paradox of Hydrogen ions in Sun, cosmic blueshift is Cherenkov shift not Doppler/fixing the Maxwell Equations, TALK

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Now I need to straighten out the error of a Doppler shift on light waves. This is one of the most crazy ideas of the last two centuries and those that bought into Doppler shift of light waves should be confiscated of their degree in physics.

To accept Special Relativity, and then be a bozo by saying that speed of source can shift light, means, well, it means you do not understand Special Relativity.

The only Doppler shift in the world is sound waves, not light waves.

So, what is the Redshift? It is not the motion of source, but what? If light is a magnetic field Double Transverse Wave, then it can be bent when another magnetic field is encountered.

But, we have to explain Blueshift also. It is recognized that blueshift exists. However, the scientists of the past 100 years has kept the blueshift a guarded secret as to how much blueshift is going on. There is no Catalog of stars and galaxies with blueshift. Is it a rare phenomenon? Or is it commonplace?

Another scandal and corruption in physics and astronomy is the Ionized Hydrogen on the Sun. This has been known since 1950 as a paradox, in that there should not be any excess electrons or positrons especially in the hot environment of the Sun. Now if physics had just Logical people doing physics, that when they ran into this trouble of 1950 of excess electrons, they should not have conjured up silly idiotic theories of black holes, dark matter, dark energy, String theory, Standard Model, Quark theory, until they settled the problem of Ionized hydrogen and blueshift.

So, why has the physics and astronomy community not tabulated the stars and galaxies with blueshift. A Catalog Listing of blueshifted objects needs be done. Is it rare or commonplace? Does it reach some sort of limit to how much blueshifting, whereas redshifting has no limit?

All in all, why is blueshift hush hush, silence. Why is Ionized Hydrogen and excess electrons hush hush silence. Whereas every week we read about fake physics of Big Bang, black holes, worm holes, dark matter, dark energy and other nonsense.

So I was reading about Cherenkov (spelling) radiation where it makes a blueshifting effect, and that blueshifting is not Doppler. So if blueshift stars and galaxies are rare, then we have a Cherenkov blueshift, not a Doppler shift. Because Doppler shift occurs only with Sound Waves, not Light Waves.

AP

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Now when I search for Cherenkov Doppler same radiation, I get these hits:


out 152,000 results
Cherenkov radiation | Article about Cherenkov radiation by The Free ...
encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Cherenkov+radiation‎
Find out information about Cherenkov radiation. or , light emitted by a transparent ... A quantum treatment by V. L. Ginzburg in 1940 led to the same results. .... When Cherenkov radiation is emitted, the Doppler effect in a medium takes on new ...
[PDF] Cherenkov radiation combined with the complex ... - OSA Publishing
https://www.osapublishing.org/josab/viewmedia.cfm?uri=josab-32-8...‎
A unified analytical description of the Cherenkov and complex Doppler phenomena in a ... Cherenkov radiation in left-handed metamaterials such as the backward direction of ..... almost the same, so that constructive interference occurs. In.
[PDF] Combined complex Doppler and Cherenkov effect in left-handed ...
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1503.07319‎
Mar 25, 2015 ... In dispersive media, the so-called complex Doppler effect occurs, when a ... The Cherenkov radiation in LHM has been studied by Lu et al. ..... near θ, the cone angle α is almost the same, so that constructive interference ...
[PDF] RADIATION BY UNIFORMLY MOVING SOURCES Vavilov ...
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/.../pdf?md5...pid=1-s2.0...
Vavilov-Cherenkov effect, Doppler effect in a medium, transition ..... kinematic conditions for absorption and for emission of waves are the same. Of course, when ...
Doppler effect induced spin relaxation boom : Scientific Reports
www.nature.com/articles/srep23169
Mar 21, 2016 ... Compared to classical Cherenkov radiation, we show that quantum dot .... phonon is not the same as the Zeeman splitting of the spin qubit.
Cherenkov radiation combined with the complex Doppler effect in ...
https://www.researchgate.net/.../281889149_Cherenkov_radiation_combined _with_the_complex_Doppler_effect_in_left-handed_metamaterials
A unified analytical description of the Cherenkov and complex Doppler phenomena in a simple metamaterial model is presented. It is shown that a moving ...
[PDF] INFLUENCE OF NORMAL AND ANOMALOUS DOPPLER EFFECTS ...
www.nipne.ro/rjp/2012_57_9-10/1356_1366.pdf‎
Cherenkov radiation of one, two, three and four electrons moving in a spiral in a transparent ... Doppler effects on synchrotron-Cherenkov radiation. 1357.
Molecular Physics, Thermodynamics, Atomic and Nuclear Physics: ... - Google Books Result
https://books.google.com/books?isbn=1483139301
V. L. Ginzburg, L. M. Levin, M. S. Rabinovich - ‎2013 - Science
What are the sectional dimensions of the channel if the radiation intensity in the Cherenkov and Doppler effects is of the same order as when the motion occurs ...
Physics - Viewpoint: Flipping a photonic shock wave
https://physics.aps.org/articles/v2/91‎
Nov 2, 2009 ... Čerenkov radiation with the emission cone reversed has been observed in a ... inverse Doppler effect, backward Čerenkov radiation, and negative radiation ... The spectrum of the radiation exhibited a peak at the same ...
Theoretical Physics and Astrophysics - Google Books Result
https://books.google.com/books?isbn=1483293181
V.L. Ginzburg, D. ter Haar - ‎2013 - Science
... to magneto—brems and Cherenkov radiation (including the Doppler effect). We note that one can arrive at the same result (Gertsenstein, 1954) by considering ...

--- end of hits ---

So, is it safe to say that there never was a Doppler shift of Light Waves, for the Redshift is due to light traveling nearby a strong magnetic field before arriving on Earth. And the blueshift was none other than a Cherenkov radiation shift.

I need to know the extent of blueshift-- whether rare as is Cherenkov radiation of stars galaxies is rare.

You see, physics is corrupted in this spot, this spot of shifting of light waves. Doppler works only on Sound waves, never light waves. Because light waves are governed by Special Relativity which means the motion of the source of light cannot affect the light wave itself.

So, in the history of Physics and Astronomy, what happened in the 20th century was that they saw this redshifting of galaxies and stars, and wanted to blame something for causing this redshift. So, as you can see, physicists are lazy in mind as the rest of the people in the world and even though Special Relativity is violated, they wanted something, anything to explain redshift. When you are lazy, you take the fakery. When you are not lazy, you want the truth, and so you do not accept a Doppler shift of light, and you look for something that is reasonable and logical. You look for magnetic field bending light waves as it passes nearby.

Magnetism explains Redshift, but not blueshift. So here again, if lazy, you accept Doppler even though fakery. If not lazy, you need to look further. Obviously a magnetic field cannot give blueshift, so here we need something else, and Cherenkov radiation seems to fit the bill.

AP

[Odd Bodkin]

On 8/23/2016 3:15 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> So, why has the physics and astronomy community not tabulated the stars and galaxies
> with blueshift. A Catalog Listing of blueshifted objects needs be done. Is it rare
> or commonplace? Does it reach some sort of limit to how much blueshifting, whereas
> redshifting has no limit?

How is it that you can't do a websearch?
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1007.1580.pdf
http://skyserver.sdss.org/dr12/en/home.aspx


--
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[benj]

On 8/23/2016 5:21 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 8/23/2016 3:15 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>> So, why has the physics and astronomy community not tabulated the
>> stars and galaxies
>> with blueshift. A Catalog Listing of blueshifted objects needs be
>> done. Is it rare
>> or commonplace? Does it reach some sort of limit to how much
>> blueshifting, whereas
>> redshifting has no limit?
>
> How is it that you can't do a websearch?
> http://arxiv.org/pdf/1007.1580.pdf
> http://skyserver.sdss.org/dr12/en/home.aspx
>
>

Go get him, Tiger!

[Archimedes Plutonium]

I do not recall whether Doppler thought his effect would apply or not apply to light waves.

I do recall that Hubble, having discovered astronomy redshift in light waves proposed it as a Doppler effect. But later in life, Hubble recanted his connection to Doppler effect. Anyone know if Hubble replaced his recanting on some other phenomenon? Or was it just an abject rejection.

Now I have light wave (I like to call them photons), as a 4 vector B field of Double Transverse with destructive interference with head on view as this:

__|__
|

Not a Single Transverse but Double and the double part allows the photon to always travel at the same speed-- speed of light, regardless of wavelength.

So, now, how can you change the wavelength of light while the speed is always fixed? The answer is by either constructive or destructive interference with the linear addition of another light wave to the original. So if you had a orange wavelength and added a red wavelength the addition of waves would result in a red outcome. If you had a green wavelength and added a violet wavelength the outcome of linear adding would fall more to a blue wavelength.

So in this manner we begin to see how we can shift the wavelength-- by constructive add on of another wave of light.

Another means of altering the wavelength is bending the light as it comes near a magnetic field.

So in my new theory of Light as a Double Transverse Wave how does Cosmic Redshift occur? It occurs by a magnetic field near a light wave, bending it to be redshifted. Alright that explains redshift but not blueshift. There is not as much blueshift in astronomy as there is redshift. But in a few cases there is a Paradox such as the "Blue Outliers" PG1543+489 quasar. Now if Doppler Effect were correct, then quasars should have no blueshifts on the cosmic balloon of a Big Bang. At that distance, everything should be redshift.

So, blueshift is a challenge for my theory, and the way it is handled is that blueshift is Cherenkov Radiation. This is what happens when a energetic electron in water moves faster than the phase velocity of light in water. Emitting a blueshift, called a bow-wave. Now stars have plenty of energetic electrons, but water is not the medium; something else is the medium for bow waves.

Experiment: draw a evenly spaced dots on a sheet of paper and get a Earth globe to try to lay the paper over the globe. The dots represent galaxies, and as we try to fit the paper onto the globe what does our Perspective of these dots become? On the flat paper the dots are evenly spaced. Pressed on the globe, it looks like the dots are now formed into dense superclusters of dots the further out we look. It is not that the dots are dense forming Walls of dots or superstructures.

If you understand Special Relativity, you understand that the motion of the source of light cannot influence the light wave in any means possible. The source can only create the light wave, but once created, the source has no further influence on the light wave departed. The light wave does not remember how fast or slow the source was moving, nor in what direction. On the other hand, Sound waves have the information of how the source is moving and can be Doppler influenced.

So, in order for me to reconcile Redshift and Blueshift, without Doppler, I need to show that light waves are influenced by a magnetic field and there are plenty of YouTube experiments showing that. Second I need to show blueshift replaced with something, and that something is Cherenkov Radiation.

AP

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Alright good, was looking for how many stars are predominantly Cherenkov radiating stars, and all compact stars are such.

Now, can we get blueshift of spectral lines as a byproduct of Cherenkov radiation.

Redshifted is magnetic field influence

Blueshifted is Cherenkov radiation influence

iPhone post

AP

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Alright there are only about 100 galaxies known to be blueshifted, all the rest redshift, which should have alerted someone with a logical mind the shift was not Doppler.

One of the blueshift galaxies is Andromeda, yet it is paradoxical that all its neighbors are redshift yet uniformity surrounding Andromeda.

And if we examine all 100 blueshifted galaxies, they too are surrounded at a uniform distance by redshifted galaxies.

What this means is that blueshift is not a direction of motion but rather, the galaxy is a Cherenkov blue radiation galaxy and its strong magnetic field bends the light of its neighbor galaxies to be redshifted.

The kinetic motion of galaxies have to agree with the fact of their existence. Andromeda is not hurdling towards us, but away from us.

Redshift is caused by light traveling by a magnetic field

Blueshift is caused by Cherenkov radiation

iPhone post

AP

[Odd Bodkin]

So what lie were you referring to earlier about blueshifts, Ben?

[Odd Bodkin]

On 8/23/2016 9:44 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> So, blueshift is a challenge for my theory, and the way it is handled is that blueshift is Cherenkov Radiation.

Nonstarter. Blueshift means that characteristic emission lines from the
elements present in the galaxy are shifted to higher frequencies. The
emission lines stand right out, are narrow, and have a characteristic
pattern that is the fingerprint of the element.

Cerenkov radiation does not have that feature of an emission line pattern.

Try again.

[Archimedes Plutonium]

On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 7:32:22 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 8/23/2016 9:44 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > So, blueshift is a challenge for my theory, and the way it is handled is that blueshift is Cherenkov Radiation.
>
> Nonstarter. Blueshift means that characteristic emission lines from the

You failed physics, so go back to your philosophy.

Spectral wavelengths are influenced by magnetic fields giving a redshift

Spectral wavelengths are influenced by Cherenkov radiation as the Bow Wave, the shock cone wave compresses the spectral lines. But, you are not a physicist to understand.

> elements present in the galaxy are shifted to higher frequencies. The

By the shock cone wave of Cherenkov

> emission lines stand right out, are narrow, and have a characteristic
> pattern that is the fingerprint of the element.
>

But you failed physics, so are not able to understand any of this

> Cerenkov radiation does not have that feature of an emission line pattern.

Nor does the gravity field that bends spectral lines to redshift

Nor does the magnetic field that bends spectral lines to redshift

Nor does the Cherenkov radiation cone wave that bends spectral lines to blueshift

>
> Try again.

It is time you depart sci.physics as a dumb parrot, repeating irrelevant crap. You failed physics, and time you settled into something you can handle.

AP

[benj]

ARchie doesn't get that the shift is due to relative velocity with
respect to the observe. And Odd does not get that the the basic redshift
is due to the structure of the universe UPON which the velocity shift is
superimposed.

[Odd Bodkin]

On 8/24/2016 3:04 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 7:32:22 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> On 8/23/2016 9:44 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>>> So, blueshift is a challenge for my theory, and the way it is handled is that
>>> blueshift is Cherenkov Radiation.
>>
>> Nonstarter. Blueshift means that characteristic emission lines from the
>
> You failed physics, so go back to your philosophy.
>
> Spectral wavelengths are influenced by magnetic fields giving a redshift
>
> Spectral wavelengths are influenced by Cherenkov radiation as the Bow Wave, the
> shock cone wave compresses the spectral lines. But, you are not a physicist to understand.

The spectrum of Cerenkov radiation is easy to look up. It's in data.
Try Googling. Oh.... wait ... you have troubles with that.

>
>> elements present in the galaxy are shifted to higher frequencies. The
>
> By the shock cone wave of Cherenkov

Nope. Compare the plotted curves of a Cerenkov spectrum with a
blueshifted spectrum. You'll see.

>
>
>> emission lines stand right out, are narrow, and have a characteristic
>> pattern that is the fingerprint of the element.
>>
>
> But you failed physics, so are not able to understand any of this
>
>> Cerenkov radiation does not have that feature of an emission line pattern.
>
> Nor does the gravity field that bends spectral lines to redshift
>
> Nor does the magnetic field that bends spectral lines to redshift
>
> Nor does the Cherenkov radiation cone wave that bends spectral lines to blueshift
>
>>
>> Try again.
>
> It is time you depart sci.physics as a dumb parrot, repeating irrelevant crap. You
> failed physics, and time you settled into something you can handle.
>
> AP
>

[Archimedes Plutonium]

On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 3:34:36 PM UTC-5, benj wrote:

>
> ARchie doesn't get that the shift is due to relative velocity with
> respect to the observe. And Odd does not get that the the basic redshift
> is due to the structure of the universe UPON which the velocity shift is
> superimposed.

Ben like Odd have only a parrot understanding of physics and quickly squak what is written.

Ben knows that Hubble rejected Doppler as the cause of redshift

Ben knows that a spectral line when traversing a gravity field will be redshift

Ben knows that a spectral line when traveling by a magnetic field will be redshifted

So, why is Ben and Odd too stupid to say redshift is never a Doppler effect, the way that Hubble finally came to conclude?

Well, for Ben, he has no logical mind only a tiny physics mind, and Odd is a physics failure with no logic at all.

But, the problem goes deeper than dismissing Doppler, for there is the blueshift to remove also. The blueshift is tougher than the redshift cause. The redshift needs just a traversing of a Magnetic Field to send the spectral lines into a redshift. But how to explain blueshift?

Well, there is a phenomenon of Cherenkov radiation which Ben has known about but new to Odd completely new, because he is not a physics student.

In the Cherenkov radiation there is a Cone Front or like a sonic boom only a photon boom, and in that Cone Front can cause a blueshift of spectral lines. Ben may have the resources and enough brains to figure out the Cherenkov upon spectral lines, but Odd has no abilities.

Now, one thing that can decide for the dummies of physics that Doppler is nonexistent on light waves. A easy Logical Experiment.

Notice that all the blueshifts known are a few cases, of about 100 cases. Notice that all these blueshift astronomy bodies are nested and surrounded by redshift bodies. As if the blueshift body, such as Andromeda galaxy has only redshift neighbors. Smell the illogical rat??

So, can physics be such that a blueshift by Doppler is surrounded by only redshift bodies enclosing the blueshift body? If Doppler were was the cause, would mean that Andromeda is heading in the opposite direction from its enclosed neighbors? Would that make any sense? If you took a car going north and had that car surrounded by all its neighbors going south, how does that make any sense in a Big Bang?

So, we see here how and why Hubble with his intuition hated the Doppler cause, hated the notion that a body's speed fingerprint of motion can be imprinted upon a light wave. Hated to contradict special relativity, that a source can imprint its speed upon light waves.

So, here we have a Technique a Method a Means of throwing out the Doppler effect on light as stupid-physics, as illogical-physics.

Can you have Andromeda as blueshifted while all its neighbors are redshifted? No, you cannot.

What you can have is Andromeda is blueshifted due to Cherenkov radiation in Andromeda, while the neighboring galaxies are redshifted because their light travels by a magnetic field of Andromeda or other other galaxies before reaching Earth.

So, Ben, are you up to it, of course Odd is a failure and no point in asking him, but Ben, can you figure out how Cherenkov radiation with its Bow Wave can blueshift, or is that too much physics for you.

AP

[benj]

On 8/24/2016 8:27 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 3:34:36 PM UTC-5, benj wrote:
>
>>
>> ARchie doesn't get that the shift is due to relative velocity with
>> respect to the observe. And Odd does not get that the the basic
>> redshift is due to the structure of the universe UPON which the
>> velocity shift is superimposed.
>
> Ben like Odd have only a parrot understanding of physics and quickly
> squak what is written.
>
> Ben knows that Hubble rejected Doppler as the cause of redshift

He did. In fact the name "Big Bang" was a put-down joke. Today nobody
get the joke.

> Ben knows that a spectral line when traversing a gravity field will
> be redshift

Possibly.

> Ben knows that a spectral line when traveling by a magnetic field

> will be redshifted.

In empty space? doubtful.

> So, why is Ben and Odd too stupid to say redshift is never a Doppler
> effect, the way that Hubble finally came to conclude?

Nope. Why is archie-poo so stupid that his brain can only think of one
thing at a time. He says if one thing exists then nothing else can
exist. Pretty insane, I'd say. Archie-poo galaxies are rotating and
moving around which gave Hubble a whole range of shifts not related to
distance. Why do you say if one is boiling water with gas that then it
is impossible to boil water with electricity?

> Well, for Ben, he has no logical mind only a tiny physics mind, and
> Odd is a physics failure with no logic at all.

Odd breaks his own arm patting himself on the back after he admires his
own genius!

> But, the problem goes deeper than dismissing Doppler, for there is
> the blueshift to remove also. The blueshift is tougher than the
> redshift cause. The redshift needs just a traversing of a Magnetic
> Field to send the spectral lines into a redshift. But how to explain
> blueshift?
>
> Well, there is a phenomenon of Cherenkov radiation which Ben has
> known about but new to Odd completely new, because he is not a
> physics student.
>
> In the Cherenkov radiation there is a Cone Front or like a sonic boom
> only a photon boom, and in that Cone Front can cause a blueshift of
> spectral lines. Ben may have the resources and enough brains to
> figure out the Cherenkov upon spectral lines, but Odd has no
> abilities.
>
> Now, one thing that can decide for the dummies of physics that
> Doppler is nonexistent on light waves. A easy Logical Experiment.

Absolutely correct Archie. In fact, it's so impossible that police NEVER
use light (laser guns) to catch speeders. They MUST always use radio
waves instead. The fact that radio shows Doppler obviously means that
light can NEVER show a Doppler effect! It an easy experiment! IN fact
there was a time when I occupied a desk that was right near a pneumatic
cylinder that moved a mirror back and forth. It's purpose was to examine
the doppler shift of light from the motion. If I had asked the people
doing that experiment if they found anything I"m sure they would have
said, "No, we are just wasting time to collect taxpayer money!"

> Notice that all the blueshifts known are a few cases, of about 100
> cases. Notice that all these blueshift astronomy bodies are nested
> and surrounded by redshift bodies. As if the blueshift body, such as
> Andromeda galaxy has only redshift neighbors. Smell the illogical
> rat??
>
> So, can physics be such that a blueshift by Doppler is surrounded by
> only redshift bodies enclosing the blueshift body? If Doppler were
> was the cause, would mean that Andromeda is heading in the opposite
> direction from its enclosed neighbors? Would that make any sense? If
> you took a car going north and had that car surrounded by all its
> neighbors going south, how does that make any sense in a Big Bang?
>
> So, we see here how and why Hubble with his intuition hated the
> Doppler cause, hated the notion that a body's speed fingerprint of
> motion can be imprinted upon a light wave. Hated to contradict
> special relativity, that a source can imprint its speed upon light
> waves.
>
> So, here we have a Technique a Method a Means of throwing out the
> Doppler effect on light as stupid-physics, as illogical-physics.
>
> Can you have Andromeda as blueshifted while all its neighbors are
> redshifted? No, you cannot.

Is it moving? Probably. Are you really this stupid? This sets a new
record even by HVAC standards. At least he and "professor" Wormley are
smart enough to know that if they open their yaps they'll get their
asses handed to them.

> What you can have is Andromeda is blueshifted due to Cherenkov
> radiation in Andromeda, while the neighboring galaxies are redshifted
> because their light travels by a magnetic field of Andromeda or other
> other galaxies before reaching Earth.
>
> So, Ben, are you up to it, of course Odd is a failure and no point in
> asking him, but Ben, can you figure out how Cherenkov radiation with
> its Bow Wave can blueshift, or is that too much physics for you.
>
> AP

Archie-poo you are STILL an idiot. Nothing has changed since you started
posting here. The sign of the true kook is not that the say things that
the well-indoctrinated are sure is "wrong", but rather that they
constantly repeat nonsense which has been experimentally proven wrong
for centuries like light is not affected by Doppler or the speed of
light changes with the velocity of the source. You might as well just
hang a sign on your front like Herb's slate that says "I'm stooopid".

[Archimedes Plutonium]

On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 8:15:43 PM UTC-5, benj wrote:
(snipped)

> > Now, one thing that can decide for the dummies of physics that
> > Doppler is nonexistent on light waves. A easy Logical Experiment.
>
> Absolutely correct Archie. In fact, it's so impossible that police NEVER
> use light (laser guns) to catch speeders. They MUST always use radio
> waves instead. The fact that radio shows Doppler obviously means that
> light can NEVER show a Doppler effect! It an easy experiment! IN fact
> there was a time when I occupied a desk that was right near a pneumatic
> cylinder that moved a mirror back and forth. It's purpose was to examine
> the doppler shift of light from the motion. If I had asked the people
> doing that experiment if they found anything I"m sure they would have
> said, "No, we are just wasting time to collect taxpayer money!"
>

HAHAHA, or should I say Yikeess. Fool, the police use light not for a shift, but use it only to bounce light back and forth to measure distance then speed.

I should have read more of your posts to realize you are not even a physicist but pretending to be one.

No physicist in the world is ignorant of speed measured by light, not be a shifting of light.

So, which is more stupid in physics, Ben or Odd? a toss up.

Why do so many posters who failed physics, have no contribution towards physics, why do they hang out here? Normal people walk away from things they are not good at, but I guess, crazies like Ben and Odd, they more they fail in physics, the longer they hang out in sci.physics.

Really, I hate to think anyone got a degree in physics and thinks that police radar is a Doppler shift demonstration. What the Ben bozo is unaware of, is that society attaches the word "Doppler" to many things-- Doppler Weather, Doppler radar, Doppler speed, to make the product more appealing even though Doppler has nothing to do with it.

So, these two crazies-- Ben and Odd, are they also anti-global warming??

AP

[Archimedes Plutonium]

On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 7:27:45 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
(snipped)

> Now, one thing that can decide for the dummies of physics that Doppler is nonexistent on light waves. A easy Logical Experiment.
>
> Notice that all the blueshifts known are a few cases, of about 100 cases. Notice that all these blueshift astronomy bodies are nested and surrounded by redshift bodies. As if the blueshift body, such as Andromeda galaxy has only redshift neighbors. Smell the illogical rat??
>
> So, can physics be such that a blueshift by Doppler is surrounded by only redshift bodies enclosing the blueshift body? If Doppler were was the cause, would mean that Andromeda is heading in the opposite direction from its enclosed neighbors? Would that make any sense? If you took a car going north and had that car surrounded by all its neighbors going south, how does that make any sense in a Big Bang?
>
> So, we see here how and why Hubble with his intuition hated the Doppler cause, hated the notion that a body's speed fingerprint of motion can be imprinted upon a light wave. Hated to contradict special relativity, that a source can imprint its speed upon light waves.
>
> So, here we have a Technique a Method a Means of throwing out the Doppler effect on light as stupid-physics, as illogical-physics.
>
> Can you have Andromeda as blueshifted while all its neighbors are redshifted? No, you cannot.
>
> What you can have is Andromeda is blueshifted due to Cherenkov radiation in Andromeda, while the neighboring galaxies are redshifted because their light travels by a magnetic field of Andromeda or other other galaxies before reaching Earth.
>
>

It is said that Barnard's star, a close neighbor of the Sun is blueshifted. So, what are the 3 dimensional neighbors of Barnard star? The Sun would be one neighbor and in 3rd dimension let us say that Barnard's star has 40 neighbors, Sun being one of them. And if we look up the shifting of light of all these 41 stars, would Barnard's be the only blueshift? I would guess this is likely the case.

What this means, then, is that blueshift and redshift is not a Doppler phenomenon but is rather a phenomenon of 1) light passing by a Magnetic Field for redshift, and, 2) light from the object is Cherenkov radiation influenced to cause a blueshift.

So, it is not the case that Barnard's star is moving in the direction of the Sun, but rather, it is moving in the same direction as all the other 40 stars in that neighborhood, and what is causing the blueshift is Cherenkov radiation.

Now let me look at the quasar PG1543+489 a "Blue Outliers" quasar to see if its surrounding neighbors are all redshifted.

In fact, the good astronomers and physicists should all stop what they are doing right now, and look at all the 100 blueshifted stars and galaxies and see if all 100 have surrounding neighbors all redshifted.

So, let us prove Hubble correct, that redshift and blueshift of light is not, is never Doppler.

AP

[Archimedes Plutonium]

In SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, March 2014 is a article on blueshift titled: "Found: The Fastest-Approaching Object in the Universe" talking about a blueshift galaxy in the Virgo Cluster.

Sad to say, this article feels like reading some fantasy child's nighttime story, with Loch Ness monster Plessey, and Puff the magic fire breathing dragon with ghosts, witches and Bigfoot making an appearance.

Trouble with Astronomy is we are far away from objects and our heads are full of imagination, not good commonsense nor logic, and so we make this pitiful assumptions-- black holes exist, Doppler shift is speed towards or away from us, and other pitiful wrong assumptions.

But this article tells us of a galaxy in M87 with a huge Doppler blueshift, and the author of this article-- Nelson Caldwell, well, we do not expect much of logic for him. I say this because, if Nelson had spent just one day thinking about the situation of M87 Virgo Cluster, just one day with a clean fresh mind with logic in it, would have realized these major points:

1) The measured Shift of all the galaxies in Virgo are redshifts

2) Only one galaxy has a blueshift and is a huge blueshift

3) So you have a galaxy with huge blueshift surrounded completely by redshift galaxies, surrounded completely by redshift

So, now to Nelson, would he ever think that is strange? How in the world can you get a blueshift surrounded on all sides by redshift? Not to Nelson for he never applied common sense logic to his science.

Now I am not arguing about the numbers for the redshift or the blueshift. The numbers are all fine and dandy. What I am arguing about is what Hubble came to the conclusion that Doppler shift is not what is going on and that light waves cannot have a Doppler shift for it violates Special Relativity. The speed of an object does not imprint that speed upon light that is emitted from the object, which is what Special Relativity is all about.

So, I am not against any of the numbers given for those galaxy red or blue shift. What I am against is the idiotic and stupid interpretation of those numbers. Because if you realize the Redshift is due to light traveling by a strong Magnetic Field and bending thus shifting the light before it reaches Earth, and that Blueshift is caused by Cherenkov radiation cone wave where the spectral lines are emitted from causing blue shift. Well, then, this ridiculous notion that all the stars and galaxies are heading in one direction whilst a innermost galaxy in the opposite direction is some childish fantasy book before bedtime.

No-one has made a list of all blueshift galaxies-- perhaps 100 in all, and a list of all the galaxies surrounding that 100 blueshift galaxies. And found out, that all are surrounded by redshift galaxies. A preposterous and silly situation in a Big Bang theory.

There is no galaxy in Virgo Cluster that is heading our way, but rather instead, there is light waves bent by Magnetic Fields and Cherenkov effect heading our way.

Shame on you Scientific American for publishing such nonsense.

AP

[Odd Bodkin]

On 8/24/2016 9:00 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> So, which is more stupid in physics, Ben or Odd? a toss up.
>
> Why do so many posters who failed physics, have no contribution
> towards physics, why do they hang out here? Normal people walk
> away from things they are not good at, but I guess, crazies like
> Ben and Odd, they more they fail in physics, the longer they hang
> out in sci.physics.

Archimedes, do you have any degree in physics? Yes or no.

[benj]

Right, Archie-poo. Microwaves are not electromagnetic radiation and
neither is light. Since the velocity of light is known to be independent
of the velocity of the source then there must not be any Doppler shift
for light, right? And of course you really believe the speed of light
must depend on the speed of the source, but you don't believe in Doppler
shift. I'll bet you think that CO2 is a major greenhouse gas causing
global warming too!

Want a credential war? Please list your degrees, your published papers,
your patents, books you've authored and employment history so we can all
appreciate your genius.

Archie-poo, Odd may be a gullible fool, but at least he knows some
science. You on the other hand are just in the same class of losers as
Wormley and HVAC. They don't teach science in journalism school.

[benj]

On 8/25/2016 8:59 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 8/24/2016 9:00 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>> So, which is more stupid in physics, Ben or Odd? a toss up.
>>
>> Why do so many posters who failed physics, have no contribution
>> towards physics, why do they hang out here? Normal people walk
>> away from things they are not good at, but I guess, crazies like
>> Ben and Odd, they more they fail in physics, the longer they hang
>> out in sci.physics.
>
> Archimedes, do you have any degree in physics? Yes or no.

Odd, do YOU have a degree in physics> Yes of no.

[Odd Bodkin]

No. But neither does Archimedes. And so his claim to be more
credentialed than me is, frankly, full of shit.

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Alright, I am satisfied with this outlook on the Cosmic Redshift as explained by spectral line light waves passing near a strong magnetic field and end up being redshifted (in Old Physics, they would say it passes near a gravitational field, but they were always antiMaxwell).

Hubble discovered cosmic redshift and at first ascribed it to Doppler effect, but later in his life, he completely rejected Doppler. Hubble was correct in rejecting, because if you know Special Relativity, it means that the source speed cannot make an imprint on light that is emitted from the source.

Magnetic fields cover all the Redshift that we observe, but they do not cover the Blueshift we occasionally see.

The fact that blueshift light waves are rare, is testimony to blueshift being something on the order of Cherenkov radiation as the explanation.

So far as we know, there are only about 100 blueshifted stars and galaxies and all the others are redshifted.

When we examine these 100 blueshifted astronomy objects, we always see them surrounded by redshift objects, so that Barnard's star is surrounded 360 degrees by nothing but redshifted stars. That the blueshifted galaxy in Virgo is surrounded 360 degrees by nothing but redshifted galaxies. That the quasar PG1543+489 is surrounded 360 degrees by nothing but redshifted objects. What this means is that blueshift is not only rare, but is some localized physics phenomenon of likely Cherenkov radiation that is longitudinally bending the light spectral lines, as if the spectral lines were a result of the Cone Wave of the Cherenkov radiation.

If you are surrounded 360 degrees by redshift, and you are the only blueshift, means that shifting is not a Doppler effect, but rather, shifting is a Electromagnetic effect such as bending of light waves by magnetism or by Cherenkov effect.

It remains to be shown that Barnard's star is Cherenkov surface and that these other blueshifts are also Cherenkov surface. And what I mean by that, is that the Sun has some Cherenkov radiation, but we do not see it as a blueshift. So when is Cherenkov radiation a full scale or a large enough radiation that we see their spectral lines blueshifted. This special situation occurs rarely, because, well, blueshifts are rare.

AP

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Alright I should push onto explaining superconductivity with the newfound wisdom of the revised Maxwell theory and revised equations. What superconductivity is, then is neutrino messengers rather than photon messengers. Afterall, an electron is itself a photon trapped inside a neutrino closed torus tube. Neutrinos, like photons have constructive interference and have superposition, even though they are spin 1/2, because spin is only direction, 0 versus 180.

So what happens in normal conduction is photons making to electric circuit, and in superconductivity the neutrinos of each electron as a torus loop form the circuit. Think of the electric wire circuit as on big neutrino torus tube. Or as each neutrino carrying its enclosed electron through matter without resistance. We all know neutrinos fly through matter without resistance, and that is because they are longitudinal waves.

iPhone post

AP