Radiation evidence found that are even older than Big Bang
Sanny
just the start of a new chapter.
Link: http://www.getclub.com/Show/view.php?best=Articles&itemid=41&lang=en
/****** Copy-Paste
Scientists have found rings of radiation in the cosmos that may be
older than the Big Bang, suggesting that event was just the latest in
a series of rebirths
The theory was proposed by Sir Roger Penrose, a theoretical physicist
at Oxford University, and Vahe Gurzadyan of the Yerevan Physics
Institute in Armenia
The circles of radiation appear in concentric circles made up of below
average temperature in the cosmic microwave background (CMB), which is
the leftover glow of the Big Bang.
Copy-Paste *******/
It just means Big Bang is just an explosion which have occured many
times previously before the Big Bang.
So Big Bang occurs at a regular interval of time creating new
universe.
Scientists believe they have observed waves/ radiations of previous
Universe When Black Holes of previous Universe Collided with each
Other.
This interesting discovery brings many new exciting Questions.
1. Will this recent discovery discard the Big Bang theory?
2. Is Big Bang comes regularly to give rebirth to our Universe? What
do scientists think about it?
3. Will the Old Universe be part of our Current Universe?
4. Secondly does it mean "Time" Existed before our Big Bang?
5. Was the laws of relativity working in previous Universes? or they
were same?
6. Was the speed of light the same in previous Universe?
Hope we will see the Universe in a different way due to this
discovery.
Bye
Sanny
Read Complete Article: http://www.getclub.com/Show/view.php?best=Articles&itemid=41&lang=en
mpc755
> THE Big Bang might not have been the beginning of the universe, but
> just the start of a new chapter.
>
The Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is in, a jet
stream.
'Mysterious Cosmic 'Dark Flow' Tracked Deeper into Universe'
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/releases/2010/10-023.html
'The clusters appear to be moving along a line extending from our
solar system toward Centaurus/Hydra, but the direction of this motion
is less certain. Evidence indicates that the clusters are headed
outward along this path, away from Earth, but the team cannot yet rule
out the opposite flow. "We detect motion along this axis, but right
now our data cannot state as strongly as we'd like whether the
clusters are coming or going," Kashlinsky said.'
The clusters are headed along this path because the Universe is, or
the local Universe we exist in is, a jet stream. Analogous to the jet
stream of a black hole.
The following is an image analogous of a jet stream:
http://aether.lbl.gov/image_all.html
The reason for the 'expansion' of the universe is the continual
emission of aether into the Universal jet stream. Three
dimensional space associated with the Universe itself is not
expanding. What we see in our telescopes is the matter associated with
the Universe moving outward and away from the Universal jet stream
emission point. In the image above, '1st Stars' is where the
conditions enable aether to be compressed into matter.
The following is an image analogous of the Universe, or the local
Universe, we exist in:
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/planetarium/graphics/st_images/BlackHole.jpg
It's not the Big Bang. It's the Big Ongoing.
bert
>
> - Show quoted text -
Origenal universe took place eons ago. All present universes came out
of the original by BH reaching its credical mass density. Our universe
was created 22 billion years ago.All universes are created in pairs.
Treb gives a high sign TreBert
mpc755
The Universe, or the local Universe we exist in, has always existed.
At this time, we do not know how long the Universal jet stream we
exist in has been functioning.
For our present understanding of the Universe, it is more correct to
understand the jet stream we exist in as always having existed.
dlzc
> THE Big Bang might not have been the beginning
> of the universe, but just the start of a new
> chapter.
Link that does not try and hijack my browser:
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/health/radiation-rings-hint-big-bang-may-not-have-been-the-first_100467400.html
> /****** Copy-Paste
> Scientists have found rings of radiation in the
> cosmos that may be older than the Big Bang,
> suggesting that event was just the latest in
> a series of rebirths
The CMBR was optically dense. *No* light could have survived it. So
this is just ring interference from a massive point source.
> 1. Will this recent discovery discard the
> Big Bang theory?
No, this interpretation of data too shall pass.
> 2. Is Big Bang comes regularly to give rebirth
> to our Universe? What do scientists think about
> it?
Both "where is the iron", and baloney.
> 3. Will the Old Universe be part of our Current
> Universe?
Not, except to establish the values of constants.
> 4. Secondly does it mean "Time" Existed before
> our Big Bang?
Only orthogonal to our current time.
> 5. Was the laws of relativity working in
> previous Universes? or they were same?
Relativity has no laws. Physics has laws. Probably still has a
constant value for c, for whatever they have for photons.
> 6. Was the speed of light the same in
> previous Universe?
... as if we could tell.
> Hope we will see the Universe in a different
> way due to this discovery.
Hope you can find out what we currently see.
David A. Smith
john
> On Nov 30, 5:09 am, Sanny <softtank...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > THE Big Bang might not have been the beginning
> > of the universe, but just the start of a new
> > chapter.
>
The above post by a true BELIEVER-
i.e. NOT a scientist.
john
dlzc
On Nov 30, 12:36 pm, john <vega...@accesscomm.ca> wrote:
> On Nov 30, 8:35 am, dlzc <dl...@cox.net> wrote:
> > On Nov 30, 5:09 am, Sanny <softtank...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > THE Big Bang might not have been the beginning
> > > of the universe, but just the start of a new
> > > chapter.
>
> > Link that does not try and hijack my browser:
<snip link now broken by Google Groups>
> The above post by a true BELIEVER-
> i.e. NOT a scientist.
I've never claimed to be a scientist. Sanny never claimed to be a
cosmologist. You've never claimed to be a scientist, to the best of
my knowledge.
What I fail to understand is your continued silence when the
"repeating creationists" never touch why there is as little iron as
there is. Or how you completely neglected how I made "unscientific"
predictions about our container Universe.
So basically you look for the name of the poster, and post what you
think is an insult instasd of a reasoned response. How nice for you.
Place your hands over your ears. In between your hands is an organ
that will bring you great joy and great sorrow, if you'll just learn
to use it. And I don't mean "your skull" and "as an ashtray".
Ring interference is well known, and was not discounted by these
researchers. So they simply impressed a preferred *religously based*
interpretation on the results. How scientific is *that*?
David A. Smith
artful
For those interested, a couple of other articles for this that google
turned up :)
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/66525/title/Cosmic_rebirth
mpc755
Stating:
<start quote>
> 1. Will this recent discovery discard the
> Big Bang theory?
No, this interpretation of data too shall pass.
<end quote>
Is the same as stating:
All that can be learned has been learned.
The response of yours to the original post is demonstrating a closed
mind. Your response is showing how you consider the Big Bang dogma.
Your response is the same as someone who presents experimental
evidence the Earth is not flat. Your response:
No, this interpretation of the data too shall pass.
Galileo presents evidence the Earth is not stationary. Your response:
No, this interpretation of the data too shall pass.
M Purcell
A good point, however the preponderance of evidence supports the "Big
Bang" while none contradicts it.
I'll agree it's ongoing and there are currents in space but I see no
evidence of aether.
mpc755
The directionality of the clusters in the following is not supported
by the Big Bang. Where the authors are incorrect is when the guess the
clusters are under the effects of some type of pull external to the
Universe.
The more correct answer is understanding the Universe, or the local
Universe we exist in, is a jet stream.
The galaxy clusters in the following articles are not traveling with
dark matter. The galaxy clusters are moving through the aether. The
galaxy clusters displace aether. The moving galaxy clusters have
associated aether displacement waves.
'Hubble Finds Ghostly Ring of Dark Matter'
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/news/dark_matter_ring_feature.html
"Astronomers using NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view
of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two
galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark mater, which is
somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the
water."
The 'pond' consists of aether. The 'ripple' is an aether displacement
wave. The 'ripple' is a gravitational wave.
'Dark Halo Around Our Galaxy Looks Like Squished Beach Ball'
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/100106-dark-matter-halo-milky-way.html
"Dark matter seems to shroud the remaining visible matter in giant
spheres called haloes."
The Milky Way's halo is displaced aether.
"But the new study found that the Milky Way's halo isn't exactly
spherical, but squished. In fact, its beach-ball form is flattened in
a surprising direction — perpendicular to the galaxy's visible,
pancake-shaped spiral disk."
All of the aether displaced by the matter exerts force towards the
matter. The force exerted towards the matter by the aether displaced
perpendicular to the galaxy's pancake-shaped spiral disk offsets. It
is the aether which is displaced outward relative to the plane of the
spiral disk which exerts force towards the center of the galaxy. This
forces the matter in the pancake-shaped spiral disk towards the center
of the galaxy which results in the displaced aether looking like a
squished beach ball.
In the following image, what is being shown is the state of the aether
which is the aether's state of displacement.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/sci_nat_enl_1168021092/img/1.jpg
Every time a double slit experiment is performed is evidence of
aether.
A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a
double slit experiment the particle travels a single path and enters
and exits a single slit. It is the associated aether displacement wave
which enters and exits multiple slits. The aether displacement wave
creates interference upon exiting the slits. It is this interference
which alters the direction the particle travels. Detecting the
particle causes a loss of coherence between the particle and its
associated aether displacement wave and there is no interference.
'Gravitational mass' and 'inertial mass' are both aspects of Aether
Displacement. Aether is displaced by matter. The displaced aether
exerts force towards the matter. The force exerted towards the Earth
by the aether displaced by the Earth determines gravitational mass.
The aether's resistance to change determines inertial mass.
Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html
"Since according to our present conceptions the elementary particles
of matter are also, in their essence, nothing else than condensations
of the electromagnetic field"
The electromagnetic field is a state of aether.
Matter is the condensation of aether.
DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?' A.EINSTEIN
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf
"If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass
diminishes by L/c2."
The matter which no longer exists as part of the body has not
vanished. It still exists, as aether. As matter converts to aether it
expands in three dimensional space. The physical effects this
transition has on the neighboring matter and aether is energy. Mass is
conserved. Energy is conserved.
'Ether and the Theory of Relativity - Albert Einstein'
http://www.tu-harburg.de/rzt/rzt/it/Ether.html
"the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections
with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places, ...
disregarding the causes which condition its state."
The state of the aether as determined by its connections with the
matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the
aether's state of displacement. The cause which conditions its state
is its displacement by matter.
M Purcell
> The galaxy clusters in the following articles are not traveling with
> dark matter. The galaxy clusters are moving through the aether. The
> galaxy clusters displace aether. The moving galaxy clusters have
> associated aether displacement waves.
>
>
> "Astronomers using NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view
> of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two
> galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark mater, which is
> somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the
> water."
>
> The 'pond' consists of aether. The 'ripple' is an aether displacement
> wave. The 'ripple' is a gravitational wave.
That one's still up for grabs at CERN but you must be thinking about a
very small galaxy cluster.
mpc755
It's not still up for grabs.
I am referring to the two colliding galaxy clusters which allowed the
Astronomers using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope to get a first-hand
view of how displaced aether behaves.
'Hubble Finds Ghostly Ring of Dark Matter'
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/news/dark_matter_ring_feature.html
"Astronomers using NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view
of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two
galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark mater, which is
somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the
water."
The 'pond' consists of aether. The 'ripple' is an aether displacement
wave. The 'ripple' is a gravitational wave.
I'm also referring to the Milky Way. The researches were able to
detect the displaced aether based upon the motion of the Sagittarius
Dwarf Galaxy.
M Purcell
I dislike repetition, there is nothing wrong with my memory.
> I'm also referring to the Milky Way. The researches were able to
> detect the displaced aether based upon the motion of the Sagittarius
> Dwarf Galaxy.
>
> 'Dark Halo Around Our Galaxy Looks Like Squished Beach Ball'http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/100106-dark-matter-halo-milky-w...
>
> "Dark matter seems to shroud the remaining visible matter in giant
> spheres called haloes."
>
> The Milky Way's halo is displaced aether.
>
> "But the new study found that the Milky Way's halo isn't exactly
> spherical, but squished. In fact, its beach-ball form is flattened in
> a surprising direction — perpendicular to the galaxy's visible,
> pancake-shaped spiral disk."
>
> All of the aether displaced by the matter exerts force towards the
> matter. The force exerted towards the matter by the aether displaced
> perpendicular to the galaxy's pancake-shaped spiral disk offsets. It
> is the aether which is displaced outward relative to the plane of the
> spiral disk which exerts force towards the center of the galaxy. This
> forces the matter in the pancake-shaped spiral disk towards the center
> of the galaxy which results in the displaced aether looking like a
> squished beach ball.
So what is matter?
mpc755
I dislike statements such as "you must be thinking about a very small
galaxy cluster." I am referring to the galaxy clusters referred to in
the article. I am referring to the Milky Way which is referred to in
the other article.
>
>
> > I'm also referring to the Milky Way. The researches were able to
> > detect the displaced aether based upon the motion of the Sagittarius
> > Dwarf Galaxy.
>
> > 'Dark Halo Around Our Galaxy Looks Like Squished Beach Ball'http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/100106-dark-matter-halo-milky-w...
>
> > "Dark matter seems to shroud the remaining visible matter in giant
> > spheres called haloes."
>
> > The Milky Way's halo is displaced aether.
>
> > "But the new study found that the Milky Way's halo isn't exactly
> > spherical, but squished. In fact, its beach-ball form is flattened in
> > a surprising direction — perpendicular to the galaxy's visible,
> > pancake-shaped spiral disk."
>
> > All of the aether displaced by the matter exerts force towards the
> > matter. The force exerted towards the matter by the aether displaced
> > perpendicular to the galaxy's pancake-shaped spiral disk offsets. It
> > is the aether which is displaced outward relative to the plane of the
> > spiral disk which exerts force towards the center of the galaxy. This
> > forces the matter in the pancake-shaped spiral disk towards the center
> > of the galaxy which results in the displaced aether looking like a
> > squished beach ball.
>
> So what is matter?
Aether and matter are different states of the same material. Aether
and matter have mass. There is no space, nor any part of three
dimensional space, devoid of mass.
Force exerted towards matter by aether displaced by matter is gravity.
M Purcell
Thought you were referring to a rock in a pond.
> DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?' A.EINSTEINhttp://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf
>
> "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass
> diminishes by L/c2."
>
> The matter which no longer exists as part of the body has not
> vanished. It still exists, as aether. As matter converts to aether it
> expands in three dimensional space. The physical effects this
> transition has on the neighboring matter and aether is energy. Mass is
> conserved. Energy is conserved.
>
> 'Ether and the Theory of Relativity - Albert Einstein'http://www.tu-harburg.de/rzt/rzt/it/Ether.html
>
> "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections
> with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places, ...
> disregarding the causes which condition its state."
>
> The state of the aether as determined by its connections with the
> matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the
> aether's state of displacement. The cause which conditions its state
> is its displacement by matter.
>
> Force exerted towards matter by aether displaced by matter is gravity.
There is no gravity, only space-time curvature.
mpc755
What you refer to as space-time curvature is displaced aether.
Aether has mass.
Aether is displaced by matter.
Aether displaced by matter exerts force towards the matter.
Yousuf Khan
> On Nov 30, 5:09 am, Sanny<softtank...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> THE Big Bang might not have been the beginning
>> of the universe, but just the start of a new
>> chapter.
>
> Link that does not try and hijack my browser:
> http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/health/radiation-rings-hint-big-bang-may-not-have-been-the-first_100467400.html
Yeah, I was about to dismiss this as a crank posting seeing that
originally cited website.
>
>> /****** Copy-Paste
>> Scientists have found rings of radiation in the
>> cosmos that may be older than the Big Bang,
>> suggesting that event was just the latest in
>> a series of rebirths
>
> The CMBR was optically dense. *No* light could have survived it. So
> this is just ring interference from a massive point source.
It sounds suspiciously like distortions made by Einstein Rings. Probably
in this case its Einstein rings created by our own galaxy.
Yousuf Khan
Immortalist
Why do things need to begin? If time is the measurement of duration
and changing configurations of energy and matter and if there were no
humans and animals there would still be durations and changing
configurations of energy and matter, but no abstract "time", then
changing relationships need never have begun? Oh that stupid why is
there something rather than nothing question again.
> At this time, we do not know how long the Universal jet stream we
> exist in has been functioning.
>
> For our present understanding of the Universe, it is more correct to
> understand the jet stream we exist in as always having existed.
Is the jet stream movement ending up somewhere, circling around or
some other alternative, dropping into black slut holes?
Since the clusters show a small but measurable velocity that is
independent of the universe's expansion and does not change as
distances increase, why do most galaxies continue to show the red
shift in a way that makes them expand out from a central point?
Eric Gisse
> On 30/11/2010 9:35 AM, dlzc wrote:
>
> > On Nov 30, 5:09 am, Sanny<softtank...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> THE Big Bang might not have been the beginning
> >> of the universe, but just the start of a new
> >> chapter.
>
> > Link that does not try and hijack my browser:
>
> Yeah, I was about to dismiss this as a crank posting seeing that
> originally cited website.
Tripe.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1011.3706
The only reason artifacts are being found is because of the imposed
coordinate system. Plot the deviations as a function of a radial
coordinate, and you smoosh a rich dataset into meaninglessness. What
is not explained is why this is meaningful, or how it constitutes a
six sigma deviation.
The deviations are still Gaussian - this has been checked. Why is this
even being reported?
>
>
>
> >> /****** Copy-Paste
> >> Scientists have found rings of radiation in the
> >> cosmos that may be older than the Big Bang,
> >> suggesting that event was just the latest in
> >> a series of rebirths
>
> > The CMBR was optically dense. *No* light could have survived it. So
> > this is just ring interference from a massive point source.
>
> It sounds suspiciously like distortions made by Einstein Rings. Probably
> in this case its Einstein rings created by our own galaxy.
>
> Yousuf Khan
Multiple images are characteristc of gravitational lensing, not what
is more along the lines of diffraction through a point source.
mpc755
Exactly.
> > At this time, we do not know how long the Universal jet stream we
> > exist in has been functioning.
>
> > For our present understanding of the Universe, it is more correct to
> > understand the jet stream we exist in as always having existed.
>
> Is the jet stream movement ending up somewhere, circling around or
> some other alternative, dropping into black slut holes?
>
> Since the clusters show a small but measurable velocity that is
> independent of the universe's expansion and does not change as
> distances increase, why do most galaxies continue to show the red
> shift in a way that makes them expand out from a central point?
In the following image, matter is moving along the frame of the
Universal jet stream:
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/planetarium/graphics/st_images/BlackHole.jpg
We are heading for the 'water fall'. As we travel towards the water
fall the frame of the Universal jet stream expands. The matter which
is closer to, or already going over, the 'water fall' is expanding in
three dimensional space which is further from the Universal jet stream
emission point then we are. We are closer to the water fall than the
matter which is closer to the Universal jet stream emission point and
the frame of the Universal jet stream in which we exist is expanding
faster than the frame of the Universal jet stream which is closer to
the Universal jet stream emission point.
The matter in the Universal jet stream is probably swirling as it
heads for the 'water fall'.
All of the matter in the Universal jet stream is moving away from
where we exist in three dimensional space. The matter closer to the
water fall is expanding in the frame of the Universal jet stream in
three dimensional space faster than we are and we are in the frame of
the Universal jet stream which is expanding faster than the matter
closer to the Universal jet stream emission point. However, the motion
of the matter in the Universe is directional. All of the matter which
exists in the frame of the Universal jet stream is headed for the
'water fall'.
The Universal jet stream disk is the Rindler Horizon:
mathematician
> On 30/11/2010 9:35 AM, dlzc wrote:
>
> > On Nov 30, 5:09 am, Sanny<softtank...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> THE Big Bang might not have been the beginning
> >> of the universe, but just the start of a new
> >> chapter.
>
> > Link that does not try and hijack my browser:
>
> Yeah, I was about to dismiss this as a crank posting seeing that
> originally cited website.
>
>
>
> >> /****** Copy-Paste
> >> Scientists have found rings of radiation in the
> >> cosmos that may be older than the Big Bang,
> >> suggesting that event was just the latest in
> >> a series of rebirths
>
> > The CMBR was optically dense. *No* light could have survived it. So
> > this is just ring interference from a massive point source.
>
> It sounds suspiciously like distortions made by Einstein Rings. Probably
> in this case its Einstein rings created by our own galaxy.
>
> Yousuf Khan
If those concentric rings are true in WMAP's data then could they be
sign of very big mass (which possible originates from the start of the
Big Bang)?
Hannu
mpc755
The cosmic microwave background (CMB) is not the leftover glow of the
Big Bang.
The Universe, or the local Universe we exist in, is a jet stream.
Whatever the CMB is, it is part of an ongoing process.
Brad Guth
>
> > On Nov 30, 5:09 am, Sanny<softtank...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> THE Big Bang might not have been the beginning
> >> of the universe, but just the start of a new
> >> chapter.
>
> > Link that does not try and hijack my browser:
>
> Yeah, I was about to dismiss this as a crank posting seeing that
> originally cited website.
>
>
>
> >> /****** Copy-Paste
> >> Scientists have found rings of radiation in the
> >> cosmos that may be older than the Big Bang,
> >> suggesting that event was just the latest in
> >> a series of rebirths
>
> > The CMBR was optically dense. *No* light could have survived it. So
> > this is just ring interference from a massive point source.
>
> It sounds suspiciously like distortions made by Einstein Rings. Probably
> in this case its Einstein rings created by our own galaxy.
>
> Yousuf Khan
Every galaxy represents a big bang beginning, and supposedly our
galaxy isn't nearly as old as others.
~ BG
Yousuf Khan
> The cosmic microwave background (CMB) is not the leftover glow of the
> Big Bang.
>
> The Universe, or the local Universe we exist in, is a jet stream.
>
> Whatever the CMB is, it is part of an ongoing process.
Even if this were the case, the CMB can still be the glow from the
beginning of such a jet stream.
Yousuf Khan
mpc755
Exactly. The CMB could also be the Universal disk; the Rindler
Horizon. When we look through our telescopes what are we eventually
looking at? I'm guessing you are correct and much, if not most or all,
paths lead back to the beginning of the jet stream. However, can we
see 'over the water fall'? And if we can what are we seeing?" Are we
at the Universal disk or back at the beginning of the Universal jet
stream? Is the Universal disk and the beginning of the jet stream one
in the same?
I see nothing incorrect in understanding the glow from the beginning
of the jet stream is the CMB.
bert
>
> - Show quoted text -
Galaxies are created by huge gas clouds.Birth place of stars. Over
time galaxies merge with galaxies. In 3 million years Milky Way and
Andromeda will be one TreBert PS the days of galaxies getting
together is the exception. The reverse is reality.
Brad Guth
Molecular gas clouds need to become worth at least a thousand fold
greater mass than all the stars and everything else they create.
A typically large and massive star, like those of Sirius and
especially of Sirius(B), requires upwards of a million fold greater
molecular cloud mass to begin with. So it's somewhat unlikely that a
molecular cloud existed with sufficient mass to create an entire
galaxy, because that would have represented something like 1e48 kg
worth of molecular cloud mass, and if all galaxies were created that
way would mean that a great deal (upwards of at least 99.9%) of the
original BB molecular mass is either rogue or MIA.
It's more likely that black holes and/or neutron stars merged (perhaps
one of each) and subsequently imploded in order to create galaxies,
although obviously something else had to create those nifty BHs and
neutron stars to begin with, such as a much older universe.
The molecular cloud version of giving birth of an entire galaxy should
also take at the very least a billion years from start to finish for a
galaxy like ours, and then the molecular remainder would have to be
gradually blown or tossed away at perhaps 5% c (15000 km/sec) which
should still be within view. 14 billion years at 5% c is only 700
million ly radii, and at least thus far there's no apparent sign of
that kind of molecular cloud remainder interacting with anything else.
I can't be certain that your interpretation is unlikely, but I also
can't seem to accept it as is without further information. Obviously
a truly massive amount of molecular gas (lets say 2e42 kg) could
produce the cluster likes of multiple 1000 Ms supergiant stars that
would interact and become galactic core black holes in a very short
time (say a million years).
In other words, I believe the making of a galaxy is a wee bit more
complex, and a whole lot more time consuming unless there were
multiple BBs taking place.
~ BG
HVAC
>
> Galaxies are created
Nothing was created.
by huge gas clouds.Birth place of stars. Over
> time galaxies merge with galaxies. In 3 million years Milky Way and
> Andromeda will be one TreBert PS the days of galaxies getting
> together is the exception. The reverse is reality.
Galaxies are formed by black holes.
BURT
M Purcell
> There is no before time.
Yep, it's a product of the BB just as space is and whatever our
universe is expanding into is beyond our purview.
mpc755
Incorrect.
The Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is in, a jet
stream.
'Mysterious Cosmic 'Dark Flow' Tracked Deeper into Universe'
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/releases/2010/10-023.html
'The clusters appear to be moving along a line extending from our
solar system toward Centaurus/Hydra, but the direction of this motion
is less certain. Evidence indicates that the clusters are headed
outward along this path, away from Earth, but the team cannot yet rule
out the opposite flow. "We detect motion along this axis, but right
now our data cannot state as strongly as we'd like whether the
clusters are coming or going," Kashlinsky said.'
The clusters are headed along this path because the Universe is, or
the local Universe we exist in is, a jet stream. Analogous to the jet
stream of a black hole.
The following is an image analogous of a jet stream:
http://aether.lbl.gov/image_all.html
The reason for the 'expansion' of the universe is the continual
emission of aether into the Universal jet stream. Three
dimensional space associated with the Universe itself is not
expanding. What we see in our telescopes is the matter associated with
the Universe moving outward and away from the Universal jet stream
emission point. In the image above, '1st Stars' is where the
conditions enable aether to be compressed into matter.
The following is an image analogous of the Universe, or the local
M Purcell
Right, the BB already happened and the universe is expanding.
mpc755
That is exactly what I am saying is NOT occurring.
As far as we know, the Universe has always existed in its present
state.
What you mistake for an expanding universe is the expansion of the
matter which exists in the Universal jet stream in which we exist.
As far as we know, the aether has been being emitted into the
Universal jet stream for eternity.
M Purcell
Brad Guth
Obviously you haven't been around as long as Bert.
~ BG
Brad Guth
Now tell us where those BHs came from, and we're goo to go.
Can a super-duper molecular cloud ever directly form into a BH?
~ BG
Brad Guth
Brad Guth
That's only what they want us to think. Actually, for billions of
years it could have been retracting, and for all intents and purposes
we'd never realize it or be capable of ever detecting it.
~ BG
Brad Guth
What made our expanding universe(a) into such a singular directional
funnel or horn shape?
What about going off in the other direction, with an identical mass
and funnel shape of universe(b)? (possibly as an antimatter universe)
~ BG
M Purcell
> On Dec 9, 12:11 pm, M Purcell <sacsca...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 9, 11:30 am, BURT <macromi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > There is no before time.
>
> > Yep, it's a product of the BB just as space is and whatever our
> > universe is expanding into is beyond our purview.
>
> Now tell us where those BHs came from, and we're goo to go.
Same place everything else came from, the BB.
> Can a super-duper molecular cloud ever directly form into a BH?
Does it have a center of mass?
Brad Guth
You are obviously stuck with Alan Guth. It's time (way past due) to
upgrade to Brad Guth and rethink everything from scratch.
Does negative redshift or blueshift cause your Alan Guth brain to self-
destruct?
~ BG
M Purcell
Of course, an argument from ignorance.
mpc755
As far as we know, the process we are a part of has been going on for
an eternity. It just so happens that this is our place and our time
within the jet stream.
mpc755
If there is another jet stream 'on the other side' then I would think
it would consist of matter.
mpc755
It did until you shortened it to 'BO'.
M Purcell
Kind of like an infinite loop.
Brad Guth
You only get one gold star for that one. Now you can go back to
sticking your brown noes right back into that mainstream status-quo
butt.
~ BG
Brad Guth
That's as good of guess as any. Too bad others here can't seem to
think for themselves, but then parrots and brown-nosed clowns (always
scared to death of their peers and their own shadow) never do.
~ BG
Brad Guth
Than call it the great OB (ongoing bang). At least that's better than
GBW (God breaking wind).
~ BG
Brad Guth
That's continually modulated by other infinite loops. (aka universe B,
C, D and so-forth)
~ BG
mpc755
Exactly.
Where the pressure is great enough is where aether condenses into
matter. Once such location is where '1st stars' is in the image below:
http://aether.lbl.gov/image_all.html
The aether is being emitted into the Universal jet stream faster than
it can disperse. The pressure increases until the aether condenses
into matter. This releases the pressure. The aether again builds up
faster than it can disperse and more aether condenses into matter. As
far as we know, where '1st Stars' is in the image above has always
existed.
mpc755
There's no bang! How about 'The Big O'.
M Purcell
Rinse and repeat.
mpc755
There is no evidence of other universes.
mpc755
The Big Ongoing.
John J Stafford
> > The following is an image analogous of a jet stream:
> >
> > http://aether.lbl.gov/image_all.html
Sorry. Three dimensions cannot show such. Try again.
M Purcell
Gotta admit I wonder about the laws of conservation, I suppose aether
is just as good a description as dark matter or dark energy.
mpc755
Jet streams exist in three dimensional space. Try again.
John J Stafford
> the local Universe we exist in is, a jet stream.
Just what is a jet stream except some handy metaphor? Spell it out! "Jet
Stream" Why 'jet"? Rationalize it in multiple dimensions.
M Purcell
Of course, an ad hominem.
mpc755
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_jet
'Twisted Physics: How Black Holes Spout Off'
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/blackhole_jets_040817.html
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/planetarium/graphics/st_images/BlackHole.jpg
The Universal jet stream is a larger version of a Black Hole polar
jet.
Can't use the term 'polar' until we know there is another one 'on the
other side'.
mpc755
The change in the state of the aether emitted into the Universal jet
stream is dark energy.
Aether has mass.
Aether is displaced by matter.
Aether is not at rest when displaced.
Aether displaced by matter exerts force towards the matter.
Force exerted towards matter by aether displaced by matter is gravity.
What is presently described as dark matter is displaced aether.
The galaxy clusters in the following articles are not traveling with
dark matter. The galaxy clusters are moving through the aether. The
galaxy clusters displace aether. The moving galaxy clusters have
associated aether displacement waves.
'Hubble Finds Ghostly Ring of Dark Matter'
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/news/dark_matter_ring_feature.html
"Astronomers using NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view
of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two
galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark mater, which is
somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the
water."
The 'pond' consists of aether. The 'ripple' is an aether displacement
wave. The 'ripple' is a gravitational wave.
'Dark Halo Around Our Galaxy Looks Like Squished Beach Ball'
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/100106-dark-matter-halo-milky-way.html
"Dark matter seems to shroud the remaining visible matter in giant
spheres called haloes."
The Milky Way's halo is displaced aether.
"But the new study found that the Milky Way's halo isn't exactly
spherical, but squished. In fact, its beach-ball form is flattened in
a surprising direction — perpendicular to the galaxy's visible,
pancake-shaped spiral disk."
All of the aether displaced by the matter exerts force towards the
matter. The force exerted towards the matter by the aether displaced
perpendicular to the galaxy's pancake-shaped spiral disk offsets. It
is the aether which is displaced outward relative to the plane of the
spiral disk which exerts force towards the center of the galaxy. This
forces the matter in the pancake-shaped spiral disk towards the center
of the galaxy which results in the displaced aether looking like a
squished beach ball.
In the following image, what is being shown is the state of the aether
which is the aether's state of displacement.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/sci_nat_enl_1168021092/img/1.jpg
A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a
double slit experiment the particle travels a single path and enters
and exits a single slit. It is the associated aether displacement wave
which enters and exits multiple slits. The aether displacement wave
creates interference upon exiting the slits. It is this interference
which alters the direction the particle travels. Detecting the
particle causes a loss of coherence between the particle and its
associated aether displacement wave and there is no interference.
'Gravitational mass' and 'inertial mass' are both aspects of Aether
Displacement. Aether is displaced by matter. The displaced aether
exerts force towards the matter. The force exerted towards the Earth
by the aether displaced by the Earth determines gravitational mass.
The aether's resistance to change determines inertial mass.
DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?' A.EINSTEIN
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf
"If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass
diminishes by L/c2."
The matter which no longer exists as part of the body has not
vanished. It still exists, as aether. As matter converts to aether it
expands in three dimensional space. The physical effects this
transition has on the neighboring matter and aether is energy. Mass is
conserved. Energy is conserved.
'Ether and the Theory of Relativity - Albert Einstein'
http://www.tu-harburg.de/rzt/rzt/it/Ether.html
"Since according to our present conceptions the elementary particles
of matter are also, in their essence, nothing else than condensations
of the electromagnetic field"
The electromagnetic field is a state of aether.
Matter is condensations of aether.
Brad Guth
Sure, why the hell not.
We can also call all the negative redshift or blueshift stuff "The Big
Oops".
Brad Guth
That's why they're called other universes.
Brad Guth
Some folks just can't get their heads outside of that cozy failsafe
mainstream status-quo box, especially when that box is mostly public
and even faith-based funded.
~ BG
mpc755
If you have one marble and all you have evidence of is one marble then
to state there are other marbles is incorrect.
mpc755
>
> > > Than call it the great OB (ongoing bang). At least that's better than
> > > GBW (God breaking wind).
>
> > > ~ BG
>
> > There's no bang! How about 'The Big O'.
>
> Sure, why the hell not.
>
> We can also call all the negative redshift or blueshift stuff "The Big
> Oops".
I still prefer the Big Ongoing.
M Purcell
Of course, an appeal to novelty.
mpc755
An appeal to focusing on what occurs physically in nature.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/sci_nat_enl_1168021092/img/1.jpg
A change in the state of the aether emitted into the universal jet
stream is dark energy.
The Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is in, a jet
M Purcell
> On Dec 10, 9:35 am, M Purcell <sacsca...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Of course, an appeal to novelty.
>
> An appeal to focusing on what occurs physically in nature.
>
> Aether has mass.
> Aether is displaced by matter.
> Aether is not at rest when displaced.
> Aether displaced by matter exerts force towards the matter.
> Force exerted towards matter by aether displaced by matter is gravity.
>
> What is presently described as dark matter is displaced aether.
>
> The galaxy clusters in the following articles are not traveling with
> dark matter. The galaxy clusters are moving through the aether. The
> galaxy clusters displace aether. The moving galaxy clusters have
> associated aether displacement waves.
>
>
> "Astronomers using NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view
> of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two
> galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark mater, which is
> somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the
> water."
>
> The 'pond' consists of aether. The 'ripple' is an aether displacement
> wave. The 'ripple' is a gravitational wave.
>
>
> "Dark matter seems to shroud the remaining visible matter in giant
> spheres called haloes."
>
> The Milky Way's halo is displaced aether.
>
> "But the new study found that the Milky Way's halo isn't exactly
> spherical, but squished. In fact, its beach-ball form is flattened in
> a surprising direction — perpendicular to the galaxy's visible,
> pancake-shaped spiral disk."
>
> All of the aether displaced by the matter exerts force towards the
> matter. The force exerted towards the matter by the aether displaced
> perpendicular to the galaxy's pancake-shaped spiral disk offsets. It
> is the aether which is displaced outward relative to the plane of the
> spiral disk which exerts force towards the center of the galaxy. This
> forces the matter in the pancake-shaped spiral disk towards the center
> of the galaxy which results in the displaced aether looking like a
> squished beach ball.
>
> In the following image, what is being shown is the state of the aether
> which is the aether's state of displacement.
>
>
> A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a
> double slit experiment the particle travels a single path and enters
> and exits a single slit. It is the associated aether displacement wave
> which enters and exits multiple slits. The aether displacement wave
> creates interference upon exiting the slits. It is this interference
> which alters the direction the particle travels. Detecting the
> particle causes a loss of coherence between the particle and its
> associated aether displacement wave and there is no interference.
>
> 'Gravitational mass' and 'inertial mass' are both aspects of Aether
> Displacement. Aether is displaced by matter. The displaced aether
> exerts force towards the matter. The force exerted towards the Earth
> by the aether displaced by the Earth determines gravitational mass.
> The aether's resistance to change determines inertial mass.
>
Do you believe repetition makes it any more valid or do you just like
circular reasoning?
mpc755
>
> Do you believe repetition makes it any more valid or do you just like
> circular reasoning?
I believe posts on physics and astronomy forums should have something
to do with physics and astronomy.
Aether has mass.
Aether is displaced by matter.
Aether is not at rest when displaced.
Aether displaced by matter exerts force towards the matter.
Force exerted towards matter by aether displaced by matter is gravity.
What is presently described as dark matter is displaced aether.
The galaxy clusters in the following articles are not traveling with
dark matter. The galaxy clusters are moving through the aether. The
galaxy clusters displace aether. The moving galaxy clusters have
associated aether displacement waves.
'Hubble Finds Ghostly Ring of Dark Matter'
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/news/dark_matter_ring_feature.html
"Astronomers using NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view
of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two
galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark mater, which is
somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the
water."
The 'pond' consists of aether. The 'ripple' is an aether displacement
wave. The 'ripple' is a gravitational wave.
'Dark Halo Around Our Galaxy Looks Like Squished Beach Ball'
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/100106-dark-matter-halo-milky-way.html
"Dark matter seems to shroud the remaining visible matter in giant
spheres called haloes."
The Milky Way's halo is displaced aether.
"But the new study found that the Milky Way's halo isn't exactly
spherical, but squished. In fact, its beach-ball form is flattened in
a surprising direction — perpendicular to the galaxy's visible,
pancake-shaped spiral disk."
All of the aether displaced by the matter exerts force towards the
matter. The force exerted towards the matter by the aether displaced
perpendicular to the galaxy's pancake-shaped spiral disk offsets. It
is the aether which is displaced outward relative to the plane of the
spiral disk which exerts force towards the center of the galaxy. This
forces the matter in the pancake-shaped spiral disk towards the center
of the galaxy which results in the displaced aether looking like a
squished beach ball.
In the following image, what is being shown is the state of the aether
which is the aether's state of displacement.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/sci_nat_enl_1168021092/img/1.jpg
M Purcell
> On Dec 10, 11:19 am, M Purcell <sacsca...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Do you believe repetition makes it any more valid or do you just like
> > circular reasoning?
>
> I believe posts on physics and astronomy forums should have something
> to do with physics and astronomy.
Apparently your beliefs don't include logic.
mpc755
Aether has mass.
Brad Guth
Yes, and otherwise the BOO (Big Ongoing Oops)
As far as anyone knows, with the limited 14 billion year radii and
having more than sufficient mass within that volume, especially when
we include those red and brown dwarfs plus everything else that's
stealth or nearly invisible, it could have been collapsing for the
past billion some odd years and we'd never know.
~ BG
Brad Guth
Except there's nothing novel about it.
Brad Guth
Are you suggesting that you understand perfectly what make this
universe tick?
If so, please explain gravity (of course only objectively, because
anything subjective simply doesn't count as far as wizards like
yourself are concerned)
~ BG
M Purcell
Except that it's not mainstream, which seems to be your only criteria.
M Purcell
> On Dec 10, 9:20 am, M Purcell <sacsca...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 10, 9:12 am, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 10, 11:19 am, M Purcell <sacsca...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Do you believe repetition makes it any more valid or do you just like
> > > > circular reasoning?
>
> > > I believe posts on physics and astronomy forums should have something
> > > to do with physics and astronomy.
>
> > Apparently your beliefs don't include logic.
>
> Are you suggesting that you understand perfectly what make this
> universe tick?
No, I'm suggesting that mpc775's beliefs don't include logic.
> If so, please explain gravity (of course only objectively, because
> anything subjective simply doesn't count as far as wizards like
> yourself are concerned)
Objectively it is space-time curvature, subjectively you should jump
off a cliff to experience it for yourself.
mpc755
What you refer to as 'space-time curvature' is displaced aether.
Brad Guth
Not everything mainstream is wrong, just certain matters that simply
do not add up or fit the mold, so to speak.
You do agree the the victors always get to record and/or obfuscate
history the way they see fit, and does that make history correct?
What group of mainstream peers encourages independent outsiders to
have any say as to incorporating their interpretations?
~ BG
Brad Guth
Your mainstream status-quo or bust interpretation is noted, but that's
not what this topic is about. So why are you here?
Why don't you start a topic of "Nothing changes and everything stays
the same, or else".
~ BG
M Purcell
Obviously you didn't notice the cross-posting of the OP.
> Why don't you start a topic of "Nothing changes and everything stays
> the same, or else".
Why would I?
M Purcell
The rational ones.
mpc755
>
> > What group of mainstream peers encourages independent outsiders to
> > have any say as to incorporating their interpretations?
>
> The rational ones.
Every double slit experiment ever performed where there have been
detectors placed at the exits to the slits has always detected the
particle exiting a single slit.
It is not rational to think a particle exits multiple slits when you
do not look for it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/sci_nat_enl_1168021092/img/1.jpg
The Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is in, a jet
Brad Guth
You wouldn't, because what would be the point if nothing ever changes
and revision of anything published and in textbooks is always
forbidden?
~ BG
Brad Guth
You got any short list of those we can always trust? (because if so,
thus far they aren't doing their jobs other than protecting their own
peer butts)
You do realize the peer review has been part of the problem.
~ BG
Yousuf Khan
> On Dec 9, 6:00 am, Yousuf Khan<bbb...@spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Even if this were the case, the CMB can still be the glow from the
>> beginning of such a jet stream.
>>
>> Yousuf Khan
>
> Exactly. The CMB could also be the Universal disk; the Rindler
> Horizon. When we look through our telescopes what are we eventually
> looking at? I'm guessing you are correct and much, if not most or all,
> paths lead back to the beginning of the jet stream. However, can we
> see 'over the water fall'? And if we can what are we seeing?" Are we
> at the Universal disk or back at the beginning of the Universal jet
> stream? Is the Universal disk and the beginning of the jet stream one
> in the same?
>
> I see nothing incorrect in understanding the glow from the beginning
> of the jet stream is the CMB.
There's lots of theories about our Universe being the inside from some
other universe's blackhole.
Yousuf Khan
Brad Guth
There’s always something like the absence of evidence does not
represent any lack of evidence. Just because loads of evidence is
hidden under the next suspicious rock that you elect to not turn over,
doesn't represent that such evidence isn't there to behold.
I could probably come up with a thousand similar parities, including
some of my own.
Why wouldn't there be at least one other universe?
~ BG
M Purcell
Emerging from your blackhole I'm sure.
Brad Guth
Are you suggesting that astrophysics is special or conditional from
that of regular terrestrial physics?
It seems the original BH mass of the supposedly singular BB creation,
as if it were divided in two and thereby giving half to each universe
might help explain the nature or basis of why it seems we're still
expanding, as though our universe is simply missing half of the
required mass in order to prevent or even slow or retard the
continuous expansion.
~ BG
Brad Guth
> On Nov 30, 11:09 pm, Sanny <softtank...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > THE Big Bang might not have been the beginning of the universe, but
> > just the start of a new chapter.
>
> > Link:http://www.getclub.com/Show/view.php?best=Articles&itemid=41〈=en
>
> > /****** Copy-Paste
> > Scientists have found rings of radiation in the cosmos that may be
> > older than the Big Bang, suggesting that event was just the latest in
> > a series of rebirths
>
> > The theory was proposed by Sir Roger Penrose, a theoretical physicist
> > at Oxford University, and Vahe Gurzadyan of the Yerevan Physics
> > Institute in Armenia
>
> > The circles of radiation appear in concentric circles made up of below
> > average temperature in the cosmic microwave background (CMB), which is
> > the leftover glow of the Big Bang.
>
> > Copy-Paste *******/
>
> > It just means Big Bang is just an explosion which have occured many
> > times previously before the Big Bang.
>
> > So Big Bang occurs at a regular interval of time creating new
> > universe.
>
> > Scientists believe they have observed waves/ radiations of previous
> > Universe When Black Holes of previous Universe Collided with each
> > Other.
>
> > This interesting discovery brings many new exciting Questions.
>
> > 1. Will this recent discovery discard the Big Bang theory?
>
> > 2. Is Big Bang comes regularly to give rebirth to our Universe? What
> > do scientists think about it?
>
> > 3. Will the Old Universe be part of our Current Universe?
>
> > 4. Secondly does it mean "Time" Existed before our Big Bang?
>
> > 5. Was the laws of relativity working in previous Universes? or they
> > were same?
>
> > 6. Was the speed of light the same in previous Universe?
>
> > Hope we will see the Universe in a different way due to this
> > discovery.
>
> > Bye
> > Sanny
>
> > Read Complete Article:http://www.getclub.com/Show/view.php?best=Articles&itemid=41〈=en
>
> For those interested, a couple of other articles for this that google
> turned up :)
>
> http://www.universetoday.com/79750/penrose-wmap-shows-evidence-of-%E2...
>
> http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/66525/title/Cosmic_rebirth
Lynn Yarris, Walter and Luis Alvarez of Berkeley Lab seem to connect a
number of their deductively interpreted investigative dots in a
sufficiently rational way. However, for some reason the ongoing cycle
of the nearby gravity influence from Sirius is always getting
excluded, even though it’s still offering a much greater influence
than you’ve been told to think, and it’s only getting stronger by the
day. If you’d care to learn more of what Sirius used to be worth
(including it progenitor molecular/nebula cloud that could have easily
been worth 3e37 kg up to 5e37 kg), and further considering whatever
its maximum influence potential had to offer, on that thought I have
the necessary math to back up what I’ve interpreted.
“Nemesis was first proposed in 1984 to explain perplexing cycles in
mass extinctions on Earth. About every 27 million years, almost like
clockwork, there is a significantly higher likelihood that a mass
extinction will take place on our planet – akin to the apocalypse that
killed off the dinosaurs (and much of the rest of Earth's life) about
65.5 million years ago.”
“The theorized companion star, through its gravitational pull,
unleashes a furious storm of comets in the inner solar system lasting
from 100,000 to two million years. several of these comets strike the
earth.”
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/extinctions-nemesis.html
If we get nailed by that 10+ km big one with enough density and
velocity to set most of our world on fire and cause yet another half
inch layer of sooty red clay as saturated with iridium to form, along
with months of perpetual darkness that’ll pretty much terminate that
vast bulk of life as we know it, as such it might be a good idea for
our planet having some kind of local or interstellar capable lifeboat,
upon or within which some of us might survive.
It’s perfectly clear, going by the great number of 100+ km diameter
craters on our moon that has a much tougher and thicker crust than
Earth, that our planet had to have taken at least ten fold as many and
worse impacts, and likely each one of those impactors would have had
the capability of exterminating most terrestrial life as we know it,
especially of the sorts that produced so many craters of 250+ km and
of course that absolutely horrific 2500 km crater at its south pole.
Now that we've kinda pillaged, plundered and trashed our mother Earth
for all she’s worth, not to mention having overpopulated as well as
our having commercially harvested and/or polluted most every km3 of
ocean to the point of no return, whereas its prime aquatic predators
are starving and having to adapt by switching over to eating humans
and most anything else that swims by (including cannibalism of their
own species), and otherwise our expanding O2 depleted dead zones that
only accommodate jellyfish habitats, whereas perhaps it's time for us
to move on in order to locate a replacement Eden/Earth (if necessary
an exoplanet Super-Earth (GJ 1214 b) of 40+ light years distant might
have to do), as this may become the only viable long-term future for
humanity that just can’t seem to leave anything preexisting well
enough alone.
As is, our artificial global dimming by one point over the past few
centuries has serious negative consequences, say going from an albedo
of 39% down to 38% (another peer accepted albedo of .367 is obviously
much dimmer), is actually a huge increase in solar energy absorbing,
not to mention what our personal captured asteroid/planetoid of
7.35e22 kg has been doing to us by way of its 2e20 N worth of tidal
force modulating our entire planet.
It’s worth noting that one redneck fart from either HVAC, Hagar or
rabbi Saul Levy and the albedo dimming over their single-wide trailer
drops by 5 points. (just saying)
Sooty/polluted air, and especially those elements of dirty CO2 and NOx
are all very bad news for the global environment (worse yet and
obviously acidic when getting extra saturated with water).
I believe our spendy OCO mission was intentionally foiled by Big
Energy, because they really don't want us to ever realize just how bad
they've made it for us. They also don't want us to ever realize how
much tonnage of hydrogen, helium and raw methane is getting released
and forever lost per second, not to mention their all-inclusive
contributions of creating CO2 and NOx, plus another good dozen other
mostly toxic elements released and/or created via their own plus our
end-use combustion is actually a pretty horrific scale of mass
consumption and systematic disregard for the global environment, which
wouldn’t be so terrible if this global trauma were only contributed by
10% of the global population instead of the 75+% that has no further
intentions of their being left in our pretentious infidel dust, so to
speak.
~ BG
mpc755
I am not saying there are, or aren't other universes. I am saying
there is no evidence of other universe. If you want to hypothesis
other universes then that is fine. If you state there are other
universes, without providing any evidence of such, then that is
incorrect.
mpc755
There is no evidence of other Universes.
If the matter in the Universal Jet exists within the frame of the
Universal Jet then the CMB may be the frame of the jet.
mpc755
The missing mass is aether.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/sci_nat_enl_1168021092/img/1.jpg
The Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is in, a jet
Brad Guth
You like playing word games?
Are you saying there can be one exploded mass of say being worth 1e54
kg, and there's no other opposite mass involved, then so be it?
Just because we can not seen past our event horizon radii of 14
billion ly, doesn't mean there's nothing outside of or beyond that
event horizon.
~ BG
mpc755
>
> You like playing word games?
>
> Are you saying there can be one exploded mass of say being worth 1e54
> kg, and there's no other opposite mass involved, then so be it?
>
> Just because we can not seen past our event horizon radii of 14
> billion ly, doesn't mean there's nothing outside of or beyond that
> event horizon.
>
> ~ BG
You seem to be stating there are other universes. I am pointing out
there is no evidence of other universes. If you choose to hypothesis
there are other universes then that is fine. If you state there are
other universes, without providing any evidence of such, then that is
incorrect when discussing the physics of nature.
I am interested in understanding what occurs physically in nature.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/sci_nat_enl_1168021092/img/1.jpg
The Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is in, a jet
Brad Guth
>
> "Astronomers using NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view
> of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two
> galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark mater, which is
> somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the
> water."
>
> The 'pond' consists of aether. The 'ripple' is an aether displacement
> wave. The 'ripple' is a gravitational wave.
>
>
> "Dark matter seems to shroud the remaining visible matter in giant
> spheres called haloes."
>
> The Milky Way's halo is displaced aether.
>
> "But the new study found that the Milky Way's halo isn't exactly
> spherical, but squished. In fact, its beach-ball form is flattened in
> a surprising direction — perpendicular to the galaxy's visible,
> pancake-shaped spiral disk."
>
> All of the aether displaced by the matter exerts force towards the
> matter. The force exerted towards the matter by the aether displaced
> perpendicular to the galaxy's pancake-shaped spiral disk offsets. It
> is the aether which is displaced outward relative to the plane of the
> spiral disk which exerts force towards the center of the galaxy. This
> forces the matter in the pancake-shaped spiral disk towards the center
> of the galaxy which results in the displaced aether looking like a
> squished beach ball.
>
> In the following image, what is being shown is the state of the aether
> which is the aether's state of displacement.
>
>
> A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a
> double slit experiment the particle travels a single path and enters
> and exits a single slit. It is the associated aether displacement wave
> which enters and exits multiple slits. The aether displacement wave
> creates interference upon exiting the slits. It is this interference
> which alters the direction the particle travels. Detecting the
> particle causes a loss of coherence between the particle and its
> associated aether displacement wave and there is no interference.
>
> 'Gravitational mass' and 'inertial mass' are both aspects of Aether
> Displacement. Aether is displaced by matter. The displaced aether
> exerts force towards the matter. The force exerted towards the Earth
> by the aether displaced by the Earth determines gravitational mass.
> The aether's resistance to change determines inertial mass.
>
I have no problems with most of that.
How about electrons being equal to black holes.
How many rogue electrons exist per cm3?
~ BG