1
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Can the Universe really form over 70 sextillion stars in 13.7 billion years?
« on: 19/07/2009 10:36:42 »
G'day Ophiolite
You said
That I agree with.
Please leave the Troll and othe forums out of it, you are above such silly statements.
So far you have not expressed your thoughts on the discussion you have spent more time being a critic.
So far, from all the Forums that I have discussed, not one has provided concrete evidence for the BBT. I do not have to prove that the BBT is correct. I put more weight on star formation and galaxy evolution to explain the ongoing processes that do not require the ad hoc theories of the BBT.
Regardless, this paper is informative.
Is space really expanding? A counterexample
Authors: Michal Chodorowski (Copernicus Center)
(Submitted on 9 Jan 2006 (v1), last revised 3 Jul 2006 (this version, v2))
You said
Quote
All they say is, to paraphrase, there is still a lot of uncertainty in the specifics of our observations and that makes it difficult to determine which model of galaxy formation and the like we should follow.
That I agree with.
Please leave the Troll and othe forums out of it, you are above such silly statements.
So far you have not expressed your thoughts on the discussion you have spent more time being a critic.
So far, from all the Forums that I have discussed, not one has provided concrete evidence for the BBT. I do not have to prove that the BBT is correct. I put more weight on star formation and galaxy evolution to explain the ongoing processes that do not require the ad hoc theories of the BBT.
Regardless, this paper is informative.
Is space really expanding? A counterexample
Authors: Michal Chodorowski (Copernicus Center)
(Submitted on 9 Jan 2006 (v1), last revised 3 Jul 2006 (this version, v2))
Quote
Abstract: In all Friedman models, the cosmological redshift is widely interpreted as a consequence of the general-relativistic phenomenon of EXPANSION OF SPACE. Other commonly believed consequences of this phenomenon are superluminal recession velocities of distant galaxies and the distance to the particle horizon greater than c*t (where t is the age of the Universe), in apparent conflict with special relativity. Here, we study a particular Friedman model: empty universe. This model exhibits both cosmological redshift, superluminal velocities and infinite distance to the horizon. However, we show that the cosmological redshift is there simply a relativistic Doppler shift. Moreover, apparently superluminal velocities and `acausal' distance to the horizon are in fact a direct consequence of special-relativistic phenomenon of time dilation, as well as of the adopted definition of distance in cosmology. There is no conflict with special relativity, whatsoever. In particular, INERTIAL recession velocities are subluminal. Since in the real Universe, sufficiently distant galaxies recede with relativistic velocities, these special-relativistic effects must be at least partly responsible for the cosmological redshift and the aforementioned `superluminalities', commonly attributed to the expansion of space. Let us finish with a question resembling a Buddhism-Zen `koan': in an empty universe, what is expanding?