0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Science - space is expanding Anti/objective science - No its not
Show me a single deduction made from your ideas which can actually be shown to match the real world, where the conventional view does not.But, for preference do it in another thread. This one's getting cluttered.
Quote from: Thebox on 29/05/2018 16:06:32Science - space is expanding Anti/objective science - No its notOK, now let's look at what I actually asked for.Quote from: Bored chemist on 29/05/2018 16:01:05Show me a single deduction made from your ideas which can actually be shown to match the real world, where the conventional view does not.But, for preference do it in another thread. This one's getting cluttered.Now, in this case the conventional view is that space is expanding.There are a couple of bits of evidence for this- The CMB which is a near perfect match to the blackbody radiation spectrum.The observation of Doppler shifted spectral lines in distant stars with bigger shifts for more distant ones and there's the oldest bit (albeit that it's rather equivocal.)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olbers%27_paradoxwhich shows that either the universe has a "start date" or that it's finite in extent or that there's somethign really odd about our (local) bit of the universe.Whereas you have a bald assertion.Lets see how you show that your claim fits the data better than the conventional view.You will need to include the maths.Have fun.
Two problems. Even in 4D space-time, space is expanding.Secondly the ether has been shown not to exist.Relying on something made up as your "explanation" is a fail.
Firstly you are not listening like normal.
Secondly , space-time is expanding not the space.
if space-time is not also the ''ether'' , then what on earth do you suppose satellite carrier signals traverse through ?
Stop being absurd and think for once before you comment.
Said the man who recently said "I am space "https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=73406.msg543310#msg543310
Quite clearly you are again ignoring spacial fields in search of an ''ether''.
I'm not in search of an ether.I know it's not there.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 29/05/2018 20:10:18I'm not in search of an ether.I know it's not there.You mean you accept there is no ether but have never done your own investigations?
Quote from: Thebox on 29/05/2018 20:18:12Quote from: Bored chemist on 29/05/2018 20:10:18I'm not in search of an ether.I know it's not there.You mean you accept there is no ether but have never done your own investigations?Actually, I have built a Michelson interferometer- it worked as expected.Have you?