🚀 go-pugleaf

On 12 fév, 09:57, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The essence of COSMOLOGY-GATE:
>
> http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/wiggles-on-the-dark-side-...
> "The wavelength of light from a galaxy that is accelerating away from
> our Milky Way is "stretched" so the light is seen as "shifted" towards
> the red part of the spectrum."
>
> The above fraud is a relatively new version of a classical fraud
> designed to camouflage the falsehood of Einstein's 1905 light
> postulate: in order for the speed of light to appear constant, the
> wavelength should change in an idiotic way (it is granted that the
> scientific community invariably sings "Divine Einstein" and "Yes we
> all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity"):
>
> http://sampit.geol.sc.edu/Doppler.html
> "Moving observer: A man is standing on the beach, watching the tide.
> The waves are washing into the shore and over his feet with a constant
> frequency and wavelength. However, if he begins walking out into the
> ocean, the waves will begin hitting him more frequently, leading him
> to perceive that the wavelength of the waves has decreased. Again,
> this phenomenon is due to the fact that the source and the observer
> are not the in the same frame of reference. Although the wavelength
> appears to have decreased to the man, the wavelength would appear
> constant to a jellyfish floating along with the tide."
>
> http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/big_bang/ind...
> John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer
> were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now
> pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would
> mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to
> have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH - THE DISTANCE
> BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)."
>
> Pentcho Valev wrote:
>
> COSMOLOGY-GATE:
>
> 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."
>
> http://cosmologystatement.org/
> An Open Letter to the Scientific Community
> (Published in New Scientist, May 22, 2004)
> "The big bang today relies on a growing number of hypothetical
> entities, things that we have never observed-- inflation, dark matter
> and dark energy are the most prominent examples. Without them, there
> would be a fatal contradiction between the observations made by
> astronomers and the predictions of the big bang theory. In no other
> field of physics would this continual recourse to new hypothetical
> objects be accepted as a way of bridging the gap between theory and
> observation. It would, at the least, raise serious questions about the
> validity of the underlying theory."
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/6057362/Give-scientists-the-freedo...
> 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.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
> "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."
>
> 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.amazon.fr/bang-nest-th%C3%A9orie-comme-autres/dp/2360120026
> "Le big bang n'est pas une théorie comme les autres. Ce n'est
> d'ailleurs pas une théorie physique au sens propre du terme, mais un
> scénario cosmologique issu des équations de la relativité générale. Il
> est le modèle qui s'ajuste le mieux aux observations actuelles, mais à
> quel prix ? Il nous livre un Univers composé à 96 % de matière et
> d'énergie noires inconnues. C'est donc un euphémisme que de dire que
> le big bang semble poser autant - sinon plus - de questions qu'il n'en
> résout. En ce sens, le big bang apparaît davantage comme une
> paramétrisation de notre ignorance plutôt que comme une modélisation
> d'un phénomène. Pourtant, le succès du big bang et l'adhésion qu'il
> suscite, tant dans la sphère scientifique que dans la sphère
> médiatique, ne se démentent pas. Surmédiatisé, son statut dépasse
> celui de modèle théorique, et la simple évocation de son nom suffit
> pour justifier des opérations de marketing scientifique ou rejeter des
> cosmologies alternatives. Pour éclaircir les problématiques -
> scientifiques, médiatiques, économiques ou politiques - liées à la
> cosmologie d'aujourd'hui, il est nécessaire de multiplier les angles
> de vue et de distinguer, selon leur registre, les différents enjeux.
> C'est le but que se sont fixés les auteurs de cet ouvrage. Pour chaque
> point soulevé, leurs regards croisés contribuent à favoriser
> l'émergence citoyenne d'un esprit éclairé et critique."
>
> http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig10/bauer1.1.1.html
> Suppression of Science Within Science
> by Henry Bauer
> "I wasn't as surprised as many others were, when it was revealed that
> climate-change "researchers" had discussed in private e-mails how to
> keep important data from public view lest it shake public belief in
> the dogma that human activities are contributing significantly to
> global warming. (...) Take cosmology and the Big-Bang theory of the
> origin of the universe. Halton Arp was a respected, senior American
> observational astronomer. He noticed that some pairs of quasars that
> are physically close together nevertheless have very different
> redshifts. How exciting! Evidently some redshifts are not Doppler
> effects, in other words, not owing to rapid relative motion away from
> us. That means the universe-expansion calculations have to be revised.
> It may not have started as a Big Bang! That's just the sort of major
> potential discovery that scientists are always hoping for, isn't it?
> Certainly not in this case. Arp was granted no more telescope time to
> continue his observations. At age 56, Halton Arp emigrated to Germany
> to continue his work at the Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics. But
> Arp was not alone in his views. Thirty-four senior astronomers from 10
> countries, including such stellar figures as Hermann Bondi, Thomas
> Gold, Amitabha Ghosh, and Jayant Narlikar, sent a letter to Nature
> pointing out that Big Bang theory:
> *relies on a growing number of hypothetical . . . things . . . never
> observed;
> *that alternative theories can also explain all the basic phenomena of
> the cosmos
> *and yet virtually all financial and experimental resources in
> cosmology go to Big-Bang studies.
> Just the sort of discussion that goes on in science all the time,
> arguing pros and cons of competing ideas. Except that Nature refused
> to publish the letter. It was posted on the Internet, and by now
> hundreds of additional signatures have been added... (...) Then
> there's that most abstract of fundamental sciences, theoretical
> physics. The problem has long been, How to unify relativity and
> quantum mechanics? Quantum mechanics regards the world as made up of
> discrete bits whereas relativity regards the world as governed by
> continuous, not discrete, fields. Since the mid-1970s, there has been
> no real progress. Everyone has been working on so-called "string
> theory," which has delivered no testable conclusions and remains a
> hope, a speculation, not a real theory. Nevertheless, theoretical
> physicists who want to look at other approaches can't find jobs, can't
> get ...
>
> plus de détails »

Le chiote gate...

Y.B.