Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 77 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-21-2019 8:28 PM
22 online now:
DrJones*, edge, JonF, kjsimons, Percy (Admin), Tanypteryx (6 members, 16 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 850,001 Year: 5,038/19,786 Month: 1,160/873 Week: 56/460 Day: 56/91 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Quantized redshifts strongly suggest that our galaxy is at the centre of the universe
Inactive Member

Message 167 of 170 (19122)
10-05-2002 4:39 PM
Reply to: Message 166 by Tranquility Base
10-02-2002 3:47 AM

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
^ Wehappy

Tell me more about the spiral arm quantization - it's not due to the fact that one arm is moving towards and the other away in those cases?

You're starting to worry me, TB. Have you been reading any of the links in this thread? Are you following any of the subtleties of redshift quantization discussed here?

Percy brought this up a long time ago...


The next step involved examining the rotation curves of individual spiral galaxies. Such curves indicate how the rotational velocity of the material in the galaxy's disk varies with distance from the center.

Several well-studied galaxies, including M51 and NGC 2903, exhibited two distinct redshifts. Velocity breaks, or discontinuities, occured at the nuclei of these galaxies. Even more fascinating was the observation that the jump in redshift between the spiral arms always tended to be around 72 kilometers per second, no matter which galaxy was considered.


and Setterfield does, too...

However, when it is considered that the quantum jumps in redshift values have been observed to even go through individual galaxies [Tifft, 1977, p.31], it becomes apparent that the redshift can have little to do with either space-time expansion or galactic velocities through space...


So it seems that Tifft's older work is the source of this observation. Have these data been superceded or discredited since? I don't know. Maybe you could look into it.

If these data hold up, then a strictly Dopplerian interpretion of redshift is completely untenable. Therefore, galactocentrism based on redshift 'shells' falls apart.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by Tranquility Base, posted 10-02-2002 3:47 AM Tranquility Base has not yet responded

Jagz Beach
Inactive Member

Message 168 of 170 (77507)
01-10-2004 12:19 AM

Beach Bump




[This message has been edited by Jagz Beach, 01-10-2004]

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : One big mess of a link "hidden". It was causing the page to be overwide.

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by Eta_Carinae, posted 01-10-2004 12:38 AM Jagz Beach has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 2482 days)
Posts: 547
From: US
Joined: 11-15-2003

Message 169 of 170 (77516)
01-10-2004 12:38 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by Jagz Beach
01-10-2004 12:19 AM

Bad links
What was your point here.

All the links at the end go nowhere!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Jagz Beach, posted 01-10-2004 12:19 AM Jagz Beach has not yet responded

Jagz Beach
Inactive Member

Message 170 of 170 (77567)
01-10-2004 11:30 AM

I was looking up some information last night regarding red shifts and these were a couple of sites I decided to bookmark here until I had an opportunity to cross reference them... I apologize for stirring up static... It was late I was tired and it just seemed like a convenient thing to do at the time... Don't mind me I am just the villaige idiot trying to get a grip...

[This message has been edited by Jagz Beach, 01-10-2004]

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019