Modern Astronomy ........,.,.,

[numbernu...@gmail.com]

§ 24. Modern Astronomy




Modern astronomers use parallax to determine the distance to a star. The change in the angle of a star is measured after an observer on the surface of the earth propagates the distance of the earth's orbital diameter (six months) which is used as the parallax reference distance but the distance to a 4.22 light year (4 x 10^16 meters) star is more than 10^7 times larger than the earth's orbital diameter (1.4 x 1010 m); consequently, the reference distance of the earth's orbital distance KL is to short of a length to obtain an accurate measurement of the distance of a 4.22 ly star using parallax. To measure the distance to a 4.22 ly star using parallax requires a reference distance of approximately 1% of the 4.22 light year distance. Example, the distance between two points separated by 100 km using a 30 ft flag pole is measured using parallax. If the observed moves 1 cm to the right perpendicular to the line formed by the flag pole point to the observer, the 1 cm parallax reference distance is 100,000 times less than the distance (100 km) being measure; consequently, the 1 cm parallax reference distance is to short to measure the 100 km distance since a change in the angle of the flag pole cannot be detected using a parallax reference distance of 1 cm. To measure the distance to the flag pole requires a reference distance of 1 km (1% of 100 km); conversely, to measure the distance to a 4.22 ly star requires a parallax reference distance that is 1% of 4.22 ly which forms a minimum parallax reference distance length of 4 x 10^14 m which is more than 10,000 times greater than the earth's orbital diameter (1.4 x 10^10 m) which proves parallax cannot be used to determine the distance to a 4.22 light year star. Moreover, a dimming method of the star's intensity is used to determine the distance to a star that are more than 350 light years from the earth but the fluctuation of a star's intensity is within the intensity variation cause by the thermodynamic variation of the earth's atmosphere which proves modern astronomy is physically invalid.


The images of the Eagle Nebula obtained using the Spitzer space telescope were created using computer induced images since the image of the Eagle Nebula represents a celestial gas cloud (fig 13) but the vacuum of celestial universe cannot support the structure of a gas cloud since the existence of a cloud requires an atmosphere. In addition, a planet has been detected that is orbiting a 4.22 ly star but the Hubble telescope has a resolution of .1 arcsec. To detect an object on the surface of the moon would require an illuminated object with a diameter of 200 meters. The Hubble proportionality p is formed using the moon's distance and the 200 m resolution diameter p = (3.84 x 10^8 m) / (200 m) = 10^6. The detection of a 4.22 ly planet using the Hubble requires a minimum planetary diameter of {(4.22 ly) / p} = {(4 x 10^16) / p} = 10^10 m that is more than 1,000 time the diameter of the earth (1.3 x 10^7m) which proves the Hubble telescope that is the most power telescope known to man cannot be used to view a 4.22 ly planet; consequently, Chilean astronomers use the dimming of a 4.22 ly star Proxima Centauri caused by a planet orbiting a 4.22 star viewed using the La Silla telescope (Escude, p. 408) but the variation of the intensity (dimming) of a 4.22 light year star caused by the planet's area reducing the 4.22 ly star's intensity is within the intensity measurement fluctuation caused by the thermodynamic variations of the earth's atmosphere which proves the Chilean detection of a planet orbiting a 4.22 ly stars is physically invalid. Furthermore, the Institute of Astronomy in Cambridge detected a blackhole of the Perseus Clustera that is 250 million light years from the earth using the Chandra X-ray space telescope but X-rays cannot be focused using an optical lens which would make it extremely difficult to detect stellar X-rays produced by a 250 million light year blackhole. Also, the detection of a blackhole requires the viewing of stars that surround the blackbody hole but to detect a 250 million ly star would require a telescopic resolution power of more than .0001 arcsec yet the Hubble has a resolution power of .1 arsec which proves blackholes are an astronomic hoax.


The Big Bang expansion theory is justified using the symmetry of a spiral galaxy. The outwardly radiating tentacles of a spiral galaxy represent a galaxy that stars originate from a central point which is used to justify that the stellar universe is expanding but the image of a spiral galaxy was arbitrarily created since the photographic images of the Milky Way spiral galaxy contains the Sun and the Earth that would require the photographer to be many millions of light years away from the earth which is not physically possible. Also, the density of the stars that constitute the celestial universe viewed from all directions from the earth is constant yet the image of the Milky Way galaxy represents a higher density of stars at the center of the Milky Way and along the tentacles of the Milky Way which conflicts with the constant density of stars of the celestial universe viewed from the earth and depicted by the background stellar universe of a planisphere. The stars of the stellar universe are stationary since the stars of the constellations that constitute the celestial universe have not change positions since the advent of photograph (120 years). Furthermore, the red shift is used to justify the Big Bang expansion theory but every star in the universe at different times and positions forms both red and blue shifts since the stellar universe is stationary. When the observer on the surface of the earth propagates towards a star caused by the earth's daily and yearly motions the blue shift is produced and when the observer propagates away from the star, the red shift is observed; consequently, the stellar red and blue shifts are formed by the earth's daily and yearly motions affect on the observer viewing the stars of a stationary celestial universe which contradicts the Big Bang theory that is based on a celestial universe that stars are in motion (expanding).


The Caltech-MIT lunar laser ranging experiment is described in Smullin paper "Optical Echoes form the Moon" (1962). The Caltech-MIT lunar reflector experiment is an attempt at measuring the distance from the earth to the moon using a mirrored reflector that was install on the surface of the moon during the Apollo 11 mission. A 2.3 W laser beam at the earth is pointed at the lunar reflector that is 238,900 miles from the earth. The laser beam's intensity is reflected by the lunar reflector then detected by the Lick observatory. The Hubble space telescope (.1 arcsec) is six times more powerful than the Lick telescope (.6 arcsec). The Hubble requires an illuminated object that has a diameter of 200 meters to form a detectable intensity on the surface of the moon yet the Caltech-MIT lunar reflector has a surface area of one square meter which proves the lunar reflector experiment is a hoax. In addition, the 2.3 W laser beam, after propagating a distance of 238,900 miles, to the moon, would disperse and forms a beam diameter of four miles at the moon. The laser expansion ratio is derived using the initial one inch diameter of the 2.3 W laser beam and the four mile diameter expansion of the laser beam's diameter after propagating 238,900 miles to the moon R = (253,440 inches) / (1 inch) = 253,440. Using an analogy, the 2.3 W laser beam is pointed at the moon forming a laser beam that intensity is distributed about a four mile circumference area at the moon. The intensity incident to the moon is then reflected by a four mile diameter mirror that is hypothetically situated on the surface of the moon which would form a beam diameter of R x 4 miles = 1,013,760 miles after the reflected four mile diameter laser beam propagates back to the earth; consequently, a 2.3 W laser beam's intensity cannot form a detectable intensity after propagating to the moon and back. The Caltech-MIT lunar laser ranging experiment is based on a 2.3 W laser beam's intensity that does not disperse after propagating to the moon and back.


"Hey, wait a sec! Hubble’s resolution is only 0.1 arcseconds, so the lander is way too small to be seen as anything more than a dot, even by Hubble. It would have to be a lot bigger to be seen at all. In fact, if you do the math (set Hubble’s resolution to 0.1 arcseconds and the distance to 400,000 kilometers) you see that Hubble’s resolution on the Moon is about 200 meters! In other words, even a football stadium on the Moon would look like a dot to Hubble." (By Phil Plait | August 12, 2008, Discover online).



The Apollo 11 mission did not land on the surface of the moon since the lunar lander does not contain the minimum amount of rocket fuel required in descending the lander onto the surface of the moon using a descent rocket re-entry. Using the analogy that the amount of fuel required to launch a payload from the surface of the earth into the earth's orbit is approximately equal to the amount of fuel required in descending the same payload onto the surface of the earth from the earth's orbit using a descent rocket re-entry; consequently, the amount of fuel required to descent a payload from the moon's orbit to the surface of the moon can be calculated using an earth base rocket launch by compensating for the moon's gravity. The total weight of the Apollo 11 lunar lander (dry) is 15,083 lb. Using the moon gravity of .166 g the lunar lander weight would be comparable to (15,083 lb) x (.166) = 2,504 lb on the surface of the moon; consequently, to decent the lander onto the surface of the moon would be comparable to launching a 2,504 lb payload from the surface of the earth into the earth's orbit. The Taep'o-dong 2 rocket has a maximum payload weight of 1,000 lbs and uses 114,913 lb of liquid rocket fuel which forms a fuel-payload ratio of R = (114,913 lb) / (1,000 lb) = 115. Using the fuel-payload ratio R, the minimum amount of rocket fuel required to launch a 2,504 lb payload into the earth's orbit is (2,504 lb) x R = 287,960 lb; consequently, to descent the 15,083 lb lander (moon weight of 2,504 lb) onto the surface of the moon using descent rockets requires 287,960 lb of fuel yet the total amount of fuel used in the lander descent is 18,000 lb which proves the lunar lander did not land on the surface of the moon.

"History shows us examples of scientists who were able to make a great leap forward specifically because they were not limited by the data. One of the most dramatic examples occurs at the beginning of the nineteenth century, when we may find a scientist willing to ignore the limitations of numerical facts for the sake of correct idea or theory, even to the extent of saying that certain numbers probably should be made a little bit bigger, others a little smaller, and so on. It was precisely in this way that Dalton proceeded in developing his atomic theory. Some scientists do not like examples of this sort, because they imply a special virtue "fudging" the evidence or "cooking" the data, and they warn us that we must not ever tell our science students that discoveries have been made in this way." (Suppe, p. 300).






_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[numbernu...@gmail.com]

fgffg

[numbernu...@gmail.com]

dfdf

[numbernu...@gmail.com]

hsjhdsd

[numbernu...@gmail.com]

On Monday, June 12, 2017 at 10:28:46 AM UTC-7, numbernu...@gmail.com wrote:
> § 24. Modern Astronomy
>
>
>
> dfdf

[numbernu...@gmail.com]

dfd

[numbernu...@gmail.com]

On Monday, June 12, 2017 at 10:28:46 AM UTC-7, numbernu...@gmail.com wrote:
> § 24. Modern Astronomy
>
> dfdf
>
>

[numbernu...@gmail.com]

[numbernu...@gmail.com]

[numbernu...@gmail.com]

On