Tired Light

have you seen the second lecture yet? some spooky behavior that demonstrates that light does not, in fact, travel in straight lines ...

you mean this one?
NO REDIRECT
(note the professional website and company domain)or this one?
#1 Lead Generation El Paso, TX | All-Inclusive Online Marketing
(they are the same) Sounds like a papermill for crank concepts all right.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

What Hawkins says about it: Does not match your implication.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Sorry, but I am not the one pretending to be a scientist with a published paper in a peer reviewed journal.Nor do I need to be to point out that this particular "journal" is of less than stellar quality by it's own admission.How would mentioning any real paper in any substantial journal change that fact? Especially in a different field altogether? The logic of this comment of your is false from the beginning of a gleam of a premise.LOL. Try again.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Gosh, lyndon, it was from your link ... Message 69
I just read the whole pdf article instead of just the abstract:
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0105/0105073.pdfAn interesting article indeed.The biggest problem with your model from my viewpoint is that it relies on energy being sucked out of things and not going anywhere. You need a constant noticeable net loss of energy to make it work, and this is not matched to the real world experience of experimental evidence.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

ah, so you admit that you are not a real scientist, and have to use such a slack journal to prop up your position with pseudoqualifications for your pseudoscience and to give you an aura to justify your condescending attitude of others critical of your "work"fascinating.tell me again: how would a paper on, say, the microbiological implications of waste milk products on the ecosystem of a rural stream have any -- any -- relevance to this discussion?LOL.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Hi irrelevant, arrogant and erroneous Lyndon, the problem is not in my understanding.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

agreed. a fool shows he is a fool by how he argues.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Wasn't this also part of the predicted WMAP result based on Guth's model? I'll have to go back and check. And seems to me there other models that have no problem with this result, like the string theory and branes? It seems to me that both inflation and brane theory developed a large cloud of plasma that was expanding and cooling, reaching a point where {plasma condensed\space became transparent} and that the CMB is the last visible remnant of that point in time. As this would be a uniform temperature event that spread simultaneously to the far reaches of the universe the correlation of time to distance should be what it is. No later interaction of photons required.{added by edit}
yep:
Object not found! | The University of Chicago This message has been edited by RAZD, 03*19*2005 07:34 PM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

my recollection was that only small fluctuations on a uniform background were predicted at the time by Guth's {old} inflation, and that this was born out by the WMAP. subsequent theory has moved ahead, and all the "flavors" of inflation do muddy the waters.the original (nasa) links I had to the prediction information are broken (or rather updated to new information), hence the UofC one here.I also note that nasa reports:
"Expansion rate (Hubble constant) value: Ho= 71 (km/sec)/Mpc (with a margin of error of about 5%)" or generously somewhere between 67 and 75 ...
WMAP Mission: Results- Age of the UniverseThis message has been edited by RAZD, 03*19*2005 08:13 PM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Yes, I saw that, but it doesn't add up and he has to stop the proton in the process which is another loss in energy. It seems that several steps of his proposal requires a net loss of energy beyond anything known in experimental evidence.His secondary photon radiation would also mean the the source of the CMB would be local as well as distant and that it would be patchy with the varying density of the universe matter involved, that there would be areas clear of it due to sweeping by planets etcetera, and that it would exhibit varying levels of redshift in it's data. These things are not observed.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Thanks. Perhaps rather than planet sweeping on an individual basis think of the whole plane of the solar system being swept at a differential rate compared to out of plane nearby space, and this should show up as a bias in the data based on orientation to the plane of the solar system, and this being fairly close to the neighborhood should be a fairly dominant effect (but as you say, the known patchyness of space is sufficient).I will work on the energy loss aspect, and may need some help from those more knowledgeable, it is just my "first impression" at this point, and my physics is rather rusty. (added by edit - and it should have been electron instead of proton, my mistake)This message has been edited by RAZD, 03*20*2005 10:35 AM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

we have been advised not to get into snit for snat posting. lyndon likes to provoke people rather than argue the points raised. it is poor debating approach on his part, but we do not need to follow suit, tempting as it is. I like Sylas's approach: reveal the problems so others can understand.

I'm not sure I can make myself clear here (and I could be wrong about it) but here goes:Let me start with a thought experiment: we enclose a volume of space around the solar system with a thin bubble. For the radius we can pick something far enough away to appear to be outside the normal solar system interactions yet close enough to have a fairly good idea of what is in the immediate neighborhood: the pioneer 10\11 satellites (due to their anomalous orbital behavior)"All things being equal" there should be no significant difference in behavior in either the standard redshift model or ashmore's "tired light" model (hereafter called "ATL") outside this radius (assuming that other problems are resolved), thus both would show the dipole effect of the motion of the solar system etc. etc.Within this bubble there is a distribution of matter and of free electrons that is not homogeneous, but rather more of an ordered distribution. As a result the free space electron density within this sphere will not be homogeneous, but should be higher out of plane than in plane due to the motion and gravity of the planets.It seems to me that as a result, ashmore's model should produce more local effect in both ATL and CMB⁽¹⁾, hereafter designated CMB_ASH, outside the plane of the solar system than in it, and that this should be a measurable effect.(There are also other effects like the earth's magnetic field that will effect the distribution of electrons in specific locations. But that is a different issue)Because ashmore's model is dependent on, and therefore sensitive to, the distribution of electrons in space while the standard model of redshift is not, there should be some pretty simple tests to determine if his model has any validity. And there should be variations in ATL or in CMB_ASH that should be observable, but which have not been seen.WMAP was put into the LaGrange (L2) orbits specifically to get it sufficiently out of the range of effects from earth (to where it could be aimed and shielded to remove the earth from the data) and yet be in the earth's shadow to shield it from the sun's effects. In addition, as you say the standard image has been corrected to account for the known speed of the solar system Doppler effect.It seems to me any anomalies in the image would have been noted, specifically if they were related to the positions of the planets (and magnetic fields) and did not match predicted values based on the current model, values that should be in error if ashmore is correct in his model.This picture: from APOD: 2003 February 17 - Universe Age from the Microwave Background is not corrected and it shows the line of radiation due to our galaxy. There is no mention of any effect due to our solar system and its orientation or to any local anomalies due to planets and magnetic fields.Conclusion: there are no local anomalies, there is no local production of CMB_ASH, there is no ATL effect, this model for "tired light" is wrong.That would be my take on it.

---

⁽¹⁾ CMB_ASH is given as hf_cmb = (1/2m_e)(p² — p’²)
(Where p = m_ev and p’ = m_ev’ are the initial and final momentum of the electron after the "redshifted" photon has already been emited)ps -- given that ashmore's model generates the CMB_ASH with leftover energy siphoned off by the redshift (via "double Mssbauer" effect) I don't think you can effectively divide these topics.The biggest problem I can see with his model for this is that it has to happen continuously through space, and that once generated, the CMB_ASH is equally subject to redshift as all other photons, thus the band of CMB_ASH frequencies should be spread out and wider than the predicted (and validated) frequency spread of the actual CMB.

---

Enjoy.This message has been edited by Admin, 03-21-2005 09:38 AM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

I am not familiar with the english school system Is that like a bachelor degree (york) and a masters degree (preston)?"Dubai College" sounds like high school to me, or is this more advanced?If so, that's a pretty high pedestal for someone to be "talking trash" at others.