Starship Asterisk*

apodman wrote:

Sputnick wrote:absorbtion of light by Dark Matter seems easily accepted

Huh? I thought CDM didn't interact with EM.

Sputnick wrote:the matter absorbs wavelengths other than red

Huh? How could this explain red shift?

Okay .. allowing more red to go through than the other wavelengths.

apodman wrote:

Chris Peterson wrote:This is something that has been looked at very closely for more than 50 years.

Yeah, but only by people like you.

I hate to pass on an opprtunity to comment on anything apodman says, but I can't understand what you are saying here.

Yes indeed, Chris, wit together with historical fact. And yes .. I would like to understand if possible the mechanisms by which miracles, coincidences and physics happen because I will have a better understanding of quite a lot of things, as well as an increase in faith. If faith could be supported...

When may readers expect to see the first post presenting support for your inflammatory remarks? A post which, I hope, will outline the scope of that support, summarise the nature of that support and key arguments, and make a firm commitment to providing references to peer-reviewed papers published ...

Absorbtion. Is this another joke? No. And I hope that all my jokes have a practical point as well as humour. May I ask where you read that the observed redshifts of galaxies, supernovae (other than in the Local Group), the ICM (intra-cluster medium), quasars, and GRBs are explainable by (or using) ...

Is this another example of wit? Or of ignorance^? Plain fact .. which I will not bother to substantiate because I am not under formal examination here, and I am finding my time pretty well wasted anyway. =Nereid Sputnick, please do answer my questions.[/quote] Please do tell me why Chris ignores, a...

with Redshift itself being explainable in ways other than expansion. Nobody has had any success explaining redshift in this context as anything other than a relativistic consequence of the expansion of space. The failure to identify any other plausible mechanism is one of the reasons that the BBT i...

hint: you may start from comparing initial value of expansion rate given by Hubble and its current value. Exactly - the initial Hubble measurement did not stand up to the theory so it was altered .. an elementary and necessary fudge .. with Redshift itself being explainable in ways other than expan...

Religion? I made one historically accurate comment exploring with Chris whether or not it was electrical/magnetic repulsion which allowed Jesus to walk on the water, whether the soles of his feet got wet or not, and I am said to be making comments about religion? Personally, I took that as an attem...

Sputnick, what do you consider the primary source of astronomical observations, theories, reports, etc? My feeble understanding of how the universe operates and how it will end (including a final explosion when matter-antimatter collide and eliminate the imbalance, that explosion resulting in creat...

=Nereid - "... ... Sputnick's comments about dogma, religion ... ..."[/quote] Religion? I made one historically accurate comment exploring with Chris whether or not it was electrical/magnetic repulsion which allowed Jesus to walk on the water, whether the soles of his feet got wet or not,...

But maybe I'm wrong (I freely admit that I have been wrong in the past, and will certainly be wrong again in the future). Let's see Sputnick back up his inflammatory remarks, starting with a compilation of the key papers. ^ "The supposed age of the Big Bang universe has been changed every time...

Okay, I probably should have phrased that differently. No point of philosophy has ever been proven right. And philosophers, arguing philosophy , can only argue about opinions. Well, I guess Einstein was simply wrong when he said it was time for Physicists to become Philosophers as a way of assistin...

I thought I included on this thread a quote by Einstein saying it was time for physicists to become philosophers, he making the statement because, he said, the foundations of physics had been shaken so thoroughly. (I erred in attributing the statement to the Theory of Relativity, because to my conci...

apodman wrote:

bystander wrote:So, are you going to prepare us some French cuisine? Something rich in butter, cheese, and wine?

Sorry, French was only an example. My personal specialty is Klingon.

Greek is my personal favourite .. with any bottle of wine regardless of colour, bouquet, or price.

Chris Peterson wrote: You can't measure the history of astronomy linearly.

Correct Chris, Linear Measurement is impossible unless the line curves into a closed circle with Dark Matter replacing the Aether of 3000 years ago .. the snake swallowing its tale (and that is not a misspelling).

Chris Peterson wrote:
It's really a beautiful example of science at its finest.

On the anti-side, I see it as a perfectly clear example of a theory not being supported by progressive discoveries, the theory being crudely re-sculpted to fit advancing information.[/quote]

How did you come to be the arbiter of modern cosmological theories? I am only an arbiter of one unto my own mind .. not speaking for anyone else. Consensus and majority also declare who controls the delete button in forums like this .. and that is where the danger of stifling creative thought and p...

Nereid - you admit and quote your own post where you said Plasma Cosmology is not science, so what further proof is needed? I don't have my own computer connection so don't have enough computer time or time period to answer to every demand for authentication of every statment I make .. and I do not ...

BA - The supposed age of the Big Bang universe has been changed every time a new 'measurement' of the age of galaxies near and far are made that conflict with the estimated age of the universe just before the new discoveries are made. In purely scientific terms those changes are called 'adaptive fu...

In the Legal System, the burden of proof is on the Plaitiff, the person making the claim. In the Scientific Community, the burden of achieving acceptance is on the Proponent, the one advocating a new theory. This, as Chris and Nereid have said, is as it should be. It is not up to the scientific com...

I ask again (with clearer language) the unanswered question I put to you, "Why let history see you (you personally Nereid) on the wrong side of those (astronomical) debates What " (astronomical) debates " are they Sputnick? Any of them, Nereid. Why say 'No, this is not possible, and ...

Nereid - I may have quoted the wrong page number of that book relating to Verschuur's "may not be related to mass" - page 349. As I said already here, I've read nothing in science magazines including this months' that contradict anything in Through a Universe Darkly .. and therefore cannot...

I can't wait for the larger proposed telescopes to be built and brought on line then we will have a better understanding about BBT and others. After all, the universe can't be 13.7 billion years old if we then find objects that we equate to 17 GYR away. But would an older universe preclude the BBT?...

Is Philosophy science and can it apply to astronomy? Here is Einstein's answer, First paragraph of Chapter Three of the Theory of Relativity. "It' has often been said, and certainly not without justification, that the man of science is a poor philosopher. Why then should it not be the right thi...