Sun because of the expanding pushing force from the Sun.

As the expanding planet protrudes to the other side of the expanding Sun relative to the center of the galaxy, there are no collisions with the counterpart in the center of the expanding planet.

The protrusion away from the center of the expanding galaxy slows relative to the expanding Sun, and thus the expanding planet descends again in the area between the Sun and the supermassive object in the center of the galaxy.

Is this too much for you?

Too much for you

🤔

Consider expanding Jupiter into the area between the Sun and the supermassive object in the center of the galaxy.

Expanding densities of pushing force collide with the counterball in the center of the expanding Jupiter.

The expanding Jupiter acquires a new expanding substance as the densities of expanding dark matter from a supermassive target in the center of the galaxy expand in the center of Jupiter into a new observable expanding substance that protrudes in a continuous stream toward the surface of the expanding Jupiter.

Explanation of Jupiter's red dot.

When the Sun is in the area between Jupiter and the supermassive object in the center of the galaxy, there are also collisions with the counter-sphere inside the Sun and the Sun also gets itself a new expanding substance that starts to push towards the surface of the expanding Sun.

This explains Sunspots.

The expanding Earth also receives a new expanding gas from its center, which is delayed out of the expanding Earth, causing hurricanes, tornadoes, and other storms.

🤔
__________________
http://www.onesimpleprinciple.com/l4

"Math without words is meaningless.
Words without math can have meaning."
by Maartenn100
Pixie of key is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:24 AM   #154
Pixie of key
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,287
With expanding energy fields of light, internal pressures of different magnitudes in different regions = explanation for the general redshift of light.

1. Expanding light has a lot of mass, but our devices can't register the expanding waves of the expanding light that are dark to us, which is the expanding thrust that all expanding nuclei of atoms circulate with one another.

2. We can study expanding light with the help of available photons.

3. Expanding photons are a very small part of the expanding light. They are like foam heads of waves of expanding light.

4. The wavy nature of the expanding light is projected by the available photons.

5. In the double gap test, send single photons and see where the waves of expanding light are transporting us.

6. For us, the dark waves of expanding lights interact with each other, accelerating each other's expansion out of space into existing space.

7. The denser the individual expanding densities of the waves of the expanding light, the greater the internal pressure of the expanding energy field formed by the expanding light and the more widely expanding the energy field will diffuse / expand outward into existing space.

8. In a large "empty" space between galaxy clusters, the expanding energy field of the expanding light field is not as large as within the galaxy cluster.

9. Due to lower internal pressure, the rate of expanding light does not accelerate away from its own galaxy cluster as quickly as the rate of expanding light accelerates within the forward galaxy clusters.

10. When the old expanding light finally projects inside or past another expanding galaxy, the new, more energetic and slightly faster expanding light accelerates the old expanding light to its own, thus extending the old expanding light, that is, generally redshifting.

11. The more expansive light that has passed through / past the galaxy cluster, the more elongated or generally redshifted the expanding light.

Expanding light vs. expanding space.

1. Space does not radiate information. You can't try to manipulate space to get information about it. In other words, expanding space is a completely religious concept. Expanding space is emperor naked.

2. Light can be studied scientifically. If and when the lights expand and interact with each other, we can change the trajectory of the expanding light with billions of years of expanding light by conducting a scientific experiment.

Why do cosmologists believe in the existence of expanding space trapped in a hat even though they cannot scientifically prove its existence?!?

Expanding space is a concept similar to the gods of antiquity.

🤔
__________________
http://www.onesimpleprinciple.com/l4

"Math without words is meaningless.
Words without math can have meaning."
by Maartenn100
Pixie of key is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:25 AM   #155
Pixie of key
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,287
Few logical assumptions about the ever-existing really really large-scale recycling where galaxies are expanding "particles" of a degree larger scale that convey information about objects that are really really far from the expanding galaxies of the visible universe.

And the expanding galaxies of the expanding visible universe originate from one such object that "radiates" an expanding pushing force with which the nature of the expanding galaxies.

Currently, it is the closest target, but the accelerating push away from it takes the expanding push force in the expanding galaxies of the expanding visible universe all the time toward another target of a similar size.

Recycling is everything A and O.

Recycling requires nothing more than what is being recycled, so that is also what is being recycled.

That is, this one and the same physical concretely existing thing is in itself a pushing force.

With the pushing force, the system consisting of this pushing force causes the pace of the pushing force pushing towards itself to slow down and thus it is continuously absorbed into the system consisting of this pushing force. Of course, it is also diverted out of it and recycling is explained.

Recirculation maintains the internal pressure of the system and thus the system of pushing force expands outward in space into already existing space.

1. What everything in the expanding visible universe consists of, disperses / expands in space into a larger and larger area.

2. There is no force that could prevent scattering into a larger and larger area of space. Has not been, is not, will not be.

3. Therefore, everything that is now dispersing in space must sometimes later be pushed into an area where it is the same thing that basically consists of everything and must be very densely compressed there, but still exploding / dispersing / expanding into less dense space all the time.

4. The insertion of such a very dense and massive object, which explodes all the time, results in the protruding inside being once again compressed into an extremely dense pushing force.

5. Prior to that, the pushing force pushing into that area collides with the very dense and massive expanding densities that circumvent the expanding pushing force that it encounters, causing their expansion to accelerate.

The collisions slow down the pace of the pushing force pushing into that area until it stops at the area where extreme pressure compresses it once again into an extremely dense pushing force. As a new high-density raw material which starts to push with the surrounding very dense push force towards the less dense push force region, so that this very dense push force later creates new expanding supermassive objects without pulling forces.

That is, it is essential that these expanding densities that recycle the expanding thrust encounter a very rapid thrust that causes their expansion to accelerate to explosive, creating larger entities from the center of which protrude toward the surface of the new expanding supermassive object. Thus, in such a way that the expanding densities recirculating the expanding pushing force of dark matter meet the expanding densities of dark matter from another expanding supermassive object, they interact with each other, causing each other's expansion to accelerate to an explosive shape and thus new detectable expanding stars.

6. That is, the new expanding supermassive objects collide with each other at a steep angle from their initial journey and thus the new expanding galaxies from the inside out so that the expanding galaxies circulate the expanding pushing force with each other and thus with the expanding visible universe. to a dense and massive object from which the galaxies of the expanding visible universe protrude away and within which the pushing force was once again compressed into an extremely dense pushing force.

That is, so that a very dense, ever-expanding pushing force is constantly pushing away from the center of that object, creating new expanding supermassive objects that collide with each other, and thus new expanding galaxies pushing ahead away from the object from which the expanding pushing force originates.

7. The motion of the expanding visible universe thus accelerates from a certain direction to a certain direction, and the momentum is so rapid that the whole expanding visible universe moves in an instant away from the area to which it had moved a moment ago. Here it is good to understand that the expanding matter of the expanding visible universe was born into a motion that took it already at that stage from a certain direction to a certain direction at a very rapid rate.

Of course, the expanding lights interact with each other, accelerating the expansion of each other, and thus the speeds of the expanding lights accelerate in the same proportion as the substances and lights expand.

8. One can only imagine how the expanding pushing force of the rapidly expanding visible universe will eventually collide with another extremely massive and dense object that is very very far outside the expanding visible universe and that recycles the ever-existing pushing force with other similar objects and even so that in these very massive and the pushing force in dense objects changes completely with time.

10. It is essential, of course, to understand that the thrust of these ever-exploding objects outside the expanding visible universe is the nature of the expanding galaxies.

That is, expanding galaxies are like expanding "particles" that transmit information from / about these Huge Massive and Very Very Density Expanding Objects, so that the pushing force at these all-time exploding objects changes completely with time.

One expanding photon is small, not so density and expanding star is big, density object.

One expanding galaxy is small, not so density and one HMaVVDEO, Huge Massive and Very Very Density Expanding Object is big, very very density object.

🤔
__________________
http://www.onesimpleprinciple.com/l4

"Math without words is meaningless.
Words without math can have meaning."
by Maartenn100
Pixie of key is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:26 AM   #156
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 32,363
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
I don't know much about black body's,
Given that you can't even correctly form the plural, I think it might be safer to say you don't know anything about black bodies.

Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
but is the CMB an absolutely perfect black body?

Or just close?
It approximates to the spectrum of ideal black body radiation more closely than anything else known in nature. One of the many, many things you don't know about black body radiation is that that has nothing to do with its temperature varying with direction.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:28 AM   #157
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
It approximates to the spectrum of ideal black body radiation more closely than anything else known in nature.
So the CMB is not a perfect black body?
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:32 AM   #158
Reformed Offlian
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 349
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
I don't know much about black body's, but is the CMB an absolutely perfect black body?

Or just close?
It is close. *Extremely* close. Close enough to rule out any alternative you are likely to come up with.
Reformed Offlian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:38 AM   #159
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,242
Originally Posted by Reformed Offlian View Post
It is close. *Extremely* close. Close enough to rule out any alternative you are likely to come up with.
Well, this says there are black body stars:

https://aasnova.org/2018/10/31/perfe...es-in-the-sky/
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/1...38-3881/aac88b
Mike Helland is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2020, 09:40 AM   #160
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 32,363
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
So the CMB is not a perfect black body?
As far as I'm aware, the data shows no measurable deviations from a perfect black-body curve greater than the experimental error of the measurement. You could look it up for yourself, of course, and assess it for yourself, rather than asking pointless questions on a subject you're determined not to learn anything about.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:39 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.