0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
As far as we know, the universe has no "edge"
But the highest galactic redshift seen so far is HD1 at z=13.3
Therefore, the 3000K is a direct outcome from the BBT.
The CMBR by itself has a redshift/blueshift that only indicates about our motion in the local space.
However, there is no other/direct prof that the CMBR λobserved is 3000K.
Quote from: Dave Lev on 04/02/2023 05:36:48Z= (λobserved -λrest) / λrestZ = (6275 – 2.75) / 2.75 = 2,281Why did you suddenly shift from using wavelengths to temperatures?Don't you see the problem there?
Z= (λobserved -λrest) / λrestZ = (6275 – 2.75) / 2.75 = 2,281
At that time the science community claimed that our universe is quite compact.
The real CMBR redshift only suggesting a motion of our galaxy of about 600km/sec?
Quote from: Dave Lev on 06/02/2023 07:17:24At that time the science community claimed that our universe is quite compact.Nope.Here's what Wiki said 20 years ago."The size of the Observable Universe can be calculated as a sphere with a radius equal to the age of the Universe in light years. Thus the observable universe is a sphere with a radius of 15 billion light years. However due to initial inflation of the Universe soon after the Big Bang, the actual size of the Universe is much bigger than what is observable. ...The Universe has no boundary but may be finite. This may be understood by a three-dimensional analogy: the Earth has no edge despite the fears of putative flat-earthers that they might fall off the edge if they travelled too far, but nonetheless the surface of the Earth has a finite area."https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Universe&oldid=291910Did you get confused about finite and bounded?
the Earth has no edge despite the fears of putative flat-earthers that they might fall off the edge if they travelled too far, but nonetheless the surface of the Earth has a finite area."
Quote from: Dave Lev on 06/02/2023 01:52:41Therefore, the 3000K is a direct outcome from the BBT.No.It's a direct consequence of hydrogen.If the material doing the emitting was helium, the corresponding temperature would have been roughly twice as high. (And the emission would have had more band structure to it).
Quote from: Dave Lev on 06/02/2023 01:52:41The real CMBR redshift only suggesting a motion of our galaxy of about 600km/sec?Obviously not. Since the the wavelength of the CMBR is the same in all directions, that would mean the galaxy is traveling in all directions at 600 km/sec, which hopefully you realize is not possible.
The CMBR exhibits a dipole, suggesting a motion of our star in our galaxy of about 600km/sec, relative to the CMBR. https://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/c/Cosmic+Microwave+Background+Dipole
the size of the Universe was about 92BLY....(or) 15 billion light years, than why they can't tell us how big it is.
My simplistic understanding of what they said is:- Roughly 15 (or 14) billion light years is the distance from "where the source was when the light was emitted" to "where we are now"
Roughly 100 billion light years is the distance from "where the source is now" to "where we are now"
- There is an even smaller number which represents the distance from "where the source was when the light was emitted" to "where we were back then"
As relativity illustrated, all times and distances are relative to which frame of reference you are talking about
And anything outside your light cone is irrelevant to you (eg if some object is now 100 billion light-years away, light from that object will probably never reach us, due to the expansion of the universe).
Quote from: Origin on 06/02/2023 14:28:09Quote from: Dave Lev on 06/02/2023 01:52:41The real CMBR redshift only suggesting a motion of our galaxy of about 600km/sec?Obviously not. Since the the wavelength of the CMBR is the same in all directions, that would mean the galaxy is traveling in all directions at 600 km/sec, which hopefully you realize is not possible.Quote from: evan_au on 31/01/2023 08:01:50The CMBR exhibits a dipole, suggesting a motion of our star in our galaxy of about 600km/sec, relative to the CMBR. https://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/c/Cosmic+Microwave+Background+Dipole
I do recall that in the past our scientists believed that the size of the Universe was about 92BLY.
I knew that about 15 Years ago.At that time the science community claimed that our universe is quite compact.
I would claim that if they don't know the real size of the Universe, than how do they know that what they don't know is correct or incorrect?
If we discuss about the surface of the earth (two dimensions) than it has no edge, but in three dimensions it has a very clear edge.
why they refuse to consider the possibility that the Universe could be just flat and infinite in its size?
I fully agree that the CMBR is a direct consequence of hydrogen as hydrogen is the most common atom in the nature.
why do you insist that the Atomic hydrogen welding (AHW) process (the 3000K) must be ALWAYS used in the CMBR redshift formula??
1. What is more dramatic speculation idea:The idea of multiple universes exist in a higher-level multiverse, or the idea of a single flat & infinite Universe?
. Do you agree that there is a possibility that the Universe age is much older than 13.8B years?
Do you agree that that there is a possibility that the CMB radiation is the reflection of that infinite Universe and not due to the Big bang that took place about 13.8By ago?
. Even if the chance that the real CMBR reflects the radiation of the infinite universe is just one to one million of a trillion
Quote from: Dave Lev on 08/02/2023 04:11:16 Do you agree that that there is a possibility that the CMB radiation is the reflection of that infinite Universe and not due to the Big bang that took place about 13.8By ago?No, it is not a reflection of an impossible thing.
QuoteQuote from: Dave Lev on 08/02/2023 04:11:16. Even if the chance that the real CMBR reflects the radiation of the infinite universe is just one to one million of a trillionIt's not that big.It is zero.What could it be reflected in?
Quote from: Dave Lev on 08/02/2023 04:11:16. Even if the chance that the real CMBR reflects the radiation of the infinite universe is just one to one million of a trillion
Uncertainty about the size of the universe doesn't stop scientists knowing things.
So please, do you agree by now that it is a severe mistake to claim that the CMBR redshift of the Infinite universe (option/possibility) is 1100?
Can we agree that only the following message is correct:CMBR BBT redshift is 1100
Quote from: Dave Lev on 10/02/2023 03:15:22So please, do you agree by now that it is a severe mistake to claim that the CMBR redshift of the Infinite universe (option/possibility) is 1100?No we cannot agree on that. A universe that started at the big bang can still be infinite.
Quote from: Dave Lev on 10/02/2023 03:15:22Can we agree that only the following message is correct:CMBR BBT redshift is 1100Sure.
QuoteQuote from: Dave Lev on 08/02/2023 04:11:16why they refuse to consider the possibility that the Universe could be just flat and infinite in its size?Because that wouldn't be stable. It would collapse.
Quote from: Dave Lev on 08/02/2023 04:11:16why they refuse to consider the possibility that the Universe could be just flat and infinite in its size?
Let's make it clear.Only based on the BBT theory an infinite universe wouldn't be stable.
Do you claim that Infinite universe is impossible?How could it be that you are so sure about it?
As long as Cosmologists can't prove that there is a 4th space dimension in the universe then we all must understand that the universe must be infinite in its size.
What could it be reflected in?
Hence, we fully agree that the 1100 is a direct out come from the BBT
For any element apart from hydrogen the CMBR wold have a band structure.It doesn't.So we know that the CMBR was formed by hydrogen.And once we know what element emitted that radiation, we know what temperature it must have been at (because we know the recombination temperature).And, since we know what the current temperature is, we can calculate the red shift.Can you follow that logic?