SpheresOfBalance wrote:It would seem that the only thing you understood was that "3) Electromagnetic energy..." was true, but failed to see it's implications.
Well,it's the only thing I didn't challenge, but you're right, I don't see the implications.
SpheresOfBalance wrote:It would seem that you've only parroted something you've read, without understanding it, and paraphrased at that.
I'm not sure that I can parrot and paraphrase, but I accept I may not understand everything I read.
SpheresOfBalance wrote:What I was doing was listing those things, that if one understands them, and applies a little thought, it's plain to see that the theory, that red shift is indicative of an expanding universe is not necessarily correct. It shows that it has flaws, so as to raise enough doubt, so as to be inconclusive.
And I agreed that with you that the evidence "precludes the necessity of any particular deduction". I think that some physicists are more sophisticated than you give them credit for, most are sufficiently philosophically clued up to know they are working with analogies and models. However, since Newton it has been believed that a static universe would collapse, that the force of gravity would draw everything together. Newton argued that the universe must be infinite, so that the force on every point is the same. But such a balancing act is untennable in a universe in which there is movement, if only planets orbiting the sun. The discovery by Hubble (the man, not the telescope) of red shift, which he made by comparing absorpton lines in spectra, was taken as evidence that the universe is expanding, at a stroke solving the puzzle of why it isn't collapsing. It's a very neat hypothesis. The discovery of evidence that the expansion is accelerating demonstrates that it isn't perfect, if it were cosmolgists would be out of a job.
SpheresOfBalance wrote:Do you know what Doppler shift is?
I've a rough idea. If you run into the sea, the waves hit you more frequently, if you run to the shore they hit you less often. Same with fire engine sirens, same with stars and galaxies. In the first case you get wetter or drier, in the second the pitch is higher or lower, and in the case of light, it is redder or bluer.
SpheresOfBalance wrote:It's in fact a shift in frequency of the light from a static value which is in fact dependent upon the stars composition, age, and size. One first has to know what frequency the stars light is when the observer is of parallel trajectory at the same speed.
I believe Hubble was trying to work out those things when he discovered that the absorption lines were red shifted.
According to special relativity, the 'static value' is 'when the observer is of parallel trajectory at the same speed'. We can't tell if anything is in fact static, we would almost certainly be moving relative to it. But since we are moving relative to every atom in the universe, you take your pick which one to measure from.
SpheresOfBalance wrote:Then and only then can one know if in fact its frequency is either compressed or expanded, i.e., respectively, blue or red shifted.
We cannot know anything in absolute terms. If a fire engine passes at 60mph the siren rises and falls, it seems obvious that the fire engine is moving and we are stationary. You get exactly the same effect if you drive past a stationary fire engine at 60mph; 'obviously' you are moving. But since the world is turning, going round the sun, etc, etc, whether you or the fire engine is moving in absolute terms is impossible to tell.
SpheresOfBalance wrote:You have to see a change, (A SHIFT) otherwise how could one possibly know if in fact the blue or red color was due to shift and not that it was the stars natural color, or being distorted due to gravitational pull from another body, either reflected, scattered, absorbed, rarefied or some combination, or not.
You are right, there are lots of other things to consider, but since every distant galaxy demonstrates red shift, it is reasonable to assume that there is a common cause, especially one that accounts for the non-collapse of the universe.
