• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cosmology on Microsoft Picture Manager

A collision between galaxies is nothing at all like a collision between cars.

For one thing, galactic collisions take millions of years.

Also, look at the picture. The galaxy on the right appears to have brown streaks across it. This is dust in the spiral arms of the galaxy on the left. It isn't a collision of one galaxy from the left and one from the right. They're orbiting each other.

As for distortions - the galaxy on the right has a huge tidal tail spreading out to the right. This is a distortion due to the gravitational tides of the interaction (a much better word than "collision" to describe what's going on).

If the galaxies were "spawned from the same galactic egg" as you suggest then why are they drifting apart? Does gravity not work in that region of the Universe?

Your assessment is wrong on almost all counts.

No, wait, actually it is wrong on all counts.
 
Last edited:
“…Look Ma, theyse makin baybies! …My monitor, my beautiful monitor, washed in coffee …How big do you think the galactic chicken was that laid the galactic egg? …They is amakin alot and lots o'baybees …Here are the mice.”

Go to http://img229.imageshack.us/my.php?image=catrathb3.jpg , for dealing with mice at least.

The galactic reproduction principal is not clear, however a truer picture should emerge when reasonable data is presented, devoid of catch phrases such as those above, more attuned to a gaggle of geese or a tribe of chimps, than to social contribution or intellectual debate.

The thread commenced at NGC 253 and was intended to refute the claim that the universe is expanding after the explosion of a primal atom, evidenced by Redshift which Big Bangers say shows the velocity of physical recession, which true science recognizes as an artifact of distance.

This article has demonstrated that distant galaxies show no evidence that they are fall out from an explosion, there is no trail of smoking debris like there was at the WTC on 911, which was from a genuine big bang, nor do they appear to be doing anything except drifting about a bit, until they establish stable orbits with other members in their group.

Simple galaxies like Omega Centauri and M31 expand then start spinning and flatten into discs, during this stage collisions are frequent, that they are not observed so often is because they remain as low surface brightness galaxies, that do not show up at all on most conventional photo’s, their presence was only revealed after large numbers of blue arcs centered on super massive elliptical galaxies turned up on deep field shots, so astronomers started looking for more and found millions, near and far.

During this collision phase if two colliding members are compatible, they combine then rapidly evolve into an active disc as the nascent black holes lurking at the heart of both respond, then combine and reproduce.
 
Last edited:
Martin Timothy said:
Go to http://img229.imageshack.us/my.php?image=catrathb3.jpg , for dealing with mice at least.
Click to expand...
You do realise this picture still makes absolutely no sense in relation to the topic of this thread?

This article has demonstrated that distant galaxies show no evidence that they are fall out from an explosion, there is no trail of smoking debris like there was at the WTC on 911, which was from a genuine big bang, nor do they appear to be doing anything, except drifting about a bit until the establish stable orbits with other members in their group.
Click to expand...
CMBR anyone?

During this collision phase if two colliding members are compatible, they combine then rapidly evolve into an active disc as the nascent black holes lurking at the heart of both respond, then combine and reproduce.
Click to expand...
Compatible?
 
Martin Timothy said:
...snip

The thread commenced at NGC 253 and was intended to refute the claim that the universe is expanding after the explosion of a primal atom, evidenced by Redshift which they say shows the velocity of physical recession, which true science recognizes as an artifact of distance.

This article has demonstrated that distant galaxies show no evidence that they are fall out from an explosion, there is no trail of smoking debris like there was at the WTC on 911, which was from a genuine big bang, nor do they appear to be doing anything except drifting about a bit, until they establish stable orbits with other members in their group...snip
Click to expand...

This has GOT to be a parody, right?
 
Last edited:
slyjoe said:
This has GOT to be a parody, right?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately not.
Martin Timothy seems a bit deluded, believing things like
  • Cosmology can be done by editing astronomy pictures in Microsoft Picture Manager.
  • Galaxies are born from "eggs".
  • Galaxies are all the same size.
  • Galaxies colliding should show the same signes as small explosions (WTC).
  • "M32 is likely an embryo galaxy that will expand as a child galaxy of M31".
  • Since astronomy "publicly funded" it needs to come up with exact values: "The fact that there are such wide discrepancies, does further damage to the academic reputation of the scientific community, many of whom are tasked with interpreting data obtained in publicly funded programs."
  • "Astrometry data is essential, so has it been hijacked by NASA and JPL"
So basically someone without much scientific knowledge and a conspiracy theorist.
 
Last edited:
Martin Timothy said:
The galactic reproduction principal is not clear, however a truer picture should emerge when reasonable data is presented, devoid of catch phrases such as those above, more attuned to a gaggle of geese or a tribe of chimps, than to social contribution or intellectual debate.

The thread commenced at NGC 253 and was intended to refute the claim that the universe is expanding after the explosion of a primal atom, evidenced by Redshift which Big Bangers say shows the velocity of physical recession, which true science recognizes as an artifact of distance.

This article has demonstrated that distant galaxies show no evidence that they are fall out from an explosion, there is no trail of smoking debris like there was at the WTC on 911, which was from a genuine big bang, nor do they appear to be doing anything except drifting about a bit, until they establish stable orbits with other members in their group.
Click to expand...
And thus you demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the Big Bang theory and cosmology.

Simple galaxies like Omega Centauri and M31 expand then start spinning and flatten into discs, during this stage collisions are frequent, that they are not observed so often is because they remain as low surface brightness galaxies, that do not show up at all on most conventional photo’s, their presence was only revealed after large numbers of blue arcs centered on super massive elliptical galaxies turned up on deep field shots, so astronomers started looking for more and found millions, near and far.

During this collision phase if two colliding members are compatible, they combine then rapidly evolve into an active disc as the nascent black holes lurking at the heart of both respond, then combine and reproduce.
Click to expand...
Ummmm. Nope.
 
MT, how old is the universe and why should a scientist say that the primal atom exploded? that is rather old school, you need to brush up old man.


I ask how old for a simple reason some galaxies have been involved in a gravitational dance for millions of years.

How old is the universe?

If you don't have a sense of humor, you haven't got sense.

How do spawning galaxies get the energy to move apart and not just collapse under gravitation?
 
“…Science is not married to the Big Bang theory …got something that fits the evidence better.”

Look at deep fields obtained in the 1950’s by Hubble and Milt Humason with the two hundred inch Hale telescope at Mount Palomar, clear vision of galaxies extending as far as the eye could see.

Some appeared to exist in a swarm around the sub cluster at the heart of the Virgo cluster of galaxies, that included the massive elliptical, which means shaped between egg shaped and spherical, galaxy M87 that has a jet of material streaming from its core.

Others were in streamers and wisps of galaxies extending outward, until their images on Hubble’s plates were no more than pin pricks. The fact that when the spectra of these galaxies was analyzed it revealed that the absorption lines of all the common elements were shifted toward the red end of the spectrum, the furtherest ones away, attested to by the small width of their image on the photographic plates, all had greater RS than their closer counterparts whose images subtended a greater angle, which is astro talk for image width.

Then see later images obtained with better more sensitive instruments and see the tendrils and filaments of high RS galaxies extend once again to the resolving limit of the telescope, once again the more distant edge on spiral galaxies appear as a central bulge, with two pointy bits extending about twice as far on the same axis, yet these galaxies are vastly more distant than Hubble’s, and yet they are in the same advanced stages of evolution as the MW.

Now in this new millennia space based and adaptive optic instruments have extended the visual limit even further, and still the same clear space and edge on spirals at the visual limit, here RS is approaching twelve which puts their rate of recession well into the supraluminal category, yeah that means faster than the speed of light, yet they are goin’ about their own business, the same as around here.

See the galaxies ever further away in every direction, and see them as neurons in the brain of God, there is no other way to describe it, it is meant in no evangelical sense, it just seems the best way to describe the physical reality.
 
Last edited:
Martin Timothy said:
“…Science is not married to the Big Bang theory …got something that fits the evidence better.”

Look at deep fields obtained in the 1950’s by Hubble and Milt Humason with the two hundred inch Hale telescope at Mount Palomar, clear vision of galaxies extending as far as the eye could see.

Some appeared to exist in a swarm around the sub cluster at the heart of the Virgo cluster of galaxies, that included the massive elliptical, which means shaped between egg shaped and spherical, galaxy M87 that has a jet of material streaming from its core.

Others were in streamers and wisps of galaxies extending outward, until their images on Hubble’s plates were no more than pin pricks. The fact that when the spectra of these galaxies was analyzed it revealed that the absorption lines of all the common elements were shifted toward the red end of the spectrum, the furtherest ones away, attested to by the small width of their image on the photographic plates, all had greater RS than their closer counterparts whose images subtended a greater angle, which is astro talk for image width.

Then see later images obtained with better more sensitive instruments and see the tendrils and filaments of high RS galaxies extend once again to the resolving limit of the telescope, once again the more distant edge on spiral galaxies appear as a central bulge, with two pointy bits extending about twice as far on the same axis, yet these galaxies are vastly more distant than Hubble’s, and yet they are in the same advanced stages of evolution as the MW.

Now in this new millennia space based and adaptive optic instruments have extended the visual limit even further, and still the same clear space and edge on spirals at the visual limit, here RS is approaching twelve which puts their rate of recession well into the supraluminal category, yeah that means faster than the speed of light, yet they are goin’ about their own business, the same as around here.

See the galaxies ever further away in every direction, and see them as neurons in the brain of God, there is no other way to describe it, it is meant in no evangelical sense, it just seems the best way to describe the physical reality.
Click to expand...

That means that God's brain has a big hole in it (WMAP cold spot), maybe a tumor (Sloan Great Wall), is full of empty space and has an average temperature of a few K.
Now I see what you mean - God is dead!
 
I apologise for my behavior yesterday and earlier, my juvenile side got a hold on me.

Martin Timothy said:
“…Science is not married to the Big Bang theory …got something that fits the evidence better.”

Look at deep fields obtained in the 1950’s by Hubble and Milt Humason with the two hundred inch Hale telescope at Mount Palomar, clear vision of galaxies extending as far as the eye could see.
Click to expand...
And theoreticaly much farther, under current theory the visible universe in much smaller than the part that we can't see. So yes the universe does appear to have a lot of galaxies.
Some appeared to exist in a swarm around the sub cluster at the heart of the Virgo cluster of galaxies, that included the massive elliptical, which means shaped between egg shaped and spherical, galaxy M87 that has a jet of material streaming from its core.

Others were in streamers and wisps of galaxies extending outward, until their images on Hubble’s plates were no more than pin pricks. The fact that when the spectra of these galaxies was analyzed it revealed that the absorption lines of all the common elements were shifted toward the red end of the spectrum, the furtherest ones away, attested to by the small width of their image on the photographic plates, all had greater RS than their closer counterparts whose images subtended a greater angle, which is astro talk for image width.
Click to expand...
Now that is where you loose me, there are reasons that a galaxy might have a smaller apparent width and be much closer, first off there is the issue of the actual size of a galaxy, not all galaxies are the same size, some are bigger and some are smaller. So it might be incorrect to assume that they are all the same size in their physical dimensions.

Then there are tricks of putting the view at an angles, especialy one that is between edge on and flat face, that will tend to distort the shape of the galaxy and give you a smaller apparent width.

Then when it comes to fainter object, generally then only the brightest stars are seen and that does not indicate the true size of a galaxy but the area where young massive stars are formed.

And then there is the issue of not assuming a correlation between distance and apparent width, that would need to be proved.
Then see later images obtained with better more sensitive instruments and see the tendrils and filaments of high RS galaxies extend once again to the resolving limit of the telescope, once again the more distant edge on spiral galaxies appear as a central bulge, with two pointy bits extending about twice as far on the same axis, yet these galaxies are vastly more distant than Hubble’s, and yet they are in the same advanced stages of evolution as the MW.
Click to expand...
Not particularly, one can not always assume stage or age from shape.

There are fewer elliptical galaxies the farther away you look, because by current theory they are the result of many galaxies combined with each other.

And i would also assume that the general proportion of elements in the farther ones is going to be different, but there is a host of bugaboos when it comes to measuring the spectrum of the elements at that distance. In that again there will tend to be the the hot young massive stars.
Now in this new millennia space based and adaptive optic instruments have extended the visual limit even further, and still the same clear space and edge on spirals at the visual limit, here RS is approaching twelve which puts their rate of recession well into the supraluminal category,
Click to expand...
Not really.

But motion of two bodies moving away from each other at 98% (relative motion in opposite directions not consmological expansion) of the speed of light would be superluminal, however, that does not mean either is moving at 196% speed of light.
But i will have to check on the relative motion of the highest z I could be wrong.yeah that means faster than the speed of light, yet they are goin’ about their own business, the same as around here.
See the galaxies ever further away in every direction, and see them as neurons in the brain of God, there is no other way to describe it, it is meant in no evangelical sense, it just seems the best way to describe the physical reality.
Click to expand...

Well neurons have lipid bilayers, so I am not usre that galaxies do, or that galaxies have calcium channels.


ETA:

Yes the recession velocity is faster than the speed of light, but that does not mean that either object is moving faster than the speed of light.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom