|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 60 (9208 total) |
| |
Skylink | |
Total: 919,430 Year: 6,687/9,624 Month: 27/238 Week: 27/22 Day: 9/9 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Time Dilation, the Hubble Shift and God's Eternal Universe | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1655 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
re Message 53
quote: Because they are looking at it astro-physically rather than as an evolving quantum field. A previous measurement:
quote: The press release referred to in the article quoted in Message 53 says
quote: (nothing about the James Webb Telescope) Note: their measurements, 69.8 km/sec/Mpc, "... align more closely with the Planck results" (which were 70 to 75 km/sec/Mpc 5%). So we have, in chronological order:
This does not seem to me to be enough discrepancy to throw out the current model, rather it is an indication of the difficulty of making more accurate measurements and refining the results. To show that the current model is wrong, i would expect a greater disagreement than 4%. This just shows that it is not quite right ... yet. Conversely, to show that a different definition for the Hubble Constant provides better results, one would have to demonstrate (a) that it explains all the current evidence, (b) resolves the current discrepancies and (c) provides a prediction that will test the new paradigm. Enjoy
How do you quote someone here? I don't see a "quote" button??? ... already shown several times, some posting tips: type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:
quotes are easy and you can type [qs=RAZD]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:
RAZD writes: quotes are easy or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:
quote: also check out (help) links on any formatting questions when in the reply window. For other formatting tips see Posting TipsFor a quick overview see EvC Forum Primer If you have problems with replies see Report Discussion Problems Here 3.0 by our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1655 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
When did they add instruments to the James Webb Telescope to test for awareness? Alexa is on board ... by our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18633 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.1 |
Captaincass writes: Much respect. Theo is actually defending you and chiding me for posting your website. My apologies if I stepped out of line. I was curious as to who you were...and dont consider you as "just another one of *those* crazy Christians." I would like to discuss your faith and belief in another topic. I also want to apologize to Theodoric for saying he called me a liar. I mistook his tag line as a comment on what I said.As for the acid. I never knew what kind it was. It dissolved metals. I know it was real because I washed my hands in it twice, once with, and once without, faith. With faith, it was like water. Without faith, it burned like hell and I lost several layers of skin on my hands. I've had a few similar experiences which tested and/or confirmed my faith. Critics claim that *we* jump at any unevidenced event to bolster our faith due to lack of evidence but thats irrelevant to this science topic.
There is also the possibility it was a strong base. I was a bitter atheist at the time but I learned the power of faith and that set me off on my studies of all the religions....All of this is recounted in the site I linked to (but shouldn't have) above. I dont see you as a troll nor a spammer and thought you were interesting. (I'm curious by nature ) I can see where the critical thinking purists here insist upon standard scientific review of any theory...but I chided them for being so tough on your theory without considering that it meant a lot to you and was not simply some cultic jibber jabber. Science Forums love evidence, however, so I might ask you what personally convinced you that you were possibly on to something new or never discussed the way you framed it? Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.~Stile
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Captcass Member (Idle past 1876 days) Posts: 70 Joined: |
quote: I have been studying QM and GR for years. Decades ago I saw a comment that GR described a curvature in the forward direction of time. I have been trying to picture that ever since. About 5 or 6 years ago I had the inspiration about gravity being an evolution of events within the continuum. For that to be valid, I had to be able to explain Ho as due to time dilation. Though I now see it as fairly simple, it took me three years to come up with the correct explanation and derivation. In all my years of research I have never found anything like what I finally came up with when I put the pieces all together. If you would like to start another thread about spirituality, I would be happy to participate. I understand the science guys not wanting "religion" here. That is why I differentiate between spirituality and religion. "Religion" contains too many gross errors. I am not a Christian. I am a Buchrishinjewmus I tell the Christians I am not a Christian, I follow Jesus instead. I tell the astro folk that spacetime has 2 elements, space and time. They are looking at the physical spatial aspect, and it is diffcult for them to shift perspective to what is happening in the ephemeral time aspect, but there is a time aspect to consider. Edited by Captcass, : spelling Edited by Captcass, : addition
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1655 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
((t1 / (1 + 2.2686*10^-18)) CAN approach, but never reach .... just as t1 CAN ‘ . but also can never reach it..... If they can't reach infinity, what finite number do they stop at? Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1655 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
And they do so at different rates and one does not ever equal the other The "rate" of ((t1 / (1 + 2.2686*10^-18)) is the same as the "rate" of t1 because {1/(1 + 2.2686*10^-18)} is a constant. But this is also bogus because there is no "rate" of approaching infinity. Can you tell me what +1 equals if it doesn't equal ? Can you tell me what -1 equals if it doesn't equal ? Note that I have edited Message 89 to add this section:
(edit)But more than that, it means t1 CAN > (according to your thinking) ... and still be < (1 + 2.2686*10^-18) ... ie, as as t1 ‘ a point is reached where:
Thus thinking that t1 ‘ means that t1 is always < results in a paradox that
This paradox is resolved by replacing ">" with ≥ and "<" with ≤, which proves that your equation is wrong and should be written:
It also proves that (a) times = for any value of the constant a. This paradox/problem arises due to thinking of as a number rather than a concept. (/edit) Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9489 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 6.1 |
Maybe this is why his paper was published in a vanity journal as opposed to a legitimate, respected journal?
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1655 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
The problem stems from not understanding what the concept of infinity means.
Infinity is like the Borg Cube of math ... all numbers will be assimilated ... resistance is futile ...
" ... all your base are belong to us ... " Edited by RAZD, : ... Edited by RAZD, : added a base jokeby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4597 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 9.5 |
My question is why didn't the "peer reviewers" catch this error? I wonder if they forced any revisions in the "year of review?"
What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Captcass Member (Idle past 1876 days) Posts: 70 Joined: |
quote: There were 3 revisions. As my original paper as submitted predicted black holes were empty space, and as that is what Schild's team found, I happily changed "blackhole" to "MECO". As they were considering it, I compiled some clarifications that I added as 1 revision when I did the only other revision they wanted, which was to temove "religious" terminology like "faith" and "IATIA" from the Origin section. The predited final section is in the pre-journal version on Vixra. I had originally submitted it to another journal, don't remember which, whose editor forwarded it to the Executive Editor of the J of C, who then contacted me.... Edited by Captcass, : Addition
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1655 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
My question is why didn't the "peer reviewers" catch this error? ... Good question. It certainly calls into question the caliber of their review process. As theodoric says, it is a vanity press, so they just need the appearance of review, and if they are too hard on the papers that could cut into the profits by discouraging applicants. Just a thought. From viXra.org e-Print archive, viXra:1804.0109, -- the link to the PDF paper:
quote: The revisions (v2 through v8) would tend to indicate that some changes were made, however it also says this:
quote: So the version here is not the same as the version published in the Journal of Cosmology, for which no link was provided.
quote: Journal of CosmologyGeneral Relativity: Effects in Time as Causation quote: One wonders why the link provided in Message 1 was not to this more final PDF version of the paper. Especially as it includes a significant change from black holes to MECOs. Enjoy.by our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Captcass Member (Idle past 1876 days) Posts: 70 Joined: |
quote: I was making various revisions to the vixra version before I submitted the final vixra v8 to the journal that forwarded it to J of C. You don't publish journal versions in vixra as the journal now has copyright. If I had put the final journal up I would have violated that. I can only publish it on my own site and I have registered a new domain to do just that. If they had just accepted v8, I would have had to remove it from vixra. The J of C is not a vanity journal. People only pay a reviewer's fee and a posting fee, as listed on the journal's site. They also waive those fees if the individual is from a poor country and can't afford the fee. Addition: You cannot post links to outside sites on vixra. Hence my comment in lieu of a link. I would also note that there were several papers on vixra that preceded this one over the last 5 years that helped me work through things. I completely removed each of those when i found a fatal flaw or had an inspiration to improve it in a major way. You are only allowed 9 v's on vixra per paper.... Edited by Captcass, : addition Edited by Captcass, : addition
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1655 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
That doesn't really answer my question:
quote: I was making various revisions to the vixra version before I submitted the final vixra v8 to the journal that forwarded it to J of C. The link to the Journal article is HERE (PDF) It would have saved people some time tracking it down if you had just posted that link instead of the vixtra one. That would also look more professional, linking the final version instead of (essentially) draft versions. Reading it I notice you still have the same misunderstanding of ∞ that you can treat it like a fixed number. Consider this:
(11 + 12 +13 + ... + 1N) = N and (11 + 12 +13 + ... (no end)) = ∞ so ∞ + 1 = ∞ and you can regress this as (∞ + 1) + 1 = ∞ and ... ∞ + k = ∞ (where k is a constant of any value -∞ ≤ k ≤ +∞) thus we can regress this to where we have ∞ + ∞ = ∞ so ... ∞ x 2 = ∞ ... and you can regress this as (∞ x 2) x 2 = ∞ and thus ∞ x k = ∞ (where k is a constant of any value -∞ ≤ k ≤ +∞) quote: And yes, the infinity you are using is what they call infinity type 1. What this means is that your formula in Message 1 ... / (1 + 2.2686*10^-18) < . is incorrect, and it should be
/ (1 + 2.2686*10^-18) = This means that your conclusion
... ... as t1 ‘ , infinite divergence is impossible ... Does not follow. It may be true, but this is not the reason. Enjoy ps - Presumably your BS is from your graduation Cum Laude from the United States Merchant Marine Academy at Kings Point, New York, 1972. Out of curiosity what was the specific field? I've studied navigation and know how to use a sextant, but i"m never really sure where I am ... and in my youth I was foredeck crew on an Olson30 ULDB racing sloop. Nice pic.by our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Captcass Member (Idle past 1876 days) Posts: 70 Joined: |
quote:The vixra link was posted way before my paper had been accepted. When I returned here to this thread to note that it was accepted and published, I posted a link or info on how to get there, I forget which and am not going o go back thru all the posts. You are getting close to understanding why my formula is correct and has been accepted by everyone else reviewing the paper, now over 300.... Actually, I do not know if they all agree with my paper. I doubt it very much.But not a one has commented on your supposed "fault". Since no one has responded, I can only add to what I had so,..... I am now going to share some of what I call my "quantum tales" that demonstrate how the universe evolves forward for us, each of us, every one of us as an individual. I use these often to explain "things" to people in my museum... I have been working on further concepts implied by my theory. One of those came up in a forum the other day when someone wanted me to talk about "particles". What I told him led him to ask me if I was saying particles didn't exist and that led to me sharing these short "quantum" tales: "They don't exist as a "thing". They are evolving events. An electron is neither a particle nor a wave. It is an electron, which can display both properties depending on how we observe it. This is why I don't like discussing particles. Of course we consider a ball to be a "particle" for practical purposes, but it is not. It is an interaction of the waveform probabilities within the continuum. When you are not looking at your ball, it doesn't even exist for you. We can never find a way to formulate absolute quantum determination because our actions, including thoughts, hopes, expectations and observations, affect the next instant’s manifestation of events. For instance, I have a sea glass business and would ocean kayak to my favorite collecting site. I landed at the beach one day and found two marbles right next to each other right next to my kayak. They were just plain, colorless, well frosted, marbles but marbles are rarer than reds (which are 1 in 5,000 pieces) and to find two right next to each other is remarkable. So I said, "Lord,thank you". I sure would like to find a red marble, though. I've got a blue one, and I thank you, but I sure would like to find a red one. Please, Lord?" (the Creator is neither male nor female nor human, etc., but this is how I address It. It is simply the greater Self within us that is manifesting us. I.E., our very Life. All living things are just a different point of view for It. We instinctively roll our eyes up, even atheists, when saying, "Oh, God". That is the "3rd eye" spot, the Hindu Om chakra, the frontal lobe of the brain.). I put that thought aside and went back picking and after about 2 hours I was tired and it was time to go tide-wise, but there was just a little more beach to cover, so I decided to just make a quick pass and see if I could spot anything big just lying on top. Normally I would walk very slowly, looking for the gems amongst all the other glass. Just before I got to the end there was this huge red marble. It's 15/16ths of an inch in diameter. It is a beautiful blood red with a white swirl that forms a wave. Click on the link below to view it. http://captcass.com/images/Red%20Marble%20cropped.jpg I rolled my eyes up and went, "Lord!, Oh God! Dear Lord, etc." Then, when I bent down to pick up the marble, there were also two pieces of jewelry quality RED glass, one on either side of the marble. I went, "Oh, Lord! Dear God!, etc. a bunch more and danced around with tears in my eyes. This is how the Creator talks to me. The two red pieces, to me, were the Creator saying the marble was not a coincidence, that I asked for red and got red. The odds of finding all three together are just too vast for it to be otherwise. I would also note that I had only pictured a small, regular sized red marble when I asked. I find the Creator always gives us a much better version of what we ask for than what we imagined. I believe this is because the Creator has a by far greater imagination than we do. The point here is that neither the marble, nor even that section of beach it lay upon, existed for me until I observed them and all the superposition possibilities collapsed into my reality, which was partly determined by my wishes, faith and expectations. This eliminates the possibility of the formulation of an absolute quantum determination. It is also why I don't like discussing "particles". I don't include the above in my paper because it is indeterminate. The Girl and RedsOne day there was a girl about age 8 or 9 at the beach. She was only looking for reds (1 in 5,000 pieces). In 2 hours, she found 9 reds, whereas I, who was looking for whatever, would find a red every 3 or 4 months. At one point she came running up to me and starting talking to me and as we were finishing up she looked down and picked up a beautiful red right from right between my feet. I wanted to strangle that poor little girl. Children tend to find what they are looking for because they believe they can. A Stranger’s FaithI began my business by selling on the headlands. One day a man came down and asked me where to look. I told him there was a slag pile in the cove next to me and that because it replenished the beach he might find something rare like a red. He came back in about 15 minutes with a beautiful red and asked me where else he could look. Knowing what was happening and laughing to myself, I told him he could go to the beach behind me and that there was much more glass there and maybe he could find something even rarer, like a grape purple, which are 1 in 10,000 pieces. He came back in about 20 minutes with a beautiful grape purple. I found about 1 a year. He simply believed what I told him, as would a little child. Sound familiar? This is quantum physics, not "religion", though I expect some of the "pure" science folks will be uncomfortable. Edited by Captcass, : addition Edited by Captcass, : addition
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: |
This is quantum physics, not "religion", though I expect some of the "pure" science folks will be uncomfortable. No, that is not quantum physics it is the classic snake oil salesman carny spiel.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024