I don't think space is expanding.

[Steve]

It's the idea from a while ago.

There are three clocks here, a source's clock, an observer's clock, and then I gave the photon a clock.
If the photon's clock falls off, it's still traveling at c against it's own clock, but not an observer's, it will be c/(1+D/H)² where H=25 Gly.

This solves the reflection problem:

https://mikehelland.github.io/hubbles-law/other/reflection_nm.htm

Hope the photon sent a nice thank you note.

 

[Reality Check]

HST and "Now I've shown that it is not" gibberish from Mike Helland

It was falsified by observation, the reflection off HST's mirror.

Now I've shown that it is not.

21 March 2021: HST and "Now I've shown that it is not" gibberish from Mike Helland.

This seems to be the first mention of the HST. What are becoming ever more ignorant fantasies from him do not show anything. Garbage In, Garbage Out programming does not show anything.

 

[Reality Check]

https://mikehelland.github.io/hubbles-law/other/reflection_nm.htm

21 March 2021: An obviously idiotic "Feynman path integrals" reflection_nm.htm page from Mike Helland.

He has shown total ignorance about basic physics which will include Feynman path integrals and maybe even what reflections is !
If he has actually done a real calculation of reflection using Feynman path integrals, he would have got light reflecting off a mirror. What he has is a crazy simulation of patterns doing stuff over a boundary.

 

[Reality Check]

More idiocy about a "Feynman solution" and photon clocks from Mike Helland

The photons already have odometers in the Feynman solution.. I'm just adding clocks, and not in a relativistic way.

21 March 2021: More idiocy about a "Feynman solution" and photon clocks from Mike Helland.

The Feynman path integral treatment of light reflecting off a mirror works. There is no "odometer". There are phases that are represented in cartoons by an arrow that turns. All clocks are relativistic in the real universe. Adding locks to a photon is stupid because photons travel along a null geodesic (distances = 0, an undefined proper time).

 

[Reality Check]

Probable gibberish in an iMore ignorance in an image of an integration from Mike Hell

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_76218605556a3541be.png[/qimg]

21 March 2021: More ignorance in an image of an integration from Mike Helland.

Mike Helland is determined to display ignorance of high level science so will not be able to understand more advanced science. That random equation looks like the action from a Lagrangian.

Later we have "one of the terms in Feynman's sum is dt" gibberish. So this is Mike Helland spamming the thread with anything containing dt (an infinitesimal change in time or differentiation of time). There are millions od such equations!

 

[Reality Check]

An idiotic "Snell's law and v=c-HD" web page by Mike Helland

I can get the same thing in the classical version too:....

21 March 2021: An idiotic "Snell's law and v=c-HD" web page by Mike Helland as anyone reading "Snell's law and v=c-HD"" knows.

Snell's law is the theoretical and observed law for light travelling from 1 medium to another. His invalid "v=c-HD" tired light fantasies have nothing to do with Snell's law.

There is an about link to to (another version?) of his fantasy web pages. There we have the fantasy that light hitting the HST mirror magically restores its speed as c and equally magically changes angle because of the change in speed. What is really idiotic is that he writes that "Since the HST does resolve such galaxies, light must be reflecting normally, which means the photons have to be moving at c, invalidating the hypothesis." !

So we have Mike Helland debunking his own idea time and time again !

 

[Reality Check]

A random quote from Feynman which Mike Helland will be incapable of understanding

Here's what Feynman says:

21 March 2021: A random quote from Feynman which Mike Helland will be incapable of understanding.

 

[Reality Check]

Gibberish and an image form a textbook

...
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_762186056142463bf5.png[/qimg]

21 March 2021: Gibberish and an image form a textbook that Mike Helland will not be able to understand.

Someone ignorant abut high school level science will not understand advanced quantum mechanics.

 

[Reality Check]

Here's what I have so far:

Repeats his gibberish about photon redshift and adds reflection fantasies.

 

[Reality Check]

Irrelevant "redshifts are quantized" nonsense

There is some evidence that redshifts are quantized.

Irrelevant "redshifts are quantized" nonsense. Redshift quantization has nothing to do with quantum mechanics (his current obsession).

 

[Mike Helland]

Adding locks to a photon is stupid because photons travel along a null geodesic (distances = 0, an undefined proper time).

Right.

If the geometry of spacetime were changed to this:

You would get the accelerating reshifts with no other parameters.

 

[Reality Check]

Mike Helland links to his obviously idiotic GIGO simulations

Right click. View page source.

Mike Helland links to his obviously idiotic GIGO simulations that have nothing to do with what he was asked.
theprestige asked Where's your math, the math that yields not only everything we've observed about QED, but also everything you need to show that space is not expanding?

 

[Reality Check]

What Mike did wasn't Feynman's math. Mike did it wrong. Everyone is telling Mike that. Everyone is telling Mike the same reason why it's wrong. Because everyone with a clue about calculus can recognize his mistake instantly.

The dt error is obvious (a finite interval delta-t need not reproduce the limit as delta-t goes to dt).

But what is worse is that there is no evidence that he is using anything related to Feynman . That would not be a few lines of code. QED solutions take supercomputers to sum over the first few levels of Feynman diagrams.

 

[Ziggurat]

Right.

If the geometry of spacetime were changed to this:

Whatever the hell that is, it isn’t geometry.

 

[Reality Check]

A deeply ignorant "v = c/(1+ D/H}^2 fantasy from Mike Helland

Right. ...

Agrees with 21 March 2021: More idiocy about a "Feynman solution" and photon clocks from Mike Helland , And adds to his deep ignorance of high school level science.
10 March 2021: Mike Helland makes a high school science error (Therefore "c - c/(1+HD)²" is a high school science error).
10 March 2021: The total idiocy that he can change the units of Hubble's constant!

21 March 2021: A deeply ignorant "v = c/(1+ D/H}² fantasy from Mike Helland.
H has units of inverse time. D/H is length* time. This cannot be added to a number (1). This is dimensional analysis taught to high school students to check heir equations.

He cannot even keep his deeply ignorant fantasies consistent - see above .

 

[Mike Helland]

Agrees with 21 March 2021: More idiocy about a "Feynman solution" and photon clocks from Mike Helland , And adds to his deep ignorance of high school level science.
10 March 2021: Mike Helland makes a high school science error (Therefore "c - c/(1+HD)²" is a high school science error).
10 March 2021: The total idiocy that he can change the units of Hubble's constant!

21 March 2021: A deeply ignorant "v = c/(1+ D/H}² fantasy from Mike Helland.
H has units of inverse time. D/H is length* time. This cannot be added to a number (1). This is dimensional analysis taught to high school students to check heir equations.

He cannot even keep his deeply ignorant fantasies consistent - see above .

z = (D/H)² + 2D/H
H=25 billion light years

It's an accurate predictor of z's in an accelerating universe without invoking dark energy or a cosmological constant.

 

[Ziggurat]

z = (D/H)² + 2D/H
H=25 billion light years

It's an accurate predictor of z's in an accelerating universe without invoking dark energy or a cosmological constant.

Fitting data to a curve doesn't mean anything if you can't justify the curve. And you can't. You pulled it out of your ass, with no reasoning or justification. And it's not a prediction if you're fitting the curve to existing data.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

z = (D/H)² + 2D/H
H=25 billion light years

It's an accurate predictor of z's in an accelerating universe without invoking dark energy or a cosmological constant.

But it's mathematically and physically nonsense.
As others ahve pointed out, you cannot add things unless they have the same units. This either won't have any units, in which case it won't explain redshift as in your 'theory' that needs units of time and distance, or it becomes impossible to calculate.

This is high school stuff you are failing at, how can you possibly claim to understand physics well enough to overturn it?

 

[Mike Helland]

But it's mathematically and physically nonsense.
As others ahve pointed out, you cannot add things unless they have the same units. This either won't have any units, in which case it won't explain redshift as in your 'theory' that needs units of time and distance, or it becomes impossible to calculate.

This is high school stuff you are failing at, how can you possibly claim to understand physics well enough to overturn it?

Redshift doesn't have units.

 

[steenkh]

Redshift doesn't have units.

What nonsense this is developing into!