It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by OnceReturned
I suppose I'll bite. Let's start with GR's most famous prediction and vindicating result: the observation of bending starlight during the May 1919 eclipse(This), and many observations of bent starlight since then. How do you account for this without appealing to dynamic spacetime geometry? You should be able to account for this observation directly, and not just provide more reasons you think the notion of spacetime is silly. If spacetime is nonsense, how did the light get bent?
You've mentioned dusty plasma with regard to this problem, but that doesn't really work without further explanation. I can't imagine that it could work, but I'd like to hear what you've got.
Originally posted by Sinter Klaas
reply to post by Pillar
I've just replied her u2u with a link to this thread.
I've noticed her thoughts are in favour of a holographic universe.
So this should become very interesting.
[edit on 11-4-2010 by Sinter Klaas]
So what's going on? Hawkins classes possible explanations as "wacky" or "not so wacky". The wacky ideas include the possibility that the universe is not expanding, or that quasars are not at the distances indicated by the red shifts of their light - an idea that has previously been discredited.
Among the not-so-wacky theories is the idea that the brightness variations are not caused by the quasars themselves but by the gravitational distortion of bodies about the mass of a star floating between Earth and the quasars.
In this paper we set out to measure time dilation in quasar light curves. In order to detect the effects of time dilation, sets of light curves from two monitoring programmes are used to construct Fourier power spectra covering time-scales from 50 d to 28 yr. Data from high- and low-redshift samples are compared to look for the changes expected from time dilation. The main result of the paper is that quasar light curves do not show the effects of time dilation. Several explanations are discussed, including the possibility that time dilation effects are exactly offset by an increase in time-scale of variation associated with black hole growth, or that the variations are caused by microlensing in which case time dilation would not be expected.
Originally posted by Sinter Klaas
reply to post by mnemeth1
Wow that's a cool picture.
But I don't see what it has to do with lensing.
The article says it is all about tiny spics of dust. But is that true.
For anything to be vissible in infrared it has to radiate heat right ?
How do tiny pieces of dust totaly exposed to the cold of space. ?
I assume their could be no way for dust particles to retain heat. Just like sand on Earth quickly cools.
So an infrared photo should be impossible.
Or am I tataly missing something here. ?
7. The LIGO has never detected a gravitational wave. This non-detection directly refutes previous theory and stand in direct contradiction to predictions made by the theory of general relativity.
... Sun spots are the deepest place we can see into the Sun, yet they are the coldest places we can measure. ...
12. Stars have been observed that are too cold to possibly host nuclear fusion. These stars are called brown dwarf stars and may be the most numerous stars in the galaxy. These stars are not explained at all by the standard model of stars. However, they are well explained and predicted by plasma cosmology.
14. The WMAP has show the existence of large scale voids in the supposed "cosmic background" from the big bang. These voids were not predicted and directly refute the notion of the big bang. The standard model has no proper explanation for the existence of these voids - plasma cosmology does.
15. The CDMS project has never detected any observational evidence of dark matter despite years of trying. This directly refutes the notion that dark matter exists and is the supposed cause of galaxies flying apart.
17. All Hubble deep field images show fully formed galaxies at the supposed "edge of the universe." - if we are actually looking back in time to the birth of the cosmos, this should not be so. We should see developing galaxies, not fully formed galaxies.
Neutron stars and pulsars violate the known laws of physics