It is almost concluded now withih the scientific fraternity that the universe is expanding. And, its proof is the red shift observed by Hubble and its explanation is Doppler affect.
As far as the Doppler affect is concerned, it looks logical and can be used. But, i failed to understand how it proves that the red shift observed by the hubble is because of an expanding universe?
with love,
sanjay
I can think of 4 reasons for red shift to occur. Only one of them requires an expanding universe.
1) Energy loss
2) Polarity segregation
3) Relative velocity (Doppler effect)
4) Shrinking universe
1) Energy loss refers to the fact that a photon of light is not a fixed particle, but rather a clump or bunch of EMR noise and that clump gradually loses a little of its energy as it travels for 1000’s of light years. In physics, it is presumed that the energy content and the wave length are a one-to-one correlation. So if they measure the energy content of a photon, they calculate the presumed “wavelength”. And if the photon has lost some of its energy content due to the extreme distance of travel, which it certainty will, they will deduce that the wavelength is lower than it was when it left the distance star. The physical length of the wave might not have changed at all, but they will deduce that it has = “presumed red shift”.
2) Polarity segregation refers to the fact that positive pulses of EMR and negative pulses do not experience the exact same delays from space while traveling through such great distances. A photon has both positive pulses within as well as negative, leaving it neutral in electric potential. If the space that the photon is traveling through has a greater delay upon the small positive pulses than the negative, the photon clump will elongate. That elongation is the segregating or slight filtering of the positive and negative EMR pulses within the photon. That elongation will constitute an actual increase in wavelength = “actual red shift”.
3) Relative velocity refers to what is known as the Doppler effect that takes place any time a wave source is traveling away from a receiver. In such a case, the emitted light is transmitted with a longer wave length because each tiny portion of the clump leaves the moving source at a slightly different time. That results in a lower wave length being received by the receiver than what would have been received if the receiver had been moving with the light source. Such an effect constitutes an “apparent red shift”.
4) Shrinking universe refers to the fact that all sub-atomic particles are possibly slightly dissipating, yielding slight larger distances between objects as measured by the size of those particles. This effect has two consequences. Through time, it would appear as if the universe was expanding due to the distances between objects getting greater. But it would also have the effect of causing any wave being received to appear longer than it was when it left its source. The photons are also losing energy, but by a different rate. Thus the shrinking of the particles helps to compensate for the actually lower energy content that will be measured as higher by the smaller receiver. The combination of these yields a “perceived red shift”.
So I would say that answering only one out of four possible scenarios is hardly “proof” at all. A true proof requires the elimination of all alternatives. And in Science nothing is fact until it is “falsifiably demonstrated”. They can at best falsify that the Doppler effect will yield a red shift. They cannot falsify that the appearance of red shift was caused by the velocity of the light source.
Their conclusion is merely a part of their extensive religiosity = what the want for you to believe they have “proven”.
James,
I tried very hard many times to understand but never got the gist of the issue.
Let me try it once more.
Doppler affect says that because the observer is moving away from the omitting source, thus the observer would observe decreased frequency and increased wavelength (red shift).
As the theory of the red shift is based upon light, let me share my perception about light.
Light is not white but a lump sum combination of different colours that looks white to the eyes. The colors are enumerable and every color has its unique frequency, wavelength and photon energy, which is directly proportionate with the frequency.
It means that every color use to have different photon. And, it also means that different colors use to travel at different speeds in different mediums. That is why we see light’s dispersion while going through the prizm. Blue/violet photons have maximum energy and speed because of their highest frequency.
The second theory i want to insert here is Rayligh Scattering/Tyndall Effect.
This theory explains why sky use to appear blue in the day and yellowish red during sunset and sunrise. It says that shorter wavelengths scatter more than longer ones because of air particles in the earth atmosphere.
Reading literally, this does not seem to be logical, because, shorter wavelengths have less chance to be diverted than longer ones. Thus, i tried to explore the issue further and got the details of actual experiment regarding scattering.
The experiment clearly mentions about two different point of observations; one from the side of the tank and one from the end of it. It shows that blue light can be seen from the shorter distances while red light from longer distance.
Now, within the light of these two theories( doppler affect and rayleigh scattering), how should we explain the read shift?
Science admits that there is no absolute vacuum in the space as every point is filled by Cosmic Microwave background. So, it begs the question why red shift is not because of Rayleigh Scattering but Doppler affect?
As it is the issue of very long distances, may be thousands of light years, thus In my opinion, Rayleigh Scattering seems more reasonable than the other one.
The space between the us and the light source acts like a water filled tank of Tyndall’s experiment and we are seeing the light from the end point, not from the side, thus it looks slightly red to us.
Secondly, again as this process is about very long time intervals, thus it is also possible that over the time, the photons of blue light tend to slightly lose their energy and convert themselves into red photons. I do not think that Doppler affect would have any impact in the context of that long distances. It is more suitable to shorter distances.
The perception of ever expanding universe does not fit in the frame as it assumes that the space is absolute vacuum, which is not true even by other theories.
with love,
sanjay
Yes. That was my option (3).
All basically true, but not relevant.
I didn’t think about the Tyndall effect. But that is actually my (1) option (loss of energy). The theory being that what blue light that had been a part of the mix of light (or higher frequency pulses within each photon) are more likely to be scattered and thus the photons lose energy, giving the effect of a lower frequency photon because only the lower frequencies are left.
Understand that every photon is a mix of minute pulses in a “clump” with an averaged “frequency”. A photon isn’t quite like a smooth radio wave, although related and often drawn that way in books. If you could see inside a single photon and look at only one tiny portion within, it might look something like this;
[/quote]
That is relevant.
As it is the issue or very long time intervals, thus it is possible that because of their higher energy, some quantity of the photons of blue color may have crossed us but the red photons of the same batch may not. That would increase the red proportion in the light.
Though, this theory goes against Tyndall effect.
Yes, it is. But, it seems unlikely (at least to me) that Doppler affect would have any noticeable impact when it is the matter of thousands of light years. The speed of galaxies moving away from one another is negligible in comparison the speed of light and distance traveled.
I have a very little knowledge of science and much less of maths thus i have to depend on what others say.
i have searched the net and i found this-
James, i simply do not which is true or not but all that numbers seem to be negligible in the context of light years. If these numbers are true, there is no way that they can be the real cause of red shift ever.
The only option remains is the Tyndall effect.
[/quote]
Because of our previous discussion about RM/AO, i already visualized this. Otherwise, there is no way that a blue photon can converts into a red photon. Because, a photon is the last limit. But, in RM, it is possible.
Hubble noticed this red shift in 1929 and he concluded that the universe is expanding. He can be excused because he was the first one to put the expanding theory forth. But, the question bothers me that why this explanation of Tyndall effect have not came in anybody’s mind even in the century? How this can be possible?
with love,
sanjay
“Independent of distance” means that it doesn’t matter if the distance is 2 inches or 1 million light years. The effect comes from the fact that the source is moving away. How far away that source is, is irrelevant.
You have inspired me to think of an experiment. If you pass a laser beam through a very long chain of prisms, would it color shift? That one experiment would resolve the question. But since WW2, Science was made into a religion. One is not allowed to question its dogma, so any experiment demonstrating otherwise will not be allowed and if revealed, will be altered so as to display the proper ordained theory.
The common physicists assume that the red shift (Hubble effect) is an effect of the Doppler effect.
This is also the reason why science (as science!) simply does not get further. But it gets further as religion, as a new religion. Those of the common physicists who are honest say that they are too stupid to get further - I say they are already too religious to get further. Science had its great time long ago, and its time is not yet over but is going to be over in the relatively near future, full of dogmas and no science anymore because dogmas are a certain sign for religion. How many dogmas has science already accumulated?
That is about the size of it. Man learned long ago how to cause other people to “follow the leader” and thus form huge legions. Then they compete for top-dog, the “god of Earth”. Communism, socialism, and Secularism are all religions in disguise having seen that not being called a religion allows for more freedom to accuse the others and usurp authority. At their foundation, they are all the same. And they all fall into the same old trap of the heart, “over-extended authority in blind lust to dominate the world”. SAM is the cure for that disease as it inherently limits authority and doesn’t worry about the rest of the world … the very thing they fear and yet in the long run, the thing that they cannot avoid.
The universe itself has limits on authority. It doesn’t matter what lustful fantasy formulas for global domination anyone comes up with. Distributed authority has been proven as the only hope for any kind of mass governance for the exact same reason that distributed intelligence and distributed information becomes the only means to compute real-time rational social behavior. It is an issue of the mathematics/logistics. And the scientists are not asked to look into that one beyond the desires of those already pulling the strings. Scientists are simply monks working under the priesthood, having no idea how much of their information has been tampered with nor what their work is going to be used for. Doctors have become even more so, unwitting “ministers”.