Can we measure 'expansion'

  • 112 Replies
  • 29741 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12656
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #50 on: 17/03/2009 15:24:35 »
Jukris - There are many errors in what you say and, unfortunately, a lot that I can't understand.

Quote
Also between people there exists empty space that does not expand or curve.

The space around any object with mass is warped. But with small masses like people it is so miniscule it is impossible to detect.

Quote
These people in the centre sweat the most. This is excactly the same thing that happens without gravitation for example in the centre of the earth and in the centre of the sun.

I have no idea what you mean by that.

Quote
The atomcores expand and open up expanding electrons and expanding photons and they beam their expanding energy as waves away from themselves. This is how it goes!

Electrons & photons do not expand. Nothing is just "beamed" away. Photons can be emitted but that's the nearest you'll get.

Quote
It it also easy to realize that outside the visible universe the is an area, where is really much more energy than the visible universe has all together and the energy some where out there is much denser than than it is in a visible universe.

How is that easy to realise? We haven't a clue what is actually beyond the visible universe. We make the assumptin that it's the same as what we can see. This is called homogeneity.

As with anything that cannot be seen or measured, we have to make assumptions. But those assumptions have to be realistic. For instance, past the visible universe could be a giant cheese factory made of pink bricks; but that is not realistic. The only realistic assumption we can make about what is beyond the visible universe is that it is the same as the visible universe. Anything else would be pure fantasy.

Quote
Because the MOVEMENT takes place towards a less dense area, then the visible universe MOVES as an entity away from that one point that is really far away from the visible universe and where the energy is much denser than it is in a visible universe.

But the visible universe is expanding in all directions. It isn't just moving away from something.

Quote
You say, space start expanding faster same time when quasars born!

Who is saying that? I've certainly never heard it before. Space has been expanding since the instant of the Big Bang. Inflationary Theory says it went through a period of accelerated expansion from 10-36 seconds to 10-33 seconds but quasars didn't start forming until millions, or even billions, of years later.

Quote
Because there born quasars, there start moving more energy between expanding photons and that energy get photons expanding faster!

There you go again. Where did you get the idea that photons expand? They don't.
Fledgling science site at http://www.sciencefile.org/SF/content/view/54/98/ needs members and original articles. If you can help, please join.

*

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #51 on: 17/03/2009 15:24:40 »
Quote from: DoctorBeaver
With his ability to "think outside the box" I wonder what he'd come up with if he could come back to life now and see all the new knowledge we have acquired, all the new theories that have been devised, since his death.
Since Einstein, like Schroedinger, hated Quantum Mechanics, I doubt that he would have liked any of the new string theories or their derivatives. [:)]

Schrodinger's Bio

Quote from: the link
It came as a result of his dissatisfaction with the quantum condition in Bohr's orbit theory and his belief that atomic spectra should really be determined by some kind of eigenvalue problem. For this work he shared with Dirac the Nobel Prize for 1933.

*

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12656
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #52 on: 17/03/2009 15:30:22 »
Vern - I didn't say he would like any of it. In fact, I think he would find a lot of it rather distasteful.
Fledgling science site at http://www.sciencefile.org/SF/content/view/54/98/ needs members and original articles. If you can help, please join.

*

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12188
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #53 on: 17/03/2009 15:39:47 »
I found a very nice tutorial to how to calculate redshift.
It's a whole site dedicated to it it seems, aimed for teachers.
http://cas.sdss.org/dr5/en/proj/teachers/advanced/hubble/specifics.asp
And the visual tools for it http://cas.sdss.org/dr5/en/tools/chart/
« Last Edit: 17/03/2009 15:51:17 by yor_on »
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."

*

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #54 on: 17/03/2009 15:47:28 »
Quote from: yor_on's link
The fact that redshift can be interpreted in two ways is a subtle but important point. When objects are close to Earth, their redshifts should be interpreted as coming from Doppler shifts due to relative motion. When objects are far from Earth, their redshifts should be interpreted as coming from the cosmological stretching of space. Be sure that students understand the concept of the stretching of space, because they will need it to understand the big bang in the next section.
Nice link yor_on; I see that we're now teaching that distant red shifts are due to cosmological stretching of space, and local ones are assumed to be Doppler.

The stretching of space is completely alien to my thought processes; I just can't get my head around it. I like good old solid 3D space and 1D time. But I realize I may be alone in that universe [:)]
« Last Edit: 17/03/2009 15:50:33 by Vern »

*

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12188
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #55 on: 17/03/2009 15:57:47 »
I don't know Vern, myself I'm just trying to make sense of what 'mainstream physics' say :) And when it comes to 'expansion' I'm not sure what to think really. So I'm hoping for more 'input' on how we can test for it, maybe redshift is 'it'?

If we placed some measuring instruments at a precise distance of each other in outer space, shouldn't they too be expected to have a growing distance due to 'expansion'? We could try to send two satellites equipped with lasers for that exact measurement perhaps?

--
And make them stationary relative Earth of course.
Or maybe not::))
« Last Edit: 17/03/2009 16:07:03 by yor_on »
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."

*

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #56 on: 17/03/2009 16:36:57 »
Quote from: yor_on
If we placed some measuring instruments at a precise distance of each other in outer space, shouldn't they too be expected to have a growing distance due to 'expansion'? We could try to send two satellites equipped with lasers for that exact measurement perhaps?
You're right; it would be difficult; I think there might be a problem with gravity considerations. If we allow the gravity within galaxies to curtail the expansion, we wouldn't observe expansion.

*

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12188
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #57 on: 17/03/2009 18:28:10 »
Ahem, you might have a point there.
A small and insignificant point.
In fact intrinsically small.
So small.

Ah.
SH*
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."

*

Offline JukriS

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 115
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #58 on: 17/03/2009 18:48:04 »

*

Offline JukriS

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 115
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #59 on: 17/03/2009 18:54:31 »
Guess why that happend


"Pioneer anomaly
Main article: Pioneer anomaly

Analysis of the radio tracking data from the Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft at distances between 20–70 AU from the Sun has consistently indicated the presence of a small but anomalous Doppler frequency drift. The drift can be interpreted as due to a constant acceleration of (8.74 ± 1.33) × 10−10 m/s2 directed towards the Sun. Although it is suspected that there is a systematic origin to the effect, none has been found. As a result, there is growing interest in the nature of this anomaly.

[edit]"

*

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #60 on: 17/03/2009 19:03:17 »
This link from JukriS is an article about stuff that can not be within the known universe. Observation of speeds place a great attractor well outside the known bounds.

Quote from: JukriS link
Inflationary bubble

The scientists deduced that whatever is driving the movements of the clusters must lie beyond the known universe.

*

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #61 on: 17/03/2009 19:08:40 »
Quote from: JukriS
Analysis of the radio tracking data from the Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft at distances between 20–70 AU from the Sun has consistently indicated the presence of a small but anomalous Doppler frequency drift. The drift can be interpreted as due to a constant acceleration of (8.74 ± 1.33) × 10−10 m/s2 directed towards the Sun. Although it is suspected that there is a systematic origin to the effect, none has been found. As a result, there is growing interest in the nature of this anomaly.
Very interesting; it couldn't be that nature just naturally expands light, could it? Not to worry, we can attribute it to the expansion of space and have yet another confirmation of the big bang theory. [:)]

*

Offline JukriS

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 115
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #62 on: 17/03/2009 19:09:04 »
This link from JukriS is an article about stuff that can not be within the known universe. Observation of speeds place a great attractor well outside the known bounds.

Quote from: JukriS link
Inflationary bubble

The scientists deduced that whatever is driving the movements of the clusters must lie beyond the known universe.



Yes, and guess what?

I profetian phenomena like DARK FLOW ALREADY 28.5.2008

iT IS WITH FINNISH



"Vauvagalakseja

http://www.ursa.fi/blogit/ta/index.php?title=hubble_paljasti_massiiviset_vauvagalaksi&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1


Ehkäpä nämä vauvagalaksit ovat peräisin eri energiakeskittymästä kuin vanhemmat galaksit. Jos, niin silloin vauvagalaksien liikkeestä voitaneen havaita tämä asia.

Molemmat energiakeskittymät siis sijaitsevat näkyvän maailmankaikkeuden ulkopuolella ja ne laajenevat, avautuen energia-aaltoja joilla on galaksiluonne.

Heitämpä siis ilmoille epäilyksen tästä!

RemonttiJukteri"


http://www.onesimpleprinciple.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2259


.
« Last Edit: 17/03/2009 19:11:07 by JukriS »

*

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12656
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #63 on: 17/03/2009 19:09:24 »
This link from JukriS is an article about stuff that can not be within the known universe. Observation of speeds place a great attractor well outside the known bounds.

Quote from: JukriS link
Inflationary bubble

The scientists deduced that whatever is driving the movements of the clusters must lie beyond the known universe.

Cosmic string in the cracks between domains. Millions of lightyears long and denser than a neutron star.
Fledgling science site at http://www.sciencefile.org/SF/content/view/54/98/ needs members and original articles. If you can help, please join.

*

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #64 on: 17/03/2009 19:15:18 »
Quote from: DoctorBeaver
Cosmic string in the cracks between domains. Millions of light years long and denser than a neutron star.
I have not seen this before DoctorBeaver. Is that part of one of the string theories?

*

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12656
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #65 on: 17/03/2009 19:18:16 »
No, it's a totally different beastie. Although they are predicted by string theory.

from Wikipedia:

A cosmic string is a hypothetical 1-dimensional (spatially) topological defect in various fields. Cosmic strings are hypothesized to form when the field undergoes a phase change in different regions of spacetime, resulting in condensations of energy density at the boundaries between regions. This is somewhat analogous to the imperfections that form between crystal grains in solidifying liquids, or the cracks that form when water freezes into ice. The phase changes that produce cosmic strings may have occurred in the earliest moments of the universe's evolution.

Cosmic strings, if they exist, would be extremely thin with diameters on the same order as a proton. They would have immense density, however, and so would represent significant gravitational sources. A cosmic string 1.6 kilometers in length may be heavier than the Earth. However general relativity predicts that the gravitational potential of a straight string vanishes: there is no gravitational force on static surrounding matter. The only gravitational effect of a straight cosmic string is a relative deflection of matter (or light) passing the string on opposite sides (a purely topological effect). A closed loop of cosmic string gravitates in a more conventional way. During the expansion of the universe, cosmic strings would form a network of loops, and their gravity could have been responsible for the original clumping of matter into galactic superclusters.
« Last Edit: 17/03/2009 19:20:59 by DoctorBeaver »
Fledgling science site at http://www.sciencefile.org/SF/content/view/54/98/ needs members and original articles. If you can help, please join.

*

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #66 on: 17/03/2009 19:19:43 »
No, it's a totally different beastie.
Quick; write it up and dust off the mantel spot for the Nobel[:)]

*

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12656
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #67 on: 17/03/2009 19:22:48 »
And an Italian scientist thinks he may have found 1:

extract from http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-07/ns-iia072705.php:

THE case for the existence of cosmic strings has just been boosted. If confirmed, these one-dimensional threads of energy that can span millions of light years could be the first sign of extra dimensions in the universe. Cosmic strings are predicted by string theory. They are gigantic counterparts of the strings that are thought to give rise to the fundamental particles of matter. String theory suggests that our universe may be a three-dimensional island, or "brane", and that the big bang was the result of a collision between our universe and another 3D brane. The collision would have given rise to one-dimensional cosmic strings, and finding such a string would strengthen the theory and support the idea that extra dimensions exist.

The immense energy of a cosmic string would warp the space-time around it. If one existed somewhere between us and a distant galaxy, say, the warped space-time would create two possible paths for the light from the galaxy to reach Earth. This would result in two identical images of the galaxy in our sky, just a whisker apart. Last year, that's exactly what Mikhail Sazhin of Capodimonte Astronomical Observatory in Naples, Italy, and the Sternberg Astronomical Institute in Moscow, Russia, and his colleagues found. They named the pair CSL-1 (New Scientist, 18 December 2004, p 30).
Fledgling science site at http://www.sciencefile.org/SF/content/view/54/98/ needs members and original articles. If you can help, please join.

*

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #68 on: 17/03/2009 19:31:15 »
Okay; now I remember coming across that notion several years ago. I didn't think it would catch on.

Gravitational lensing does happen; I didn't see in the article linked how they determined that the two star images they observed were not due to gravitational lensing of the more familiar kind.

*

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12188
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #69 on: 17/03/2009 19:50:10 »
Jukris, what exactly is your point?

You say you 'prophesied' this due to what?
Give it some time and make it into a comprehensive text.
That will make it easier for me to see how you think here.

So give it some time and build it up to a 'whole' text.
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."

*

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12656
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #70 on: 17/03/2009 20:22:31 »
SHall we throw semilocal strings into the mix too? Shall we? Eh? Eh?
Fledgling science site at http://www.sciencefile.org/SF/content/view/54/98/ needs members and original articles. If you can help, please join.

*

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12188
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #71 on: 17/03/2009 20:42:38 »
Are you saying that we should string 'it' on:)
I would much prefer a coherent discussion.
Cutting to the cheese, like a laser.
Not that I do that, of course.

Ah, cut cheese with a laser that is.

--
(Although it would be nifty:)
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."

*

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #72 on: 17/03/2009 22:33:05 »
I'm still trying to figure how strings can be semi-local. The edit box won't even accept it without the dash [:)]

*

Offline JukriS

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 115
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #73 on: 18/03/2009 08:24:16 »
Sorry abot my english. I know, is terrible.

I see news about baby galaxies 28.5.2008.

Then i just think about, maybe this baby galaxies are from some other giant expanding energyconcentration, what usual and bigger galaxies are from.

This giant expanding energyconcenrtration expanding and emit energywaves who have a nature of galaxies!

They are very far away outside visible Universe!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AewKGNIZpuE&feature=channel_page



.

*

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12656
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #74 on: 18/03/2009 10:18:55 »
I'm still trying to figure how strings can be semi-local. The edit box won't even accept it without the dash [:)]

http://crd.lbl.gov/~borrill/defects/semilocal.html

Some of the animations are interesting. The best 1 is to scroll down to where it says "The full simulation volume (t = 20 - 2000, isosurface = 1/2) " and click on the link.
Fledgling science site at http://www.sciencefile.org/SF/content/view/54/98/ needs members and original articles. If you can help, please join.

*

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #75 on: 18/03/2009 16:23:26 »
Quote from: DoctorBeaver
Some of the animations are interesting. The best 1 is to scroll down to where it says "The full simulation volume (t = 20 - 2000, isosurface = 1/2) " and click on the link.
Yes; very interesting; I had not encountered the notion of local strings before.

*

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12656
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #76 on: 18/03/2009 21:49:57 »
Quote from: DoctorBeaver
Some of the animations are interesting. The best 1 is to scroll down to where it says "The full simulation volume (t = 20 - 2000, isosurface = 1/2) " and click on the link.
Yes; very interesting; I had not encountered the notion of local strings before.


If you had I'd say that you need to get out more!  [:D]

I've got nothing better to do than trawl through obscure science references.
Fledgling science site at http://www.sciencefile.org/SF/content/view/54/98/ needs members and original articles. If you can help, please join.

*

Offline JukriS

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 115
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #77 on: 19/03/2009 10:46:40 »
Neutriinos explode and radiate energy waves. They will relocate their kineticenergy, expanding planets and Expanding atoms nucleus.

The longer time neutriinos moving mode, the more they affect the interaction of atoms with the cores.

The sun will neutriinos to transfer kinetic energy to the gasplanets more than pioneerprobes.

Gas Planets gets neutriinos "curving" towards him. Therefore, the Sun in a bigger pressure gasplanets than pioneerprobes.

This explains the so-called. pioneeranomalian!



Also that

http://arxivblog.com/?p=596

*

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12656
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #78 on: 19/03/2009 11:00:01 »
Quote
Neutriinos explode and radiate energy waves

What!?  [:o]

Where did you get that idea from?
Fledgling science site at http://www.sciencefile.org/SF/content/view/54/98/ needs members and original articles. If you can help, please join.

*

Offline JukriS

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 115
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #79 on: 19/03/2009 13:48:15 »
Where did you get that idea, particle dont emit energy?

Of course also all particle emit energy!

This just entropy, you know!

There is no drawing force at all!

If the particles radiate energy, and if the energy of particles becomes entropian throughout the period of less high-density energy, combining macro and micro Kosmos just their own time to understand the overall!

Underground power

When we do experiments on the surface and find out how much the particles transfer the kinetic energy songs, it is worth remembering that they are at the stage of hot / high-density and an outer low-surface relative to the amount of energy that they have! Then they do not affect the interaction of atoms songs kernels very much and therefore do not give up their energy. (kinetic energy or heat energy, and it is the same!)

Later, when particle already moved huge emptynes through, the old density of particles is much less than the future of new particles. Particles of the old time is quicker, and they radiate energy more quickly away from himself. They are bigger and their share of more energy to make them explode their energy towards the nuclei of atoms.

The sun changes with time by red giant. the same phenomenon also occurs in micro-particles of the world!

Does not change the substance energy. Atoms in the kernel, there is no other than the energy that changes the whole period of less high-density energy in accordance with entropian!

Thus we realize that the so-called. dark energy is the one and the same energy as everything else is!

Our measuring instruments, we may not even be able to detect the energy that causes galaxy forces between the rejection, even though this energy is of the one and the same energy as everything else is.

This energy, therefore, to press us towards the expansion of the Earth's surface more strongly than the Earth's emitted energy pushes us away from the planet Earth!

For example, galaxy centers huge black holes are not much time to have affected interactions with each other, but now they come from the energy of which is the result of the stars, the turn affects a lot of other galaxy of stars with. During its journey, these particles are affected by interactions with each other and make each other explode or to become a faster high-density less energy, allowing them to transfer more ns. kinetic energy of non-residential galaxy force galaxy!

Quasars have been observed in born at the same time as the space began to expand an accelerating pace! It is thus seen how the energy started to become less high-density energy an accelerating pace, but still thought-state expansion and began to expand an accelerating rate? and this theory is based on the observation obtained from particles that have energy! The particles themselves are not changed over the entire period of less energy, high-density, when light stretches of red moves in general!

As simple as everything is on!

.

Tommy The Wizard Hellstenin book Einari told this on page 125 (A good book, worth reading!)

"The truth is in itself always simple. It has just identified. It is a bright, clear, and simple, so that even a child can understand it. In fact, just the child understands, because he does not make things complicated. The so-called adults are doing, and when Then someone says the truth, it is not expected, because it is not sufficiently complicated. vicious, huh? "


Expanding galaxy groups therefore tönivät each other away from each other already in existence in the state which is not really expanding or curving!

*

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #80 on: 19/03/2009 15:01:38 »
Quote from: JukriS
Quasars have been observed in born at the same time as the space began to expand an accelerating pace! It is thus seen how the energy started to become less high-density energy an accelerating pace, but still thought-state expansion and began to expand an accelerating rate? and this theory is based on the observation obtained from particles that have energy! The particles themselves are not changed over the entire period of less energy, high-density, when light stretches of red moves in general!
Do you have a reference for this. I glean from your post that you're saying that there is some connection between Quasars and the expansion of space. I've never seen that before.

*

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12656
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #81 on: 19/03/2009 23:47:03 »
Quote
Neutriinos explode and radiate energy waves

What!?  [:o]

Where did you get that idea from?

I was referring to exploding neutrinos emitting energy. I have never heard of them exploding and I do not see how they can as they are fundamental. What do they explode into? They have no constituents.
Fledgling science site at http://www.sciencefile.org/SF/content/view/54/98/ needs members and original articles. If you can help, please join.

*

Offline JukriS

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 115
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #82 on: 20/03/2009 08:04:21 »
What is inside atoms nucleus?

There is only energy.

Why everything what we can see, heard, taste, smell and feel, happend?

This all happend, because energy open up/expanding, changing to not so denstity energy all a time!

Not the substance altered energy!

The energy change of less high-density energy! In space who dont change at all!


Quasars are located in I think about 7-11 billion light-years away from us?

Space began to expand with an accelerating rate of 8 billion years ago? When the universe was 6 billion years old?


Quasars Energy was a time to move mode, and affect its light photons, who were coming towards us!


http://www.onesimpleprinciple.com/296

When you read my text, lets remember, i am lasy dude! i post write some text again. Like tornados.

I think Tornados, sunspots and gasplanets spots are same kind of phenomena who need some energy from space inside sun or planets and after that coming some energy out...
« Last Edit: 20/03/2009 08:06:00 by JukriS »

*

Offline JukriS

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 115
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #83 on: 20/03/2009 08:56:09 »
Of course, the light comes to us in the direction towards and quasars in the radiant energy has reached the same region where the light towards us came. and it has a light too light to help get information quasars. Surely, but if my time was before the hot / dense photons began to influence the interactions with each other and began to push each other away from each other. An accelerating pace because of how more and quasars and also stars was born, the more photons started to move around in space!

*

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12656
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #84 on: 20/03/2009 21:14:51 »
Quote
Space began to expand with an accelerating rate of 8 billion years ago? When the universe was 6 billion years old?

Where did you get that idea from? Space has been expanding since the moment of the Big Bang. If it hadn't expanded prior to 8 billion years ago, how did quasars form 11 billion years ago?
Fledgling science site at http://www.sciencefile.org/SF/content/view/54/98/ needs members and original articles. If you can help, please join.

*

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #85 on: 21/03/2009 02:45:01 »
Quote from: DoctorBeaver
I was referring to exploding neutrinos emitting energy. I have never heard of them exploding and I do not see how they can as they are fundamental. What do they explode into? They have no constituents.
I am coming to suspect that neutrinos may not actually exist. Their detection has many subjective elements that might yield to reports of detection when actually the data is within the noise level. I am reminded of the discrepancy between detected solar neutrinos, and the theoretical amount of solar neutrinos.

Looking back, I notice that there has never been an event that was detected by neutrinos, then we looked with other means and confirmed the detection. It is always the other way around, we see an event, such as a nova flair up, then we find that sure enough, we detect neutrino events that just might be some small portion greater than the noise level.
« Last Edit: 21/03/2009 02:47:03 by Vern »

*

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12656
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #86 on: 21/03/2009 08:55:06 »
Vern - I agree they're slippery little buggers.
Fledgling science site at http://www.sciencefile.org/SF/content/view/54/98/ needs members and original articles. If you can help, please join.

*

Offline Chemistry4me

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 7709
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #87 on: 21/03/2009 10:16:32 »
Vern - I agree they're slippery little buggers.

Ditto. [:)]

*

Offline JukriS

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 115
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #88 on: 21/03/2009 11:22:24 »
Quote
Space began to expand with an accelerating rate of 8 billion years ago? When the universe was 6 billion years old?

Where did you get that idea from? Space has been expanding since the moment of the Big Bang. If it hadn't expanded prior to 8 billion years ago, how did quasars form 11 billion years ago?



Where did you get that idea from? Space has never been expanding.

Space is been there for ever! Sapce who dont expanding or curving! sapce who dont change at all!

Only energy expanding in space who dont expand!

Lets think about that way. galaxys centre is very big particle/black holes who expanding and radiate energywaces who have a nature of atoms.

It is take a time and finally born stars.

same thing happend for our particle.

Even first quasars born 11 billion years ago, it is take some time, before this particle, (who start moving when quasars born), born small "stars" who start radiate very small particle. With this energy waves, our particle get themselfs expanding faster and faster...


You cant see, heard, taste, smell or feel space and you BELIEVE, that space expanding!

Are you some religious or what!


Where did you get that idea from? Particle dont radiate energy?

Of course, also particle radiate energy.

Also particle can absorb and emit energy what particle radiate!

Ofcourse, because there is all a time entropy, you know!


Only one force!

PRESSURE, you know!

Change of pressure, nothing else!

No drawing force at all

No gravity, you know!

You cant explain drawing force.

You can explain pushing force easy way!

.
« Last Edit: 21/03/2009 11:28:17 by JukriS »

*

Offline Chemistry4me

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 7709
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #89 on: 21/03/2009 11:47:09 »
Where did you get that idea from? Space has never been expanding.
It hasn't? [???]

*

Offline Chemistry4me

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 7709
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #90 on: 21/03/2009 11:48:53 »
You cant see, heard, taste, smell or feel space and you BELIEVE, that space expanding!

Are you some religious or what!


Where did you get that idea from? Particle dont radiate energy?
Haha. [:D]

Now that's funny. [:)]

*

Offline Chemistry4me

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 7709
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #91 on: 21/03/2009 12:08:09 »
Looks like I'll have to go back and learn Year 11 physics/astronomy again. [:)]

*

Offline JukriS

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 115
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #92 on: 21/03/2009 12:23:31 »
Looks like I'll have to go back and learn Year 11 physics/astronomy again. [:)]

No way dude!

Why you want to learn againg wrong physics?

Forget extra dimensions, expanding and curving space, dark matter and dark energy!

Just think about with you own brains everything.

There is only one element who changing and it is energy, no space.

occam cut expanding and curving space off. Also extra dimensions off, you know!


.

*

Offline Chemistry4me

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 7709
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #93 on: 21/03/2009 12:25:32 »
So if what you say is true...

What do you mean exactly by 'energy changing'?

*

Offline JukriS

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 115
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #94 on: 21/03/2009 12:35:10 »
So if what you say is true...

What do you mean exactly by 'energy changing'?


Energy changing all a time to not so density energy!

I can easyly proof that.

All that energy, what sun already radiate, was inside sun 5 billion years ago. Then that energy was smaller area what is now! Then sun was more density. Same thing happaend all a time for energy who is inside atoms nucleus who expanding and radiate energywaves who have a nature of electrons and particle. Electrons just moving to the next expanding atoms nucleus and get this expanding faster!



All the phenomens can be explained by one force and this force is the  pressure. (Don´t forget the power of thought! You also can move yourself by the power of thought! Quite right. You get yourself to move with the help of the muscles . You so you send message of your brains to your muscles and you get yourself to move? What is power/force of this thought, which get you to move there where you want?).


We can describe by people what happens in the atomcores all the time. For example one thousand people can go to the space and curl up close to each other. Now we have made an energyconsentration of people that covers a certain spot of the space. We know that the biggest part of the atoms is empty space. Also between people there exists empty space that does not expand or curve.

Now these people can begin to straighten or in other words to open up and this way they push themselves away from each other. One can observe the hardest pressure in the middle of this human energyconsentration and people who locate in the middle must do an enormeous job so that they woun´t
flatten in the centre. These people in the centre sweat the most. This is excactly the same thing that happens without gravitation for example in the centre of the earth and in the centre of the sun.

The density of the human energyconsentration reduces and the people push themselves away from the centre of the human energyconsentration. Now for a little while we can observe a phenomen of gravitation without a drawing force (that actually does not exist) on the surface of the human energyconsentration.

In my opinion the space does not expand or curve. If it would expand, could you describe how does the space expand?

It is easy to describe how the energy all the time turns into a less dense energy in the atomcores, so I think that it is time to forget all about the magical expanding and curving of the space. You can also forget all the spare spacedimentions, the dark substance and the dark energy.

So the space does not expand or curve!

The atomcores expand and open up expanding electrons and expanding photons and they beam their expanding energy as waves away from themselves. This is how it goes!

When you look at the galaxy, you can understand that the energy inside the galaxy is denser than outside the galaxy. If you look at a star, you can understand that energy inside the star is denser than outside the star. This way you will know for sure that the energy inside the atomcore is denser than outside the atomcore. It is not difficult to understand that the energy inside the protons / neutrons is denser than outside of them and the energy inside the qvarks is denser than outside the qvarks and so on...

It it also easy to realize that outside the visible universe the is an area, where is really much more energy than the visible universe has all together and the energy some where out there is much denser than than it is in a visible universe. Still in that area far away from the visible universe there is no centre point where the energy would be denser than outside it.

That three-dimentionally expanding energyconsentration that bems energywaves with the nature of the galaxies, is formed also from separate three-dimentionally expanding energyconsentrations ect. And so the smaller separate energyconsentrations we talk about, the denser and denser the
energy is all the time.

So the atomcore does not have a centre point, where the energy would be denser than outside it. There is no centre point also at the universe, outside which the energy would be less denser.

Because the MOVEMENT takes place towards a less dense area, then the visible universe MOVES as an entity away from that one point that is really far away from the visible universe and where the energy is much denser than it is in a visible universe.

http://www.onesimpleprinciple.com/l2



.

*

Offline Chemistry4me

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 7709
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #95 on: 21/03/2009 13:02:52 »
Is this your own theory?

*

Offline JukriS

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 115
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #96 on: 21/03/2009 13:04:47 »
Is this your own theory?

Yes

Is just about idea.

i dont have mathematic for my idea

.

*

Offline Chemistry4me

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 7709
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #97 on: 21/03/2009 13:06:17 »
What do the other people here think about it?

*

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12656
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #98 on: 21/03/2009 14:33:30 »
Jukris - you obviously believe what you say but you seem to ignore a lot of scientific evidence. There may be domains outside our visible universe that behave differently but there is no real evidence for that. We can only make assumptions. Those assumptions are based on observation and well-founded theories, not wild speculations.

You can't say that the physics that is taught is wrong. For many years some of the best minds in the world have been working on why things look the way they do, why things behave the way they do. They have worked out laws that explain much of what we see in the universe and, in most cases, those laws are consistent. We can't explain everything, that much is true; but certainly most of what we see is explainable by well-established and proven physics.

To just say that it's all wrong without some kind of scientific justification or hard evidence to back up your statement is silly and people will not take a lot of notice of you.

You say "Atoms are expanding all atoms history, you know!". Where is there any evidence for this? In fact, all the evidence says that statement is wrong. If atoms expanded then nothing would be stable.
« Last Edit: 21/03/2009 14:36:17 by DoctorBeaver »
Fledgling science site at http://www.sciencefile.org/SF/content/view/54/98/ needs members and original articles. If you can help, please join.

*

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12656
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Can we measure 'expansion'
« Reply #99 on: 21/03/2009 17:41:48 »
Jukris - Please give some evidence for these statements you have made:

1) Atomic nuclei expand
2) Neutrinos explode

Unless you can show that these events actually happen then I cannot take your theory seriously and I doubt anybody else would.
Fledgling science site at http://www.sciencefile.org/SF/content/view/54/98/ needs members and original articles. If you can help, please join.