🚀 go-pugleaf

"Pentcho Valev" <pvalev@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:ac2f375f-c1dc-467c-8178-39be796583ce@g19g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
> The journal Nature exercising itself in crimestop in 1979:
>
> http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v277/n5698/abs/277633a0.html
> Nature 277, 633 - 635 (22 February 1979)
> Photon decay in curved space-time
> D. F. CRAWFORD
> School of Physics, University of Sydney, New South Wales 2006,
> Australia
> "RECENT astrophysical observations have raised doubts as to whether
> the large redshifts of distant galaxies (the Hubble redshift) are due
> entirely to cosmological expansion. The strongest argument in favour
> of cosmological expansion is that there is no known hypothesis
> consistent with the laws of physics (other than the Doppler shift
> hypothesis) that can explain the observed redshifts. An alternative
> explanation - a gradual energy loss of photons due to their
> interaction with curved space-time - is considered here."
>
> http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com/1984-17.html#seventeen
> George Orwell: "Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as
> though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It
> includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive
> logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are
> inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of
> thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction.
> Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity."
>
> The dangerous thought at the threshold of which the journal Nature
> will always stop short: It is reasonable to assume that "energy loss
> of photons" can be explained in terms of "speed loss of photons".
>
> Pentcho Valev wrote:
>
> The only reason behind Dark Energy:
>
> http://www.physorg.com/news179508040.html
> "More than a dozen ground-based Dark Energy projects are proposed or
> under way, and at least four space-based missions, each of the order
> of a billion dollars, are at the design concept stage."
>
> Sometimes the correct solution to the problem (the speed of light
> decreases with distance and this causes Hubble's redshift) is hinted
> at in Einsteiniana but then billions may not come and Einsteinians
> promise not to hint anymore:
>
> http://www.sciscoop.com/story/2008/10/30/41323/484
> "Does the apparently constant speed of light change over the vast
> stretches of the universe? Would our understanding of black holes,
> ancient supernovae, dark matter, dark energy, the origins of the
> universe and its ultimate fate be different if the speed of light were
> not constant?.....Couldn't it be that the supposed vacuum of space is
> acting as an interstellar medium to lower the speed of light like some
> cosmic swimming pool? If so, wouldn't a stick plunged into the pool
> appear bent as the light is refracted and won't that affect all our
> observations about the universe. I asked theoretical physicist Leonard
> Susskind, author of The Black Hole War, recently reviewed in Science
> Books to explain this apparent anomaly....."You are entirely right,"
> he told me, "there are all sorts of effects on the propagation of
> light that astronomers and astrophysicists must account for. The point
> of course is that they (not me) do take these effects into account and
> correct for them." "In a way this work is very heroic but unheralded,"
> adds Susskind, "An immense amount of extremely brilliant analysis has
> gone into the detailed corrections that are needed to eliminate these
> 'spurious' effects so that people like me can just say 'light travels
> with the speed of light.' So, there you have it. My concern about
> cosmic swimming pools and bent sticks does indeed apply, but
> physicists have taken the deviations into account so that other
> physicists, such as Susskind, who once proved Stephen Hawking wrong,
> can battle their way to a better understanding of the universe."
>
> http://www.springerlink.com/content/w6777w07xn737590/fulltext.pdf
> Misconceptions about the Hubble recession law
> Wilfred H. Sorrell, Astrophys Space Sci
> "Reber (1982) pointed out that Hubble himself was never an advocate
> for the expanding universe idea. Indeed, it was Hubble who personally
> thought that a model universe based on the tired-light hypothesis is
> more simple and less irrational than a model universe based on an
> expanding spacetime geometry (...) ...any photon gradually loses its
> energy while traveling over a large distance in the vast space of the
> universe."
>
> http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,757145,00.html
> Monday, Dec. 14, 1936: "Other causes for the redshift were suggested,
> such as cosmic dust or a change in the nature of light over great
> stretches of space. Two years ago Dr. Hubble admitted that the
> expanding universe might be an illusion, but implied that this was a
> cautious and colorless view. Last week it was apparent that he had
> shifted his position even further away from a literal interpretation
> of the redshift, that he now regards the expanding universe as more
> improbable than a non-expanding one."
>
> In the end dark minds enter the stage and things get irreversible
> (billions are guaranteed):
>
> http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/87150187.html
> "Dark Energy: The Biggest Mystery in the Universe (...) "We have a
> complete inventory of the universe," Sean Carroll, a California
> Institute of Technology cosmologist, has said, "and it makes no
> sense."
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/6057362/Give-scientists-the-freedom-to-be-wrong.html
> Martin Rees: "Over the past week, two stories in the press have
> suggested that scientists have been very wrong about some very big
> issues. First, a new paper seemed to suggest that dark energy the
> mysterious force that makes up three quarters of the universe, and is
> pushing the galaxies further apart might not even exist."
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/7522026/Hubble-telescope-shows-Universe-expansion-is-speeding-up-and-proves-Einsteins-theory.html
> "And the astronomers found that the universe was growing faster and
> faster with time, as predicted by Einstein in his theory of general
> relativity. Scientists claim that the universe is made up of three
> different components - normal matter, which is the physical objects in
> the universe such as the planets - dark matter, which is invisible
> matter that creates the gravitational pull that causes galaxies to
> form - and an unknown energy referred to as "dark energy", the force
> which causes the universe to expand. Einstein's theory of general
> relativity claims that space and time are a geometrical structure
> which can be changed by the behaviour of the matter inside it. So
> proof that the expansion of the universe is speeding up shows that the
> contents of the universe, such as the "dark energy" causing it to
> inflate, are influencing its structure. Ludovic Van Waerbeke, of the
> Department of Physics and Astronomy at Leiden University in the
> Netherlands, said: "Our results confirmed that there is an unknown
> source of energy in the universe which is causing the cosmic expansion
> to speed up, stretching the dark matter further apart exactly as
> predicted by Einstein's theory."
>
> Pentcho Valev

==========================

  There is not even the appearance of spatial depth, spatial extent, to that 
TIME-LINE coming this way into this point from every point of distant 
spherical time compass (so to speak). Absolute zero spatial depth in the 
line (absolute zero spatial extent in the line). How can it be showing to 
expand without any space showing to it? just a length of 1-dimensional 
TIME-LINE and nothing more. No depth or extent of universe showing at all.

  You can't have any depth or extent from 13.75 billion [[DIFFERENT]] times. 
That's 13.75 billion terribly, terribly, thin sliced universes. And none of 
those universes existing longer than, or existing an instant before or an 
instant after, the particular-instant-slice of time-line.

  The total observable universe, as some expanding solid single of 
space-time showing, is a total fiction on display. It never existed in any 
[space] at all, nor existed at any [time] at all.

GLB

=========================