Hubble's Expanding Universe Red Shifts The Big Bang

hyalitemar Says:

Oct 8, 2008 - polpoint, red shift is definitive in itself of an expanding universe as surely as you observe a car driving away from you as a expanding distance between you and it as the car appears smaller and smaller. If you need more convincing, imagine a standing on the side of the road. A car approaches with its horn blasting and continues as it drives out of sight. Can you imagine the tone that you hear?

hyalitemar Says:

Oct 8, 2008 - As the car approaches the tone increases relative to the car's velocity to you. On the side of a freeway, we would hear a high tone since the sound waves that reach our ear are compressed. At the moment the car passes us, the tone of the horn we hear immediately changes to a low tone as the sound waves from the horn are now stretched out. Light waves are similar. Get in your car to 70mph and try it with you friends. Even do the math if you like. The evidence is clear.

hyalitemar Says:

Oct 8, 2008 - As the car approaches the tone increases relative to the car's velocity to you. On the side of a freeway, we would hear a high tone since the sound waves that reach our ear are compressed. At the moment the car passes us, the tone of the horn we hear immediately changes to a low tone as the sound waves from the horn are now stretched out. Light waves are similar. Get in your car to 70mph and try it with you friends. Even do the math if you like. The evidence is clear.

polpoint Says:

Oct 8, 2008 - Thanks for the explanation, but I understand how the Doppler effect works. The problem I have is that I have seen no evidence that the same principle can be applied to light travelling over interstellar distances. This tenuous thread seems to be the basis for the entire universe expansion, big bang theory and scrapping of the eternal universe model. I was just trying to find out if I am incorrect and there actually is other evidence that points to the universe being in an expansive state.

hyalitemar Says:

Oct 8, 2008 - The nice thing about science in that it is demonstrable and can be broken down into steps. If you are looking for evidence of an expanding and accelerating universe, without regard to actual observations and experiment, your quest is more of a spiritual one rather than a scientific one. Your question in regards to Doppler seems to say, well, without using our ears or sound waves, how can you prove a car is moving away without using sound. There are many avenues that you can pursue.

hyalitemar Says:

Oct 8, 2008 - One can look at the car over time and note it's diminishing size. One can either conclude that the vehicle is shrinking or moving away, or that some other phenomenon is at work. Science does not require faith, only objectivity. It is not up to me or anyone else to show you how things are done. If you are skeptical, it is up to you to educate yourself if you so wish it. Learn advanced math, do your own experiments, read what other people are doing.

polpoint Says:

Oct 9, 2008 - Why do you say without regard to actual observations and experiment. That is exactly what I am asking for. Note when I was asking for "other evidence" and before that "anything besides the red shift...that ponts towards this" My question was never in regards to Doppler, you are the one who brought that up. I am talking about the effect vast distances have on electromagnetic radiation and what we use as a basis to determine that everything does in fact exhibit a red shift from its true emanations

polpoint Says:

Oct 9, 2008 - I like how people who question "fundamentals" of science are all of a sudden not asking scientific questions. Much of what I have been taught is completely wrong if not a flat out lie, so I am inclined to question the basis for everything else and look at the actual evidence that led to those conclusions. Twice now you have either misrepresented or not understood what I said.

polpoint Says:

Oct 9, 2008 - Now thank you for arguing your "point" or whatever with me because it has led me to the work Halton Arp and his book Quasars, Redshifts and Controversies, which shows galaxies which are associated with one another in some way that exhibit vastly different red shifts. This seems to lend credence to mine and Wcoltd's point of view that the red shift may be caused by some type of inaccuracy at measurement or lack of understanding on some point, willful ignorance, or something else entirely.

hyalitemar Says:

Oct 13, 2008 - Your statement, "...to determine that everything does in fact exhibit a red shift from its true emanations...", is incorrect. There are observations of bodies outside of our galaxy that are "moving toward us" and are correspondingly blue shifted. The Andromeda Galaxy is one example.

hyalitemar Says:

Oct 13, 2008 - Well polpoint, given that the resources to your questions are available online, offline, the library, etc..., and that intellectual tools are out there to help you answer questions you may have, like math; I find it disingenuous of you to troll onto this forum demanding that everyone answer your questions in the name of curiosity. For if you are truly curious, you would peruse the answers through the above mentioned resources BEFORE leaving pestering comments and questions.

hyalitemar Says:

Oct 13, 2008 - Critical thinking skills are a must in any objective endeavor. Local gravitational effects, originating inertia, etc.. account for, "...galaxies which are associated with one another in some way that exhibit vastly different red shifts..." is a given. A third party observing the Milky Way and Andromeda Galaxies at several billion light years distant would note that the Milky Way and Andromeda have varying red shifts from their point of view. Galactic collision is the reason.

hyalitemar Says:

Oct 13, 2008 - So polpoint, do you understand why I am being harsh with you? You are making elementary mistakes in your reading comprehension. Please further your education before making infantile observations. If you want to argue a point, show me the math. If we were arguing optics, which seems to be a point of yours (observed redshift) , argue in the mathematics of optics. An example would be S=Rl-SQRT Rl^2-(d/2)^2, a formula for making optical telescope lenses. You must disprove it, I don't have to.

jennyhanson27 Says:

Dec 18, 2008 - i imagine it would be in the blue end of the spectrum, with a very short wavelength.

pjholl Says:

Dec 18, 2008 - Hahaha, more like Gamma rays.

fiesta181 Says:

Mar 18, 2009 - why would you have to post such a stupid comment? You were asking people to make fun of you and so they did. Ah Ah Ah

kobasica Says:

Mar 29, 2009 - Red shift? I think they meant the Compton Effect.

samgoddam Says:

Apr 5, 2009 - at 2:00 that looks like sperm

zamrock20 Says:

Apr 7, 2009 - lol ye ^_^

inventorr77 Says:

May 27, 2009 - How many "blue-shifted" stellar light spectrum observations have been discovered? In other words, how many stars (suns) out there are moving toward us? The more we learn, the more we realize we don't know... and the biggest obstacle to the progression of our understanding is our illusion of knowledge.

badamoss Says:

Jun 15, 2009 - in your face religion

luker4459 Says:

Jul 9, 2009 - "the biggest obstacle to the progression of our understanding is our illusion of knowledge" That is true in relation to religion (because religion is never willing to admit it is wrong), but not to science. Science is always willing to change its ideas, throw out old theories and think differently when new information comes to light. Scientists are definitely not being held back by a false sense of knowledge.

onemarktwoyou Says:

Aug 6, 2009 - is "c" not a constant? well i guess the red shift is a lie. you can not tell how fast or how far something is with a red shift. its like using a tape measure made with elastic. the red shift has properties that we don't understand. first it shouldn't exist. second it occurs in bands, not a smear as it is predicted for something that can't exist. third how do you use "c" to predict red shift speeds, when the spectrum is shifted? bad math does not make good science. newton would kick some rears.

Roachehh Says:

Sep 15, 2009 - fucking neeks

ah4fecksake Says:

Nov 17, 2009 - @Roachehh whats a neek?