tom sarbeck

  • PB, you ask softball questions. I play hardball and ignore them.

    You want fair?

    Click on the Chris Reeves article I linked to a while ago. To the right on the page you will see is a menu on which you can start your own personal journey.

     

  • This discussion on the kind of science that requires evidence and reason is becoming a discussion on science fiction. No thanks, PB, Reg and Robert.

     

  • Aw-ww, Beanie. Quantum entanglement? Stuff popping in and out of existence?

    Einstein did not start the anti-empiricism of our time but with his thought-experiments, his hatred of laboratory work, and his arbitrary limit on the speed of light, he gave scifi a boost. Isaac Newton’s religiosity may have blinded him to a speed of gravity that is o…[Read more]

  • tom sarbeck posted a new activity comment 4 days, 10 hours ago

    Robert, this discussion is about light on a one-way trip, not a radar signal on a two-way trip.
    It’s also about the loss of some of the light being interpreted as a frequency shift. I don’t know if some of the radar signal is being lost.

    As to a distinction between doppler shift and doppler effect, check Edwin Hubble’s use of the terms in my…[Read more]

  • tom sarbeck posted a new activity comment 4 days, 22 hours ago

    Read carefully what Edwin Hubble said:
    If … a Doppler shift, a curiously small, dense, suspiciouly young universe.
    If … not Doppler effects, a universe extended indefinitely in space and time.

    Bye bye Big Bang.

    • Tom, why don’t you just explain the difference between an electromagnetic doppler shift and a doppler effect, since I know a RADAR return is frequency shifted in either direction, proportionate to the velocity and direction of the target and that velocity is calculated by the doppler equation. Yes, the calculation for mechanical soundwaves are…[Read more]

      • Robert, this discussion is about light on a one-way trip, not a radar signal on a two-way trip.
        It’s also about the loss of some of the light being interpreted as a frequency shift. I don’t know if some of the radar signal is being lost.

        As to a distinction between doppler shift and doppler effect, check Edwin Hubble’s use of the terms in my…[Read more]

  • tom sarbeck posted a new activity comment 4 days, 22 hours ago

    Beanie, the physicist you cite assumes the truth of expansion, aka recession.

    He assumes he sees all the wavelengths and concludes they are stretched,

    Instead, the shorter wavelengths do not survive their journey so he sees only the longer wavelengths.

    Then, like religious folk, he tells a story.

  • tom sarbeck posted a new activity comment 5 days, 12 hours ago

    Further, Robert, the Zwicky I cited in my below reply to Pope Beanie said tired light accounts for what Bangers refer to as doppler shifts.

    In short, doppler shifts do not exist in electromagnetism, but legions of Bangers insist that they do exist.

    Similar misuse of language was standard practice among people working in the Apollo program. They…[Read more]

  • tom sarbeck posted a new activity comment 5 days, 19 hours ago

    Continuing the above where interupted by a fingertip’s accidental touch.
    …As the Wiki article says, longer wave lengths survive their journey better than short wave lengths. The surviving wave lengths APPEAR to have been shifted. Bangers, having studied neither art nor electricity, gets things all wrong.

    BTW, I ignored your previous q…[Read more]

  • tom sarbeck posted a new activity comment 5 days, 19 hours ago

    First, PB, a reply that requires some knowledge of physics.
    “Zwicky suggested that photons might slowly lose energy as they travel vast distances through a static universe by interaction with matter or other photons, or by some novel physical mechanism. Since a decrease in energy corresponds to an increase in light’s wavelength, this effect w…[Read more]

  • tom sarbeck posted a new activity comment 5 days, 20 hours ago

    Robert, you say the radars you designed looked for opposing doppler SHIFTS. How certain are you that the radars did not look for doppler EFFECTS?
    Scroll down to the Brain Cox-Darwin interview you posted five months back. One month later (just above it), I posted Edwin Hubble’s use of both terms. You will see they are not synonomous.

  • Claim:
    The hot bang best matches our observations,
    Debunk:
    The hot bang results from:
    1) a hypothesis without evidence that because red shift (light) is a Doppler effect (sound), the universe is expanding, and
    2) its expansion began from an imagined infinitely small and infinitely hot point. (LeMaitre’s ‘primeval atom).
    None of that was obs…[Read more]

    • Well, as for your first point it’s a wonder that the thousands of airborne weather RADARs I have designed over the years are able to detect turbulence and windshear as they do by looking for opposing doppler shifts of the electromagnetic pulse that we transmit. We then alert you pilot so he or she doesn’t kill you. Its not like we are an audio…[Read more]

      • Robert, you say the radars you designed looked for opposing doppler SHIFTS. How certain are you that the radars did not look for doppler EFFECTS?
        Scroll down to the Brain Cox-Darwin interview you posted five months back. One month later (just above it), I posted Edwin Hubble’s use of both terms. You will see they are not synonomous.

      • Further, Robert, the Zwicky I cited in my below reply to Pope Beanie said tired light accounts for what Bangers refer to as doppler shifts.

        In short, doppler shifts do not exist in electromagnetism, but legions of Bangers insist that they do exist.

        Similar misuse of language was standard practice among people working in the Apollo program. They…[Read more]

    • Then what causes red shift? (I dare you to evade yet another reasonable question!)

      • First, PB, a reply that requires some knowledge of physics.
        “Zwicky suggested that photons might slowly lose energy as they travel vast distances through a static universe by interaction with matter or other photons, or by some novel physical mechanism. Since a decrease in energy corresponds to an increase in light’s wavelength, this effect w…[Read more]

      • Continuing the above where interupted by a fingertip’s accidental touch.
        …As the Wiki article says, longer wave lengths survive their journey better than short wave lengths. The surviving wave lengths APPEAR to have been shifted. Bangers, having studied neither art nor electricity, gets things all wrong.

        BTW, I ignored your previous q…[Read more]

    • OK, I see now that (at least some) physicists differentiate between the terms “doppler effect” and “doppler shift”. So, you’re not actually saying that recession of a star or galaxy does not cause redshift, but you’re saying that there is more than one possible cause of redshift. Right? (The physicist that I just read:…[Read more]

      • Beanie, the physicist you cite assumes the truth of expansion, aka recession.

        He assumes he sees all the wavelengths and concludes they are stretched,

        Instead, the shorter wavelengths do not survive their journey so he sees only the longer wavelengths.

        Then, like religious folk, he tells a story.

      • Read carefully what Edwin Hubble said:
        If … a Doppler shift, a curiously small, dense, suspiciouly young universe.
        If … not Doppler effects, a universe extended indefinitely in space and time.

        Bye bye Big Bang.

        • Tom, why don’t you just explain the difference between an electromagnetic doppler shift and a doppler effect, since I know a RADAR return is frequency shifted in either direction, proportionate to the velocity and direction of the target and that velocity is calculated by the doppler equation. Yes, the calculation for mechanical soundwaves are…[Read more]

          • Robert, this discussion is about light on a one-way trip, not a radar signal on a two-way trip.
            It’s also about the loss of some of the light being interpreted as a frequency shift. I don’t know if some of the radar signal is being lost.

            As to a distinction between doppler shift and doppler effect, check Edwin Hubble’s use of the terms in my…[Read more]

  • tom sarbeck posted a new activity comment 6 days, 13 hours ago

    Take a cue from your father, PB.
    The Bang is a bunch of math-inclined folk who, to keep their taxpayer funding, are using a Genesis-like origin story to win allies in Congress.

  • Neil deGrasse Tyson opens the first chapter of his book “Astrophysics for People in a Hurry” with:
    “In the beginning, nearly 14 billion years ago, all the space and all the matter and all the energy of the known universe was contained in a volume less than one trillionth the size of the period that ends this sentence.”

    I don’t see that as eviden…[Read more]

    • Hi Tom,

      “I don’t see that as evidence. Do you?”

      No. In itself it’s not purported to be evidence – it’s a statement of fact. I’m confident that NGT would love for you (or anyone else) to challenge the evidence behind this statement. As I’m not physicist of or a cosmologist I’m not going to waste my time trying. At this point it’s a matter of t…[Read more]

    • I’m not a diehard banger. It’s just that they seem to have the best ideas for what to research next in the quest to understand the univers, and a large enough community willing to spend time on it and try to educate us. I can’t even get straight talk from you about what kind of research you think the scientific community should work on next. All I…[Read more]

      • Take a cue from your father, PB.
        The Bang is a bunch of math-inclined folk who, to keep their taxpayer funding, are using a Genesis-like origin story to win allies in Congress.

  • tom sarbeck replied to the topic Away With Words in the forum Small Talk 2 weeks, 3 days ago

    I too believe U will have another beer.

  • PB, as this discussion’s opening post says, science is a personal journey. What works for me won’t work for you. Are you certain you want to start the journey?

     

  • tom sarbeck replied to the topic Science As A Personal Journey in the forum Science 3 weeks ago

    Jake, _Robert_ doubts that a competing theory is being suppressed by the “scientific religious” and says an example would be denial from publication of a sound research paper.

    Here’s something from Hannes Alfven:

    “I have no trouble publishing in Soviet astrophysical journals, but my work is unacceptable to the American astrophysical jou…

    [Read more]

  • Whence anthropo, PB?

    Read both parts of what Hubble said and you’ll know which part the a-centrists chose.

    Track record? Don’t evaluate one until you know it.

     

  • Yeah, cosmology’s Standard Model is anthropocentrism’s last hurrah. May it rest in peace.

     

  • Thanks,  Jake. At least you and I here on AZ see the Big Bang as a Big Fraud. Of course, with NASA’s budget anyone could publicize anything until many see it as true.

    Have you seen Edwin Hubble’s words that point out the unsupported conclusion by a person who, IMO, deserves to remain unknown?

    “If the red shifts are a Doppler shift . . . the  o…[Read more]

  • Jake, before I reply, I need to know whether you evaluate evidence or ignore it.

    I will explain. Neil deGrasse Tyson opens the first chapter of his book “Astrophysics for People in a Hurry” with:

    In the beginning, nearly 14 billion years ago, all the space and all the matter and all the energy of the known universe was contained in a volume les…[Read more]

  • Load More