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, 01:34 PM   #201
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by Reformed Offlian View Post
It's up for discussion. But that discussion needs to have more than just: 'There are some unsolved problems with the standard model, therefore whatever I prefer to believe instead.'

Sure.

I believed in the big bang and the expanding universe when I was kid and up to adulthood.

It could be right, but now I'm not so sure.

My hypothesis is basically this:

1. We observe redshift, which is a decrease in frequency
2. the speed of a wave is frequency times wavelength
3. a decrease in frequency means a decrease in speed

I then propose several mathematical formulations of that conjecture, with the prominent one being the speed of a photon is c - H * D. I show how this relates to the standard model, and that it deviates in the same way from the standard model that observations behind the Hubble tension do.

You can read a lot more about it here:

https://mikehelland.github.io/hubbles-law
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, 03:12 PM   #202
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,219
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
1. We observe redshift, which is a decrease in frequency
2. the speed of a wave is frequency times wavelength
3. a decrease in frequency means a decrease in speed
3 is wrong. Changes in velocity do not produce changes in frequency, but only in wavelength.
__________________
"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 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, 03:17 PM   #203
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
What's missing from this 'crisis in cosmology'? The idea that space is not expanding at all.
Yeah.

Obviously my opinion is that alternate forms of Hubble's Law should be on the table.

My version of it resolves Hubbles tension. Here's my hypothesis (green) vs the standard model (white dots) at H=74

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, 03:22 PM   #204
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
3 is wrong. Changes in velocity do not produce changes in frequency, but only in wavelength.
a = b * c

If b goes down, a goes down.

v = frequency * wavelength

The standard model says the observed frequency decrease leads to an increase in wavelength.

My hypothesis says a decrease in frequency leads to a decrease in velocity.

This can be tested by putting a telescope in space, and placing a shutter a fair distance from its lens. When the shutter is closed, any redshifted light should stick around after the normal light disappears if its moving slower.

If both normal galaxies and highly redshifted galaxies disappear from view at the same time, my hypothesis would be falsified.
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, 04:44 PM   #205
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,219
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
a = b * c

If b goes down, a goes down.
Or c goes up. You can't tell by that equation alone.

Quote:
My hypothesis says a decrease in frequency leads to a decrease in velocity.
Your hypothesis is wrong.

Quote:
This can be tested by putting a telescope in space, and placing a shutter a fair distance from its lens. When the shutter is closed, any redshifted light should stick around after the normal light disappears if its moving slower.

If both normal galaxies and highly redshifted galaxies disappear from view at the same time, my hypothesis would be falsified.
There's an easier way to tell, which has already been done. If velocities are different, then the Doppler shift due to the motion of the earth around the sun will be different for different sources.

It isn't.
__________________
"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 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, 04:49 PM   #206
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Your hypothesis is wrong.
I think I'll the experiment decide that.

Quote:
There's an easier way to tell, which has already been done. If velocities are different, then the Doppler shift due to the motion of the earth around the sun will be different for different sources.
That doesn't test the hypothesis at all.

The red-shifted light should be red-shifted by Hubble's law.
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, 05:07 PM   #207
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,185
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
That's a great question.
Thank you. Unfortunately, while all answers are responses, not all responses are answers. Your post in no way answered my question.

What is the benefit to proposing something with no way of knowing whether it is true or not?
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot 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, 05:16 PM   #208
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,219
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
I think I'll the experiment decide that.
It already has.

Quote:
That doesn't test the hypothesis at all.

The red-shifted light should be red-shifted by Hubble's law.
And there would be an additional red shift or blue shift due to earth's orbit, and that shift would reverse as the earth's direction reverses. It would be a larger effect the slower the light is.

But that's not what astronomers actually see. It's the same for all sources.
__________________
"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 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, 05:52 PM   #209
Reformed Offlian
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 346
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
I think I'll the experiment decide that.



That doesn't test the hypothesis at all.

The red-shifted light should be red-shifted by Hubble's law.
Ziggurat specifically referred to the annual-cycle Dopper shift due to the earth's motion around the sun. Which has nothing to do with the cosmological red shift. Nor with any other possible sources of redshift (e.g., galactic rotation, proper motion, etc.)

The magnitude of that shift will go approxmiately as the quotient of the earth's orbital speed and the speed of incoming light. Any variation in the latter between sources would produce variations in the observed Doppler shift of light from those sources.

Last edited by Reformed Offlian; 3rd December 2020 at 05:54 PM.
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, 10:10 PM   #210
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Thank you. Unfortunately, while all answers are responses, not all responses are answers. Your post in no way answered my question.

What is the benefit to proposing something with no way of knowing whether it is true or not?
That there is more to the universe than what is in the observable region is neither an original idea by me nor exclusive to my hypothesis.
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, 10:28 PM   #211
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
It already has.



And there would be an additional red shift or blue shift due to earth's orbit, and that shift would reverse as the earth's direction reverses. It would be a larger effect the slower the light is.

But that's not what astronomers actually see. It's the same for all sources.

You do know what when we observe the night sky, we're pointing our telescopes away from the sun?

Our line of sight at night is perpendicular to our motion around the sun.
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, 10:30 PM   #212
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,185
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
That there is more to the universe than what is in the observable region is neither an original idea by me nor exclusive to my hypothesis.
Still not an answer to my question.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot 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, 10:33 PM   #213
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Still not an answer to my question.


Do you think everything in the universe can be observed from earth?
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, 10:53 PM   #214
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,185
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
Do you think everything in the universe can be observed from earth?
That doesn't answer my question either. Why are you so resistant to answering a question?

In good faith, I will answer yours. No, I don't. I expect that beyond our light horizon there is essentially more of the same, until we reach the wavefront of the expansion of the universe, which has to be out there somewhere. But there is no way of knowing whether that's true or not so I don't feel the urge to spend a great deal of intellectual energy thinking about it.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot 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, 10:58 PM   #215
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
That doesn't answer my question either. Why are you so resistant to answering a question?

In good faith, I will answer yours. No, I don't. I expect that beyond our light horizon there is essentially more of the same, until we reach the wavefront of the expansion of the universe, which has to be out there somewhere.
Ok.

As I said in my first reply, in standard cosmology, there's this thing called Hubble Limit/Length/Volume/Sphere:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_volume

The idea that our observable region is not the whole universe is widely accepted and uncontroversial.
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, 11:07 PM   #216
Reformed Offlian
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 346
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
You do know what when we observe the night sky, we're pointing our telescopes away from the sun?

Our line of sight at night is perpendicular to our motion around the sun.
You do know that the night sky is pretty much a hemisphere, right? And that we can look at stars in the direction the earth is orbiting just fine? They're right there on the horizon.

"Line of sight" smh
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, 11:16 PM   #217
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by Reformed Offlian View Post
You do know that the night sky is pretty much a hemisphere, right? And that we can look at stars in the direction the earth is orbiting just fine? They're right there on the horizon.

"Line of sight" smh
True, but I'm talking about space telescopes, because the ancient light can't have interacted with the atmosphere.

And if the Hubble telescope gets less than 50 degrees away from the sun it breaks.
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 4th December 2020, 12:28 AM   #218
Reformed Offlian
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 346
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
True, but I'm talking about space telescopes, because the ancient light can't have interacted with the atmosphere.
But neither me nor Ziggurat was; we were talking about measuring the red/blue shifts of the light from celestial objects and how they change over the course of the year. If light from different celestial objects were coming in at different speeds, the change in their red shifts and blue shifts over the course of the year would also be different. They aren't.

So the hypothesis you have in mind has already been tested, just by a different experiment.

Quote:
And if the Hubble telescope gets less than 50 degrees away from the sun it breaks.
Which means it can look at stars in a 260 degree arc, and not just a 180 degree arc. That's still not a "line of sight" perpendicular to the earth's motion, in fact its even less of one.
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 4th December 2020, 12:32 AM   #219
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by Reformed Offlian View Post
But neither me nor Ziggurat was; we were talking about measuring the red/blue shifts of the light from celestial objects and how they change over the course of the year. If light from different celestial objects were coming in at different speeds, the change in their red shifts and blue shifts over the course of the year would also be different. They aren't.
If the light is traveling through the atmosphere, it will be traveling at the speed of light in that medium.

In v = c - H * D, the c and H are constant. The D is distance.

----

The photon's distance from where it was emitted is crucial to keep in mind at all times. Consider light that has traveled billions of years to reach your telescope. The light enters the lens, gets focused to the eyepiece, and then into your eyeball.

Seems pretty straightforward. But at some level, some type of interaction with the light and the lens must be focusing the light. At the quantum level, the photon will have been absorbed by atoms in the lens. Then it is re-emitted (or an entirely new photon is emitted), and focused to your telescope's eyepiece.

The photon may have traveled great distances from its source before it encountered your telescope, but the light inside the telescope will be very close to its source: the lens that focused it. The distance to the source of the photons in the telescope will be less than a meter, not millions of light years.

In that case the refreshed photon will be traveling at c, which now results in an elongated wavelength when calculated.

Tests
Test 1: measure the speed of a cosmologically red-shifted photon

This is the first obvious test of the hypothesis.

But it would take thousands or millions of years to perform a fully controlled experiment where light is emitted with a known energy at a known time and travels across a known distance to see the effects of red-shift.

Using light that has already traveled millions of years seems to be the only choice.

But interacting with the photon will cause it to reset its distance and speed, as mentioned in the previous section. The task then is to come up with a clever way to measure the speed of ancient light without disturbing the photon.

Consider a long tube in space with a telescope at one end and an open shutter at the other. The telescope has a nearby galaxy and a highly red-shifted galaxy in its sight.

What happens when the shutter is closed?

Prediction: Because the red light is moving slower than the yellow light, first the nearby galaxy will disappear from view, then the distant one.

Obviously the longer the tube is the better the experiment would be. A few kilometers at least, a light second would be great. If we use a predictable and fast enough object in space as the shutter, that might work just as well. The shutter must not reflect any light. The moon may be too bright and too slow to work.

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 4th December 2020, 12:33 AM   #220
Guybrush Threepwood
Trainee Pirate
 
Guybrush Threepwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: An Uaimh
Posts: 3,072
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
True, but I'm talking about space telescopes, because the ancient light can't have interacted with the atmosphere.
Why not?
Guybrush Threepwood 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 4th December 2020, 12:39 AM   #221
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by Guybrush Threepwood View Post
Why not?
Because the aim is to interact with light from a source hundreds of millions of light years away, not atoms in our atmosphere.



---

The photon's distance from where it was emitted is crucial to keep in mind at all times. Consider light that has traveled billions of years to reach your telescope. The light enters the lens, gets focused to the eyepiece, and then into your eyeball.

Seems pretty straightforward. But at some level, some type of interaction with the light and the lens must be focusing the light. At the quantum level, the photon will have been absorbed by atoms in the lens. Then it is re-emitted (or an entirely new photon is emitted), and focused to your telescope's eyepiece.

The photon may have traveled great distances from its source before it encountered your telescope, but the light inside the telescope will be very close to its source: the lens that focused it. The distance to the source of the photons in the telescope will be less than a meter, not millions of light years.

In that case the refreshed photon will be traveling at c, which now results in an elongated wavelength when calculated.
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 4th December 2020, 03:29 AM   #222
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,916
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
If the light is traveling through the atmosphere, it will be traveling at the speed of light in that medium.
In your idea, then (I will not call it theory) outside of the atmosphere everything in space should have another colour: speed = frequency * wavelength

Quote:
a = b * c
If b goes down, a goes down.
if a goes up, then b goes up (while apparently c is not involved here)

So question: do we see that things in space have a different colour when viewed inside or outside our atmosphere? Do stellar spectra look differently?
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
tusenfem 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 4th December 2020, 03:41 AM   #223
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,219
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
If the light is traveling through the atmosphere, it will be traveling at the speed of light in that medium.
Doesn't matter. The frequency will remain red or blue shifted even if the speed changes.
__________________
"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 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 4th December 2020, 03:46 AM   #224
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,219
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
That doesn't answer my question either. Why are you so resistant to answering a question?

In good faith, I will answer yours. No, I don't. I expect that beyond our light horizon there is essentially more of the same, until we reach the wavefront of the expansion of the universe, which has to be out there somewhere. But there is no way of knowing whether that's true or not so I don't feel the urge to spend a great deal of intellectual energy thinking about it.
If the big bang theory is correct, then there is no wave front. Space itself exploded while filled with matter, it wasn't matter exploding into space. If the universe is finite, then it wraps around like a 4D balloon inflating. If it is infinite, the it is filled with matter everywhere as well. In neither case do you get any wave front.
__________________
"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 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 4th December 2020, 06:18 AM   #225
grmcdorman
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,349
Occurs to me, based on the discussion earlier of time discrepancies with an oscillating charge, that Mr. Helland has another problem: Cepheid stars.

Mind you, I'm a lay person, so I'd like to see what more knowledgeable folks than I think.
__________________
"Hello. My name is Inigo Skywalker. You are my father. Prepare to die."
grmcdorman 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 4th December 2020, 07:26 AM   #226
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
In your idea, then (I will not call it theory) outside of the atmosphere everything in space should have another colour: speed = frequency * wavelength
The speed of light in our atmosphere isn't a whole lot slower than light in a vacuum. So

The hypothesis is that photon's have a velocity of c - H * D.

If they are traveling slow after millions of years, but then hit our atmosphere, they will be absorbed and remitted by our atmosphere, making the distance to the light's source very near instead of very far.
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 4th December 2020, 07:31 AM   #227
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Doesn't matter. The frequency will remain red or blue shifted even if the speed changes.
Right.

The energy never comes back.

It's velocity and wavelength do, if it's absorbed and re-emitted (D = 0), but those don't cost energy.

Here's the cruz of the matter, can a single photon show Doppler shift?
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 4th December 2020, 08:17 AM   #228
Reformed Offlian
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 346
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
If the light is traveling through the atmosphere, it will be traveling at the speed of light in that medium.
Ziggurat beat me to pointing out that the red shift or blue shifts would still appear.

Also, the HST and other astronomical satellites have spectographs; if the phenomenon actually happened, astronomers would have seen it by now; the atmosphere wouldn't hide it from them at this point.

Also, lights with different speeds entering a medium like the atmosphere would be refracted by different amounts. Astronomer would have noticed that, too.

Also, since you brought up emission through a medium, why wouldn't extinction have an effect on the observed light from distant galaxies?

IOW, it's already known that what you propose isn't true.

Last edited by Reformed Offlian; 4th December 2020 at 08:18 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 4th December 2020, 08:29 AM   #229
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,219
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
Right.

The energy never comes back.

It's velocity and wavelength do, if it's absorbed and re-emitted (D = 0), but those don't cost energy.

Here's the cruz of the matter, can a single photon show Doppler shift?
Yes, of course it can.

The fact that you didn't already know this reveals a very marked lack of understanding of some very basic physics. You are badly out of your league, and don't even know what you don't know.
__________________
"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 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 4th December 2020, 08:48 AM   #230
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Yes, of course it can.

How can a wave with a single crest doppler shift?

You need at least two to establish a frequency of arrival rate.

Note that frequency of arrival rate, and the frequency of a single photon E/h aren't the same thing.
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 4th December 2020, 08:54 AM   #231
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,219
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
How can a wave with a single crest doppler shift?
What makes you think a photon has a single crest? It doesn't.

Like I said, you lack understanding of a lot of very basic physics, and don't even know how much you lack.

Quote:
You need at least two to establish a frequency of arrival rate.

Note that frequency of arrival rate, and the frequency of a single photon E/h aren't the same thing.
No ****. We all know that. Nobody is talking about the frequency of arrival rate. We're all talking about the frequency of the photons themselves.
__________________
"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 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 4th December 2020, 09:02 AM   #232
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: 32,351
Mike, I think you need an explanation of how this thread feels for the rest of us.

Imagine you're out fishing, and as you make a cast, some guy walks up to you and says, "You'll never catch anything that way. You need my new invention."

You feign interest, and he explains that the shape of a fish hook makes it almost impossible for you to hit a fish with it when you cast the line, and explains to you that his new invention is a straight piece of metal with no barb and the line attached to the middle, so it flies truer and you can hit a fish with it.

While you're trying to find words to respond with, you reel the line in and try another cast, and he says, "See? You missed the fish. And that worm you stuck on the hook, that just makes it even less accurate. That proves you should be using my invention."

You then try and explain to him that the point of casting is not to spear the fish with a hook, when in the middle of the sentence he interrupts you and says yes, he understands all that, but his invention works better because it hits the fish more reliably. You try and explain that, without a barb, the hook won't be able to reel the fish in, and he completely ignores you and explains that the attachment of the line one-third of the way back from the point is crucial to making it fly straight. While he's talking you make another cast, and he once again points out that your hook didn't spear a fish. You try asking him whether his invention actually works, and he simply replies by pointing out that yours obviously doesn't.

After a while you get sick of trying to explain to him that he doesn't even understand what you're trying to do because he's got totally the wrong idea about how fishing works, so you just hope that the next guy along on the river has a go at explaining, because frankly the whole thing is making your head hurt.

We're you. You're that guy.

Good luck selling your straight un-barbed fish hooks.

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 4th December 2020, 09:06 AM   #233
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
No ****. We all know that. Nobody is talking about the frequency of arrival rate. We're all talking about the frequency of the photons themselves.

The Doppler effect works by changing the arrival rate. I made the following demonstration for you.

https://mikehelland.github.io/hubbles-law/freqtest.htm

Top is simple static universe, middle is expanding, bottom is my hypothesis.

This demo only has arrival rate. No frequency or energy is given to the photons.

The hypothesis slows the photons, which reduces their individual energies, but the arrival rate is not reduced.

Therefore, the orbital rate of Earth, which is already taken into consideration, will indeed add more redshift, but that is consistent for all velocities of photons.
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 4th December 2020, 09:08 AM   #234
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Good luck selling your straight un-barbed fish hooks.

If you're content with the Big Bang, I have to admit, I'm a bit jealous of you.

I've lost my faith in 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 4th December 2020, 09:28 AM   #235
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: 32,351
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
If you're content with the Big Bang, I have to admit, I'm a bit jealous of you.

I've lost my faith in it.
I have never had "faith in it." It's simply the best model currently available.

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 4th December 2020, 09:28 AM   #236
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,219
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
The Doppler effect works by changing the arrival rate.
No, Mike, it doesn't. The photon arrival rate is NOT what we measure when we measure redshift. These are different quantities. Changes in the photon arrival rate cause a change in light intensity, NOT in frequency. Individual photon frequency is what we measure. That's why increasing the intensity of light doesn't change its color. Yes, the photon arrival rate will also change with Doppler effect, but it's still not what anyone is talking about.

Again, this is a really, really basic failure of understanding on your part. Basically everything you think you know is wrong.
__________________
"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 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 4th December 2020, 09:39 AM   #237
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Individual photon frequency is what we measure. That's why increasing the intensity of light doesn't change its color. Yes, the photon arrival rate will also change with Doppler effect, but it's still not what anyone is talking about.
You were talking about a doppler shift due to the Earth's motion.

It moves at about 100,000 km/hr around the sun, or 0.0009c.

The motion of the Earth is already taken into consideration of redshifts, as well as even the rotation of Earth.

My demo shows that regardless of the photon speed, the frequency of arrival rate doesn't change, and since the photon source isn't moving, the only doppler effects are the small ones from the Earth's motion and they are already known and accounted for.
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 4th December 2020, 09:42 AM   #238
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
I have never had "faith in it." It's simply the best model currently available.
Yet we still don't know how fast the universe is expanding.

My hypothesis just moves H * D from the velocity of the galaxies to the velocity of the photon, and it predicts a slightly different curve, using a single value for H to match close and far measurements causing the Hubble tension.
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 4th December 2020, 09:48 AM   #239
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: 32,351
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
Yet we still don't know how fast the universe is expanding.

My hypothesis just moves H * D from the velocity of the galaxies to the velocity of the photon, and it predicts a slightly different curve, using a single value for H to match close and far measurements causing the Hubble tension.
Good luck trying to spear your fish.

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 4th December 2020, 09:49 AM   #240
Mike Helland
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,136
Spear fishing feeds many families around the world.

Dark energy, well, I guess even snake oil turns a profit now and then.
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
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 10:48 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.