It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Evidence the Big Bang Theory Wrong - Quasars Don't Show Time Dilation

page: 1
53
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+28 more 
posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Evidence the Big Bang Theory Wrong - Quasars Don't Show Time Dilation


www.physorg.com

Quasars, it seems, give off light pulses at the same rate no matter their distance from the Earth, without a hint of time dilation...

There’s also a possibility that the explanation could be even more far-reaching, such as that the universe is not expanding and that the big bang theory is wrong.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 08:38 PM
link   
An astronomer in Britain has shown that the light emitted by Quasars behave uniformally, regardless of how far they are from Earth.

In theory, the light from distant objects is stretched, so explosions from distant objects appear slowed down when compared to explosions of closer objects.

And yet, this is not the case with quasars. There is no 'stretching'.

This is despite the fact that they have massive red-shifts.

This could be the first really big nail in the coffin of the Big Bang theory...

www.physorg.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 08:43 PM
link   
Discussion at Badastronomy.

www.bautforum.com...

These guys have been arguing against everything since forever. Even they will have a hard time burying their heads in the sand over this. Might be fun to watch.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 08:58 PM
link   
A truly great subject.

I am glad people are taking the debate seriously, and rather than clinging to an idea they can let go and actually examine the evidence and ask better questions.

A funny thing is, I always considered the Big Bang theory like a Western Religious concept that the individual scientists could not let go of despite they had began straying away from the Church.

It is in a way, a sophisticated version of "creationism". Big bang Big crunch, Alpha and Omega.

Anyways, the point is. The Universe could be eternally aged, and infinite sized, for all we know.

That is the problem. We don't really know much anything yet. We are terribly primitive down here on little ol Earth.

The only way to even get close to figuring out these questions, is by Meeting an Advanced Alien species and asking them for help. By hearing their ideas and seeing what kind of evidence they have discovered we can really catch up and figure out the truth of our Universe.

But right now technologically and mentally speaking, we have NO WAY to figure out something like this.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 09:11 PM
link   
Alien and Advanced are relative terms-just remember that. We could be an advanaced alien species to someone else. And we could pass along our knowledge which may be much greater than theirs....but at the end of the day they only know what we do.

Same goes for "advanced" civilization passing along knowledge to us...we only get to know what they know and discovered...and that could still be very limited if the universe is indeed infinite.




Originally posted by muzzleflash
A truly great subject.

I am glad people are taking the debate seriously, and rather than clinging to an idea they can let go and actually examine the evidence and ask better questions.

A funny thing is, I always considered the Big Bang theory like a Western Religious concept that the individual scientists could not let go of despite they had began straying away from the Church.

It is in a way, a sophisticated version of "creationism". Big bang Big crunch, Alpha and Omega.

Anyways, the point is. The Universe could be eternally aged, and infinite sized, for all we know.

That is the problem. We don't really know much anything yet. We are terribly primitive down here on little ol Earth.

The only way to even get close to figuring out these questions, is by Meeting an Advanced Alien species and asking them for help. By hearing their ideas and seeing what kind of evidence they have discovered we can really catch up and figure out the truth of our Universe.

But right now technologically and mentally speaking, we have NO WAY to figure out something like this.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 09:13 PM
link   
I'm pleased to see someone else on ATS is interested in new evidence that the Big Bang theory is wrong.

I've looked around the net. For the moment, most scientists are denying it, either saying the researcher is a crackpot, or his paper is crackpot.

But it seems the research means that a high red-shift can be displayed by a close object.

The Big Bang theory is based on the current interpretation of Red-shift. It's looking more and more likely a lot of astronomers and physicists are wrong. They are busily building more epicycles as I type.

I expect this thread to vanish now, as everyone talks about Nbiru and Obama's death-squads. The stupidity on ATS does sometimes depress me a little.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 09:21 PM
link   
We only understand things from inside multiple gravity wells. Earth, Sun, Solar System, Galaxy. We have no idea the speed of light or distance between galaxies because we cannot measure anything outside. We could exists within a black hole and ever bit of light we detect outside our Solar system is warped, bent etc...

I have a feeling the voyager anamoly is only going to grow exponentially once the spacecraft completely move beyond the gravity of our sun.

I think they will speed up to incredible speeds once they are free of the sun.

Newton and Einstiens theroies only hold up inside our relative gravity well. What happens beyond is as mysterious and unmeasurable as quantume theory.

Everything outside out solar system may have seased to exist already and we are only witnessing the delayed light from things that no longer exist. I do not believe that but it could be as true as any other theory that is unproven.

We know nothing.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   
I hope religious fanatics and athiest activists alike don't look at this as any form of victory or defeat. Alot of people don't understand the concept of "theory", and it seems quite a few scientists have forgotten theories are ment to be tried, tested and broken.

It's good to see we're not sticking to the cookie cutter concepts.

S+F4u



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Markz0r
I hope religious fanatics and athiest activists alike don't look at this as any form of victory or defeat. Alot of people don't understand the concept of "theory", and it seems quite a few scientists have forgotten theories are ment to be tried, tested and broken.

It's good to see we're not sticking to the cookie cutter concepts.

S+F4u


I agree. Pehaps our own thoughts and doubt are changing reality.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Markz0r
I hope religious fanatics and athiest activists alike don't look at this as any form of victory or defeat. Alot of people don't understand the concept of "theory", and it seems quite a few scientists have forgotten theories are ment to be tried, tested and broken.

It's good to see we're not sticking to the cookie cutter concepts.

S+F4u


I agree. Pehaps our own thoughts and doubt are changing reality.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 09:38 PM
link   
I've always intuitively thought that the big bang theory was bogus. There are too many special processes and conditions. Sudden expansion being just one of these. I feel that the explanation will be simple and elegant.
Something that can be observed in nature, like a zygote that multiplies and forms a more complex structure and continues to grow. It is pretty amazing that an egg and sperm can combine and eventually become a living creature.
Laugh if you want, but I think that is a much more likely scenario.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Xeven
 




We know nothing.
Very true...I wrote a thread on this subject a while ago, here is a little exert:

...what is at the edge of the universe...what is beyond that...what was before the big bang...did time just start...but what was before that…is the universe eternal or infinite…what is time…what is anything? When you ponder these philosophical questions...you begin to see we really know nothing and we have no idea how things really work...we are only looking at the surface of reality with what sensory intake equipment mother nature gave us....an illusion essentially...we get only what we need to keep things simple and easy to understand, letting us survive most effectively, but hiding the true nature of reality...and we accept it as all we get because it's so simple for our primitive brains to understand...a rock is just a rock...and it makes sense...it's just made of some matter...it just sits there...lifeless...on this planet...in the galaxy...in this one and only universe...and everything started at the big bang...because it's a neat and easy to understand format...isn't it?


And I'll finish up with this quote to solidify my point:

A human being is a part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feeling as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.
- Albert Einstein

[edit on 15/4/10 by CHA0S]



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:13 PM
link   
It is my hope that someone with some knowledge will tell this thread a bit more detail. For decades astronomer Halton Arp has attempted to show that quasars are relatively "local" objects and the red shifts are not due to their extreme distances as is the conventional thought. This new info would seem to support his contention from another way.

I've always wanted quasars to be local objects in order to support my otherwise groundless contention that the super velocities they exhibit are that of ET ships moving at the SOL and faster.

[edit on 15-4-2010 by Aliensun]



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:26 PM
link   
reply to post by rizla
 


Very interesting rizla. I've never been a fan of the big bang theory so it's always a joy to see it brought into question.

IRM



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 02:20 AM
link   
This exact article has been posted a few times before, heres the earlier thread about the same guys findings

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 04:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by rizla

I've looked around the net. For the moment, most scientists are denying it, either saying the researcher is a crackpot, or his paper is crackpot.



haha what a surprise. How very scientific of them


Thanks for the post btw, very interesting.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 04:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Frakkerface

Originally posted by rizla

I've looked around the net. For the moment, most scientists are denying it, either saying the researcher is a crackpot, or his paper is crackpot.



haha what a surprise. How very scientific of them


Thanks for the post btw, very interesting.


I couldn't help but think of Bill Hicks talking about fundamentalist Christians when I read your comment.


Star for your comment and flag for OP. Oh... Gold star for OP too!!



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 05:35 AM
link   
S&F for you.

I really enjoyed the read on this, I love it when some random guy comes along and blows a huge hole in a theory taken to be truth for so many years. just goes to show how little we know.

I think the biggest problem we have, as a species that is born, lives, and dies and everything we see or know has a 'timeframe', it's almost impossible for us to imagine something as timeless or infinite. Why couldn't the universe be infinite? Because we think it's impossible? or we can't grasp the idea of something going on forever?

What I can't grasp is why the lightsource off the quasars is any different to from any other luminous object. I know they have pulses, but why would other lightsources dilate, but not these? Is there another type of light that causes this? maybe it doesn't travel through space the way we understand it?

so many questions! So few ways to answer them, can't wait to see what this guy finally concludes, great find!



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 07:15 AM
link   
The guy that produced the report is not a 'random guy' but has been doing stuff like this for some time. There are a number of researchers busily chipping away at the Big Bang theory. I think it is only a matter of time until either the BBT or the current interpretation of Red-shift is turned on its head.

It's interesting to watch scientists basically discount the mounting evidence against Red-shift. That thread I cited in Badastronomy is a case in point. I really must go on there and point out they are shoving their head in the sand.

A big problem is that a lot of loonies are attacking the Big Bang without filtering themselves. This means that when real research like this comes along, it is grouped with the loony stuff.

A metaphor is with the 9/11 stuff and WTC7. Mention WTC7 and the skeptics say you think the planes were holograms. Anyway, that's another story...

Thanks for showing an interest in this subject.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 07:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by polarwarrior
This exact article has been posted a few times before, heres the earlier thread about the same guys findings

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Didn't see that, probably because it vanished under the Nbiru threads.

ATS needs virtual and seamless subgroups in order that shall we say more discerning posters can keep topics alive. Sadly, there is just way too much dross on these boards, to the detriment of what the board is supposed to be about: Finding new truths.




top topics



 
53
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join