[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 1.26 MB, 1600x1200, galaxy_universe-normal.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5971043 No.5971043 [Reply] [Original]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/roger-highfield/10239254/Astronomic-news-the-universe-may-not-be-expanding-after-all.html

Einstein: 1
Hubble: 0

>> No.5971052
File: 8 KB, 167x225, yea.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5971052

>mfw i never believed it did.

>> No.5971061

>WTB peer review

>> No.5971067

cool idea. but wouldn't this difference in mass have measurable effects on star structures?

>> No.5971066

>>5971061
>None of his colleagues found any faults

>> No.5971071

Of course it's not expanding. There was no "Big Bang".

We need to learn from our extra-terrestrial friends. Billy Meier is the most proven contactee, his many hundreds of prophecies have come to pass.

He is ignored because people can't get their heads around the ET issue. But look at the evidence for yourselves. His work makes a lot more sense than all of the mainstream religions and the 'Big Bang' scientists.....

>> No.5971073

>>5971066
>Translation: none of his colleagues could be arsed to pay attention to his ramblings and just said "yae, maybe".

>> No.5971076

Every rock and grain of sand tells a story, our atoms are 4600 million years old and that the protons appear to deflate like a balloon on a regular basis; indicating that the Ether is not a medium in which waves are propagated but is composed of expanding shock waves. The nuclear reaction causing it has a beginning and an end and can be observed in a lighted candle, Prof Wetterich has a theory where he is at the center of the observable universe and it that indicates that the edge of the universe is solid.

>> No.5971085

YOU are going to trust the guy who came up with the idea of quintessence?

>> No.5971125
File: 157 KB, 1278x799, catspace.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5971125

>mfw the universe really is just a computer simulation

>> No.5971157
File: 5 KB, 259x194, images (2).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5971157

>mfw all the fools keeps jumping into beliefs on a whim and keeps getting proven wrong

stop believing shit

>> No.5971171

Time and space a fundamentally linked. They're sorta the same thing or two sides of the same coin, like matter and energy. Since time is always moving forward and expanding, space must also be moving forward and expanding.

>> No.5971176

of course it's not expanding, god would never allow that

>> No.5971191

>>5971176
Yeah then he'd run out of space eventually!

>> No.5971202

>>5971171
>time is always moving forward and expanding
time is always moving where?
if time is expanding, is time moving faster and faster?
I feel that you're dropping some pretty serious axioms and conclusion.

>> No.5971215

>>5971043
He doesn't say that the theory of an expanding universe is wrong. All he points out is that it is not the only possible interpretation of the redshift

>> No.5971393

>The way these absorb and emit light would shift towards the blue part of the spectrum if atoms were to grow in mass, and to the red if they lost it.
>Prof Wetterich argues that masses could have been lower long ago

i don't fucking understand a thing. i'm in my first year of physics at university, so naturally i'm curious and dumb: does the above mean, that atoms emit red shifted light, while they LOSE mass or while they ARE lighter?

>> No.5971401

>>5971393
I can't say I understand it.
If you're curious, here:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.1019v1.pdf

>> No.5971696

>>5971171
Except time isn't real, and is only a way to mathematically measure a planet's position in rotation relative to a star. It's a man made concept, it doesn't exist in nature. All that exists is the present moment.

>> No.5971740

>>5971171
>Time and space a fundamentally linked. They're sorta the same thing or two sides of the same coin, like matter and energy
>Since time is always moving forward and expanding, space must also be moving forward and expanding.
[citation needed]

>> No.5971930

>>5971393
Wetterich is positing that atoms may have been more or less massive billions of years ago. Which is to say, just because hydrogen's atomic weight is about 1 today doesn't mean it always has been.

It's an exotic example that demonstrates alternate explanations to the red-shift we're observing.

>> No.5971953

>>5971067
no, since mass would be expanding evenly everywhere.

>> No.5971988
File: 146 KB, 341x282, ikari.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5971988

>mfw what we are experiencing right now already happened 80 milliseconds ago

>> No.5971991

>>5971043
Atheists:-1
Christians: 1

Now that the big band has been refuted, let's see what excuse they come up with next.

>> No.5971997

>>5971125
We should make a bunch of noise and let the people running the simulation know that we're on to them.
Maybe they will reveal themselves to us.
Or maybe they will turn us off.

>> No.5972000

>>5971202
Not him, but just wondering:
How would we know if the rate of time throughout the entire universe was increasing?
Is there any way we could detect it?

>> No.5972023

>>5971997
I hope it's the latter.

>> No.5972107

>>5971043
What the fuck OP, so by this logic doesn't ANYTHING that gets near a Black Hole become red before being absored since Hawking radiation lowers mass in some way? Or if you're going to tell me that Hawking radiation only happens IN the black hole then why do some scientists think that light absored in black holes can be white or blue?
Btw lmao
> None of his colleagues found any faults

>> No.5972111

>>5971393
Uh because becoming lighter also means loosing mass while keeping your volume?
Anyway what that asshole said is bullshit. It's confirmed that new fabric of space-time is being born at an astonishing rate each second and this asshole comes here thinking that the only evidence to back up an expanding universe is the redshifts.
Uh Black Energy dumbass?
Uh Big Bang dumbass?
Uh space-time being created dumbass?
Need I to go further?

>> No.5972203

>>5972107
Black Holes do not exist.

>> No.5972208
File: 81 KB, 320x213, untitled.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5972208

>>5972203
it's true, I ain't ever seen one, yo

>> No.5972229

>>5971043
>Einstein: 1
>Hubble: 0

Someone needs to learn the difference between an examination of a new idea and assuming conclusions without looking.

Please do not jump to a conclusion immediately.
In fact, never make any statements of any kind, just read.

>> No.5972250

>>5972111
>Need I to go further?
Yes you do. I liked your argument until you gave examples, they all miss the point.

>Uh Black Energy dumbass?
It's usually called Dark Energy, and the only reason we think it exists is because we think the universe's expansion is accelerating, not the other way around. We don't think the universe's expansion is accelerating because we have detected Dark Energy, as we have not.

>Uh Big Bang dumbass?
Once again you're doing it wrong. Throwing words in the air doesn't make a case. Sure there is evidence for the Big Bang, but then state the precise evidence that contradicts his theory.

>Uh space-time being created dumbass?
Where is your proof space-time is created? If you say again "Big Bang!" then you're still not bringing any evidence forward.

Basically when you don't really know what you're talking about you should refrain from insulting people, it makes you the one to look like a dumbass.

>> No.5972277

If the universe isn't expanding, or if redshift isn't an example of galaxies going further apart, how do we account for the cosmic background radiation? Is it merely the exhaust from the shifting of masses, and we're viewing it at a relative point? And would blueshift thusly suggest atoms are gaining mass?

The fuck.

>> No.5972355

>>5971043
This article is just another example of people coming up with inventive solutions to problems that may or may not be true. Yes you *can* explain redshift by changes in elementary particle's mass, but that doesn't explain the CMB.

A while ago some scientists also pointed out that redshift could be explained by time slowing down. The media had a similar reaction.

>> No.5972382

>>5972111
I hope this is a troll.

>> No.5972688

>>5972111
Why on earth would you want to add "dumbass" to the end of everything? Even if you were correct, it hardly incites people to consider what you have written.

>> No.5972845

It's no coincidence that scientists have proposed Dark Matter and then Dark Energy to fill most of the universe, while Whites are losing the cultural war. It's in the zeitgeist; the darkness will prevail, as the light does fail.

>> No.5972986

>>5972355
And last year a loose cable lead to people claiming that neutrinos were faster than light.

Never ever EVER trust the media to fact check science stories before posting them.

>> No.5973223

>>5971071
I do find that you are correct. People cannot wrap their heads around the concept of aliens because to us, they seem too fantastical, too unreasonable to exist.

For years, we have been mentally conditioned by our media, and by our religious teachers, even before that. Even after projects MKUltra, MKNaomi, Blue Beam, Blue Book, and many more have been declassified and publicly spoken of, it seems like little more than a fallacy to most.

"Mind control? It's a fake, and it's on Youtube! You can't believe Youtube!" when Youtube is our most commonly accessed, everday used video database.

Understandably, fakes exist, but surely some proofs exist as well. Undoubtedly the reason fakes exist is for our entertainment, and to indoctrinate us further. Once the hoax is exposed, we laugh.

However, no one laughs when reporters, scientists, analytical experts and professionals "go missing" or die shortly after revealing something true, huge, and impacting. The powers-that-be are even scoffed at because it all seems so unbelievable. Put the villain in a film in the same light, with a foiled plan, and of course we eat it up.

Billy Meier seems legitimate to me. The imagery I'm still researching, but he does not bear body language or tonal hints of lying.

If people would be more aware, and more open-minded in investigating for truth, what a better world this would be.