The Big Bang didn't happen: What do the James Webb images show?

Post by eecc » Tue, Aug 16, 2022, 7:20 AM UTC

starwind wrote: post #13

behnamoh wrote: post #2

Summary by a commenter in the link: Radio astronomy observations of Pulsars indicate that the Hubble Red Shift is caused by “Tired Light” rather than the expansion of the universe. When Hubble published his observations of red shifted light from distant objects there were two possible explanations that came to the fore. One, originated by Georges Lemaitre, was that the Universe was expanding. The other, from Fritz Zw…

Curious, I googled "In the radio astronomy of Pulsars we find that the shorter wavelengths of the leading edge of the pulse arrive before longer wavelengths. The velocity of light, c, is NOT constant but varies by wavelength" and something interesting came up: "interstellar clouds of electrons retard the velocity of radio waves in direct proportion to their wavelength" in an article from a 1968 edition of Scientific…

Post by eecc » Tue, Aug 16, 2022, 8:44 AM UTC

chiefalchemist wrote: post #72

polemic wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, scientific consensus isn't "groupthink", and being a contrarian doesn't automatically entitle you to other people's attention and time.

Or does it? There are plenty of examples where science got it wrong. Were it took years, even decades to get enough people to listen.* That's not the way science is supposed to work. Politics? Yes. But not science. I trust you can do the math from here. * And when the tides turn, these not even an acknowledgement, let alone an apology. Scientists shouldn't not be turning in their graves for lacking an apology. That l…

Post by eecc » Tue, Aug 16, 2022, 10:04 AM UTC

nederland wrote: post #94

https://archive.ph/sMpXv Quote: If the universe is expanding, a strange optical illusion must exist. Galaxies (or any other objects) in expanding space do not continue to look smaller and smaller with increasing distance. Beyond a certain point, they start looking larger and larger. (This is because their light is supposed to have left them when they were closer to us.) This is in sharp contrast to ordinary, non-expa…

Post by ramesh31 » Tue, Aug 16, 2022, 2:13 PM UTC

kurupt213 wrote: post #49

ramesh31 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like this commenter should write a paper.

why, it won't make it through peer review. high frequency light arrives first because it interacts less with matter. remember, c is only constant in a true vacuum. the speed of light varies as it travels through matter (refraction). there is a lot of "stuff" to interact with between us and a galaxy 14 billion light years away i wonder if the energy of empty space (yes, empty space has energy) plays a role in slowly d…

Post by pdonis » Tue, Aug 16, 2022, 3:36 PM UTC

starwind wrote: post #98

pdonis wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The dark matter crowd was able to convince quite a few people without hurdling such a high bar I don't know where you're getting this from. Dark matter models make lots of testable predictions, and they currently match the overall data set (which includes many different observations, not just the galaxy rotation curves that are most often mentioned) better than any other models. > not to mention stuff like string-t…

Not true, string theory made numerous testable predictions of what particles LHC should detect at different energy levels. AFAIK none of the predictions unique to string theory and it's different branches have panned out. At this point I see string theory as more of a mathematical framework than physics