Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

[Reality Check]

Anyway, please tell me; - If you can explain the cosmological redshift ONLY based on the expanding Universe / Space , - WHY did you then mix Doppler Effect into it , when you above was trying to explain the cause of Cosmological redshift ?

I made a mistake.
There is

1. Redshift caused by the Doppler effect.
2. Redshift caused by the expansion of the universe. This is equivalent to a "doppler effect" for each individual galaxy but there is a relationship called Hubble's law for all galaxies.

So what you are saying now is that it ALL (the redshift) happens while the photon travels, - and I then suppose (nothing) due to DopplerEffekt, which was you first STAEMENT 1. ( or will you later jump back to horse 1 again ?)

There is

1. Redshift caused by the Doppler effect.
2. Redshift caused by the expansion of the universe. This is equivalent to a "doppler effect" for each individual galaxy but there is a relationship called Hubble's law for all galaxies.

But the point in this part of the discussion is that DE has NOTHING to do the CR, - it is 2 independent phenomena’s.

The point is that it is. There is

1. Redshift caused by the Doppler effect.
2. Redshift caused by the expansion of the universe.

The problem with CR is that when the (extension of a) photon can stretch (due to the stretching universe).
Hence the photon must lose energy.
We do not observe any kind of emitting / converting energy, - whereby we should know something could be wrong.

This is indeed a problem but not with cosmological redshift. It is a problem with GR that energy is not conserved in it except in special circumstances:

Is Energy Conserved in General Relativity?
​

So the energy lost in redshift is either converted into graviational energy or just lost (since GR need not conserve energy).

But the problems with attributing all of the observed redshift to velocities of the galaxies are many, e.g.

1. It makes the Earth a unique place in the universe, i.e. the place from which 100 billion (or ~10 million measured) galaxies are fleeing from. I wonder what we did to scare them so much ?
   The Earth is in fact a small planet orbiting an average star in the outskirts of a modest galaxy.
   It is a fundamental principle in science that tno point in the universe is special.
2. It means that in the past all of the galaxies were at one place (here!).
   Then why did all this mass not form a black hole?
3. It means that in the past all of the galaxies were at one place (here!).
   What force created the explosion that made all of the galaxies fly away?
4. How did this explosion magically leave the Milky Way at the center of the univserse?
5. How did this explosion happen in exactly the way to produce the same effect as an expanding universe?

Observation evidence for the metirc expansion of space

Hubble demonstrated that all galaxies and distant astronomical objects were moving away from us, as predicted by a universal expansion.[10] Using the redshift of their electromagnetic spectra to determine the distance and speed of remote objects in space, he showed that all objects are moving away from us, and that their speed is proportional to their distance, a feature of metric expansion. Further studies have since shown the expansion to be extremely isotropic and homogeneous, that is, it does not seem to have a special point as a "center", but appears universal and independent of any fixed central point.

And an intersting paper that measured the tempertaure of the cosmic microwave background at z = 2.3371 and showed that it was hotter as predicted by an expanding universe:
The cosmic microwave background radiation temperature at a redshift of 2.34

The existence of the cosmic microwave background radiation is a fundamental prediction of hot Big Bang cosmology, and its temperature should increase with increasing redshift. At the present time (redshift z = 0), the temperature has been determined with high precision to be T_CMBR(0) = 2.726 +/- 0.010K. In principle, the background temperature can be determined using measurements of the relative populations of atomic fine-structure levels, which are excited by the background radiation. But all previous measurements have achieved only upper limits, thus still formally permitting the radiation temperature to be constant with increasing redshift. Here we report the detection of absorption lines from the first and second fine-structure levels of neutral carbon atoms in an isolated cloud of gas at z = 2.3371. We also detected absorption due to several rotational transitions of molecular hydrogen, and fine-structure lines of singly ionized carbon. These constraints enable us to determine that the background radiation was indeed warmer in the past: we find that T_CMBR(z = 2.3371) is between 6.0 and 14K. This is in accord with the temperature of 9.1K predicted by hot Big Bang cosmology.

Bjarne's "central gravity" completely debunked!
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
(original full list to which more points have been linked)​

 

[Bjarne]

I made a mistake.

There is
1. Redshift caused by the Doppler effect.
2. Redshift caused by the expansion of the universe. This is equivalent to a "doppler effect" for each individual galaxy but there is a relationship called Hubble's law for all galaxies.

RC
Do you self a favor
Keep Doppler Effect (DE) and the Cosmological redshift (CR) TOTALLY separated.

These are 2 different phenomena’s.

It is so pretty simple, - you can NOT point one single point where DE possible can speed up ;

A.) - A star from where a photons begins its Journey
B.) - Planet Earth where the photons hit the spectrometer.
A, - is excluded because at this point the expansion have not started
B, - is excluded, - because if 2 photons have started from 2 different stars (5 and 10 B-LY way) and follow each other the last 5 B-LY of the journey, - they should both agree how fast the Earth should move away from them DUE TO THE EXPANDING UNIVERSE.

THIS IS NOT THE CASE.

The Earth cannot move away from 2 photons (traveling side by side) with 2 different speeds.

There is NOT such TRUE MOTION due to CR, - , If there was both photons would agree. – This is FANTASY´, without ground / Earth conection.

We've covered this before Bjarne. If everything is stretching proportionately then the yardstick that you use to measure CR would also have stretched by the same proportionate amount as the light wave has in the time the light wave has been travelling, and would measure no redshift.
You can't have it both ways. Either everything is expanding proportionately, OR we can measure CR, but not both.

Good point
Even though I wrote; “we are on the right track”, - I didn’t wrote I agree to any of the 2 prevailing CR versions .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The first version is that CR is the same as DE, - this gives you the problem that you cannot determinate where exactly DE affects the photon, and if becomes pretty fast clear (for a chicken brain) that this version is completely impossible / nonsense)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The second version is that the photon-wavelength has expanded in the time it toke a photon to reach us,.
If time not also stretch together with space, - the photon must have lost energy, - this is also not a perfect solution.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The third version (the new theory) is the same as the first, except “one new dimension” ; - time has also been stretching proportional with space.

To easy understand the consequence of this, look at a random absorption pattern and assume that you would measure now, and agian 1 second later and that time 1 second later was ticking double so fast.

Now the pattern from before was suddenly pretty redshifted, - you would be able to count that all the absorbed photons seems to had have only the half frequency / energy.

BUT, - you would NOT be able to see any extended pattern due to the expansion of space.

In this case the changing of the absorption pattern is only a thought-experiment; the pattern had become redshift in one second.

Now extend that one second to 10 billion years, - Let say the extension of the wavelength of the photons AND the proportional extension of the meter stick both happens with factor 10.

Hence everything would always be the same, also the wavelenght of the photons would seems to have been unchanged.

So even though the Universe would expand Z-10 (or more) in one second, you would not be able to discover it. (Except from small different of the Earth shape due to the inner stretch factor is a bit larger).

Shortly, it is always difficult to prove/ observe that everything expands, keep that in mind and it is simple ; - ONLY time difference makes the observable differences to the EM-spektre.

This is what CR is about.

 

[Reality Check]

RC
Do you self a favor
Keep Doppler Effect (DE) and the Cosmological redshift (CR) TOTALLY separated.

These are 2 different phenomena’s.

Bjarne,
Do yourself a favour and read this:
I do and they are. Doppler Effect (DE) and the Cosmological redshift (CR) TOTALLY separated. These are 2 different phenomena’s.

The first version is that CR is the same as DE, - this gives you the problem that you cannot determinate where exactly DE affects the photon, and if becomes pretty fast clear (for a chicken brain) that this version is completely impossible / nonsense)

Exactly where "DE affects the photon" is not a problem except to you. Where does DE affect the sound waves from a passing car?

The problems are multiple and in my post:

But the problems with attributing all of the observed redshift to velocities of the galaxies are many, e.g.

1. It makes the Earth a unique place in the universe, i.e. the place from which 100 billion (or ~10 million measured) galaxies are fleeing from. I wonder what we did to scare them so much ?
   The Earth is in fact a small planet orbiting an average star in the outskirts of a modest galaxy.
   It is a fundamental principle in science that tno point in the universe is special.
2. It means that in the past all of the galaxies were at one place (here!).
   Then why did all this mass not form a black hole?
3. It means that in the past all of the galaxies were at one place (here!).
   What force created the explosion that made all of the galaxies fly away?
4. How did this explosion magically leave the Milky Way at the center of the univserse?
5. How did this explosion happen in exactly the way to produce the same effect as an expanding universe?

Observation evidence for the metirc expansion of space

The second version is that the photon-wavelength has expanded in the time it toke a photon to reach us,.
If time not also stretch together with space, - the photon must have lost energy, - this is also not a perfect solution.

The second version is the best solution.

The third version (the new theory) is the same as the first, except “one new dimension” ; - time has also been stretching proportional with space. ...
This is what CR is about.

The third version (the new theory) is a lot of gibberish and actually gets rid of CR !
If time and space stretch "proportional" then the photon frequency and wavelength change "proportional". This means either

• No redshift !
• A different redshift than that observed !
• The same redshift that is observed !

In the last 2 cases we are back to The second version that you threw away.

Bjarne's "central gravity" completely debunked!
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
(original full list to which more points have been linked)​

 

[Bjarne]

If time and space stretch "proportional" then the photon frequency and wavelength change "proportional". This means either

No redshift !
A different redshift than that observed !
The same redshift that is observed !

There is no "if"
Becauase time and space stretch "proportional" then the photon frequency and wavelength change "proportional".
And yes then there are:

• No measureable redshift due to the expansion of the wavelength (AND the meter stick.)
• The same redshift that is observed, but the cause of is not the stretch of space, BUT the stretch of time.

 

[Reality Check]

If time and space stretch "proportional" then the photon frequency and wavelength change "proportional". This means either
...

That gibberish just means that you do not understand.
You throw away the observation of redshift due to the universe expanding because it does not conserve energy (second version).

Your fantasy of time stretching means that you think that there will still be redshift. Thus you will also throw away redshift due to your fantasy because it does not conserve energy (third version).

It gets worse !
Your fantasy of space and time "stretching" means that there is probably no redshift! That makes anidea into a fabntasy that does not match the observed universe.

Bjarne's "central gravity" completely debunked!
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
(original full list to which more points have been linked)​

 

[Bjarne]

You throw away the observation of redshift due to the universe expanding because it does not conserve energy (second version).

I throw it away because:

1.) I can with the same right claim that the redshift is NOT cause by the expansion, but due to that time too is changing. This does not conflict with anything, except orthodox creeds.

2.) I prefer to believe that time is the sinner based on several criteria and observations.

2a.) This solution does not have the photon energy lost problem.

2b.) Objective gravity measurement already now confirms that matter affects space much “deeper” centrally, as the prevailing thesis possible can explain, - ( ADG is stable not decreasing to zero towards the center of a body).

2c.) As a consequence of “point 2b” ; - “bended” space shall not be understood only based in a time dilation framework, - but in a time + proportion distance dilation framework, - which automatically includes the expanding space, - whereby GR and the expanding Universe MUST be unity / the same space property must be responsible for both these phenomena’s.

2d.) As a consequence of “point 2c” gravity cannot counteract the expanding space, and therefore also not responsible for the fact that distances e.g; between the Moon and the Earth not (seems) to expands.

2e.) As a consequence of “point 2d” the only possible explanations that that local space ( e.g; between the Earth and the Moon) not “seems” to expand, - is that space must expand proportional with everything else, - also proportional with the meter stick, - (which is very difficult to confirm, otherwise as by rational / logical thinking).

2f.) As a consequence of “point 2d” ; - Because also the meter stick expands together with space, the Cosmological Redshift cannot be expained, - which also point to that hence both timeand space expands proportional, - and the ring is closed.

As you see, - what I claim is not just running out in the big bright blue 21th dimension, but forms a synthetic.

At the same time all this solves several other mysteries, for example: what is mass attraction really , or what is dark matter really, etc…

 

[Paulhoff]

It seems that Bjarne has no idea of what is causing the moon to move away from earth.

A little clue, spin of the earth and tides.

Paul

 

[Paulhoff]

For everyone else to watch. This has real math, Bjarne need not watch.

http://academicearth.org/lectures/doppler-effect-and-big-bang-cosmology

Paul

 

[Bjarne]

It seems that Bjarne has no idea of what is causing the moon to move away from earth.

A little clue, spin of the earth and tides.

Paul

It seesm that you have not understood that 4cm + 6cm = 10 cm

Or in other words: 4cm + 6cm is not 4 cm

 

[Paul]

It seesm that you have not understood that 4cm + 6cm = 10 cm

Or in other words: 4cm + 6cm is not 4 cm

It seems that you have forgotten that you asked about the recession of the moon 2 years ago on Physics Forums and were quite satisfied with the answer you received.

Why are you acting like this is all new?

 

[Bjarne]

It seems that you have forgotten that you asked about the recession of the moon 2 years ago on Physics Forums and were quite satisfied with the answer you received.
Why are you acting like this is all new?

NO, - I have not forgot

And I accept that the tidal force the Moon away 4 cm..

BUT there are no local distance extending effects to measure due to the expanding Universe, - it "should" according to Hubble constant extend + 6cm bwteeen the Earth and the Moon, - you can easy calculate that yourself.

BUT zero if space and the meter stick expands proportional

And since it is zero, this is a sign that shows that the meter stick and space really do expand proportional.

Notice the new theory do not have such huge problem that; local space doesn’t seems to expand due the expanding Universe, as well as the new theory also not have the problem that; photon energy get lost.

It is the prevailing speculation that necessarily is force to invent such completely unsound speculation that; - photon’s energy disappears out in the big bright blue 21 dimensions as well as gravity local “should” counteract the expansion.

 

[Reality Check]

I throw it away because:
...

A list of the usual delusional unsupported assertions and personal beliefs from Bjarne.
One quite stupid assertion needs to be pointed out: 2a.
The fact is that if you have light that is redshifted then you have energy loss from the light . The only question is where does the energy go.

Some lies needs pointing out
2b.) "Objective gravity measurement already now confirms" that Bjarne's "central gravity" completely debunked.
2c.) "As a consequence of “point 2b”", point 2c is a delusion based on a lie.
2d.) "As a consequence of “point 2c”", point 2d is a delusion based on a delusion based on a lie.
2e.) "As a consequence of “point 2d”"”", point 2e is a delusion based on a delusion based on a lie.
2f.) "As a consequence of “point 2d”", point 2f is a delusion based on a delusion based on a lie.

Bjarne ends up with his usual delusion of grandeur where he thinks that his already debunked idea explains everything.

Bjarne's "central gravity" completely debunked!
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
(original full list to which more points have been linked)​

 

[Paulhoff]

It seesm that you have not understood that 4cm + 6cm = 10 cm

Or in other words: 4cm + 6cm is not 4 cm

That has nothing to do with why the moon is moving away from the earth.

Paul



Expanding space does not affect local systems, daaaaaa. If that where not true, the earth would be a freezing ball now after 4.5 billion years.

 

[Paul]

NO, - I have not forgot

In that case, you will not have forgotten admitting that you "do not fully understand the prevailing theory" and to being satisfied with the provided explanation.

BUT there are no local distance extending effects to measure due to the expanding Universe, - it "should" according to Hubble constant extend + 6cm bwteeen the Earth and the Moon, - you can easy calculate that yourself.

expanding universe Any model universe in which the space between widely separated objects is expanding. In the real Universe, neighbouring objects such as close pairs of galaxies do not move apart because their mutual gravitational attraction exceeds the effect of the cosmological expansion. However, the distance between two widely separated galaxies, or clusters of galaxies, will increase as the Universe expands.
​

"expanding universe" A Dictionary of Astronomy. Ian Ridpath. Oxford University Press, 2007. Oxford Reference Online.

 

[Bjarne]

The fact is that if you have light that is redshifted then you have energy loss from the light .

No it is not,- this is already proven.
The Pound Rebka Experiment already proves that redshift can be caused due to time dilation.
In this case only time is faster, and hence the number of frequencies possible to count per second are less.
This clearly demonstrates that photons (in this case) not are losing energy.

This phenomena (gravitionel redshift) is the the exactly same (principle) as Cosmological Redshift.

In both cases ONLY time difference are the sinner, and as I wrote there are no photon-energy lost to the 21 th bright blue dimension.

It would be the same as when we measure RC's heart rate to 60, - after moving him to a place where times ticks double so fast, we would only measure the HR 30. This would not be strange at all.

Hence this does not mean that RC hearth energy and frequencies have disappeared out in an unknown dimension.

However, the distance between two widely separated galaxies, or clusters of galaxies, will increase as the Universe expands

Only when you also believe that a cow always will keep it size also even though the Universe should shrink to minus z-1000 and further, so that one day the cow will be bigger than the universe where the cow live.

 

[Paul]

(anyone who actually knows something about physics please correct any errors on my part)

No it is not,- this is already proven.

Then you will be able to demonstrate the proof.

The Pound Rebka Experiment already proves that redshift can be caused due to time dilation.

Actually the experiment used a controlled doppler shift to counter the redshift or blueshift (produced by reversing the positions of the source and detector.)

Anyway, the cause of the shift is a gravitaional field.

In this case only time is faster

No it isn't.

and hence the number of frequencies possible to count per second are less.

Read that sentence again and see if you can find the basic error.

This clearly demonstrates that photons (in this case) not are losing energy.

No it doesn't

In both cases ONLY time difference are the sinner, and as I wrote there are no photon-energy lost to the 21 th bright blue dimension.

As with most of what you write, it doesn't make it correct.

It would be the same as when we measure RC's heart rate to 60, - after moving him to a place where times ticks double so fast, we would only measure the HR 30. This would not be strange at all.

If all you did was speed up the clock then yes.

If you are talking about time dilation, it would depend on where you were when you observed the measurement.

Hence this does not mean that RC hearth energy and frequencies have disappeared out in an unknown dimension.

If you're not talking about relativity.

Only when you also believe that a cow always will keep it size also even though the Universe should shrink to minus z-1000 and further, so that one day the cow will be bigger than the universe where the cow live.

This has been explained so many times now that I can only assume that you are either incapable of understanding or you are childishly refusing to admit that you don't know what you are talking about.

 

[Bjarne]

Anyway, the cause of the shift is a gravitaional field.

And it is the exact same principle responsible for Cosmological Redshift.
In both cases the reason is that both space as well as time is stretching.
(The cause to the stretch is different but this is not important)

The fact that gravity is stretching space was predicted to be able to measure towards the center of a object.

This is now already proven by the gravity measurement done at Domus Vista, and it will be further proven, - also even though RC takes so dirty words in his month and accuse me for being a liar.

RC just emphasize how fanatic and dirty science really is, - so RC is also about to write history too, but this is the chapter of disgrace of the few that was protesting / not possible to mass brain wash, / and the few that could see science from a holistic coherent perspective.

That people with all means, (also dirty means) denies objective measurements , is not surprising. New discoveries always take some decade to get true the concrete.....

“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it”
Max Planck

And certainly Johannes Kepler, A. Einstein, Isaac Newton and plenty other great scientist (that could use their right brain half) wouldn’t hesitate to sign this.

Many can’t now days anymore see the difference between creeds and certain knowledge. (like in the hoary antiquity) - And the intolerance gets worse and worse.

It seems that many are between the victims of the authoritarian mass brain wash, - and worse; it also seems that pure creeds / speculation , - gives fanatics the right to judge everything that conflicts with their own hypnotized scientific religion/speculation - as lie..

I can only say: What a shame, - holy cow, is it really possible, that student at universities can sink so deep. ??

I can only hope that the authorities would be more careful with their mass brainwash of innocent student in the future. But I have no reason to be so optimistic.

 

[Mister Earl]

Yes, Bjarne. People who are able to find the flaws in your ideas are purely the result of a government conspiracy to brainwash students. Now that you've mentioned it I can see it too

 

[Paul]

Bjarne, I think you need to take some time to relax and carefully consider your position; every recent post is more incoherent than the last and you appear to be completely disconnected from scientific reality.

 

[Paul]

Yes, Bjarne. People who are able to find the flaws in your ideas are purely the result of a government conspiracy to brainwash students kittens. Now that you've mentioned it I can see it too

You know what happens to people who reveal the existence of the Great and Sooper Seekrit Government Conspiracy to Brainwash Students and Restore the Power of the Old Order by Means of a Placid Underclass...