Cosmology

Re: Gravity from past the visible Universe can affect redshift.

Star Dragon — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:08:30 GMT

Dusty,

It seems to me that the math is correct, I don't know what your knowledge level of Geometry or comprehension of scientific notation is, but it's not rubbish. Besides the paper has been peer reviewed and due to be published,

"How Weyl Geometry Solves the Riddle of Dark Energy " In Quantization Astrophysics, Brownian Motion And Super Symmetry PP 88-96 (eds F Samarndache and V Christianato, Math,Tiger Chennai, India 2007 Foundations of Physics Vol-37 no 3 (2007) 366.

"On Dark Energy, Weyl Geometry and Brans-Dicke- Jordan Scalar Field" To appear in the Global Journal Of Science And Technology( New Delhi 2009) Mod Phys lett A-17 (2002) 2095 Mod, Phys, letter A21 No 35 (2006) 2685.

This is only one of the possible explanations out there.

Dennis

Re: Gravity from past the visible Universe can affect redshift.

Dusty_Matter — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 14:33:51 GMT

The last link that you showed is real math, and geometry. That I understand. Did you notice however that they did not try and link this math to all of the known great physicists and say that they have solved for all of the known problems to cosmology? Math has it's place and can make wonderful statements of insight, but you cannot create reality with math. Math should fit reality. Math with no proofs or evidence means nothing.

Re: Gravity from past the visible Universe can affect redshift.

Star Dragon — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 03:51:07 GMT

Dusty,

Simply by your response, It's too bad bad that you don't appreciate or seem to understand Vector Geometry, http://omega.albany.edu:8008/calc3/3d-geom-dir/cornell-lecture.html.

Oh well let us just leave it at that, I can see that this hypothetical exchange of ideas with you is over with.

Dennis

Re: Gravity from past the visible Universe can affect redshift.

Dusty_Matter — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 00:32:39 GMT

Hey Dennis,

I want to thank you for that website. I got some really good laughs out of reading it. It was quite funny. “The lattice approach to gravity”, the local geometric boundary where the Kuiper belt material resides, The math formulas which made no sense, and made no connections, and were yet used to imply that Newton, Einstein, Schwarzschild, and all the other great physicists could have all of there ideas combined into one geometry was great. That this geometry could solve for dark matter, dark energy, and the pioneer probe’s dilemmas, made it sound like a string theory for the steady state universe. Yes, it was quite funny. Maybe if you could get them to join with the string theorists, they could then claim to have a theory for everything. It’s truly amazing that this stuff hasn’t hit the mainstream yet. With everything solved we could all then just go home and work on something truly meaningful, like cold fusion. Ha Ha.

That mumbo jumbo was hilarious. I certainly hope it doesn’t fool anybody. Thanks again for the belly laughs.

Re: Gravity from past the visible Universe can affect redshift.

Star Dragon — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 05:26:29 GMT

Hi Dusty.

What is Weyl Geometry ?

In 1915, Einstein constructed a Geometrical model of the gravitational field,since then many others have also tried to give the electromagnetic field a similar geometric role.

This possibility is simply suggested by the fact that gravitation and the electromagnetic field are both long range forces.

In 1918 A mathematician named Weyl came up with an elegant attempt at a geometrical unification of both that was later improved upon by Dirac.

Since the only two long range forces, are the gravitational and the electromagnetic and the gravitational field is very well explained by Einstein's General Theory of Relativity for which it's accounted for geometrically by the curvature of space.

Weyl proposed a more general space than the Reimannian one of Einstein's theory in which the Electromagnetic field also played a Geometric role, here is a link to a paper that explains it well, zoom in on the paper so you can read it and please read the whole thing! http://www.scribd.com/doc/11379707/Dark-Energy-and-Pioneer-Anomaly-from-Weyl-Geometry-

Dennis

Re: Gravity from past the visible Universe can affect redshift.

Dusty_Matter — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 00:11:42 GMT

Hi Dennis,

I am kind of at a loss in your explanation of integrable Weyl Geometry. How does the “local down scaling of photon frequency” connect to the slow down of the Pioneer probes?

When you say “local down scaling of photon frequency”, how local do you mean? If you mean within our galaxy, or galaxy cluster then all light from further objects would all have the same redshift. If this is due to a local geometry then it would make no distinction between objects that were 1 billion light years away verses 10 billion light years away. They would all show the same photon frequency discrepancy. Then it would definitely be known that there was some problem with reading redshifts.

What exactly is down scaling of photon energy? What does that mean?

Re: Gravity from past the visible Universe can affect redshift.

Dusty_Matter — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 13:06:15 GMT

We can definitely say that gravity slows or warps the travel of light in it‘s vicinity, but to anyone observing light, it’s speed would be at the known constant.

What does the speed at which light travels, have to do with the volume of the universe? I’m sorry, I must have missed something.

On the large scale, doesn’t dark energy hold sway as to the shape and size of the universe? About 73% of a say?

Re: Gravity from past the visible Universe can affect redshift.

Primordial — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 15:24:21 GMT

DaveMitsky : Would "Cosmos" by Astromomy collectors edition dated January 16, 2007 be acceptable reference for an explanation of Hubble Volume? If yes proceed to this question, does gravity slow the speed of light or does it just change its relativistic energy between inertial observers?

Re: Gravity from past the visible Universe can affect redshift.

DaveMitsky — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 05:30:06 GMT

Primordial:

DaveMitsky : Thank you Dave for your response, what amount, and in what category of proof would you require?

Citing some peer-reviewed journal papers would be a start.

Dave Mitsky

Re: Gravity from past the visible Universe can affect redshift.

Star Dragon — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 02:49:22 GMT

Hi Dusty,

When I stated that maybe some unknown baryonic or non- baryonic matter may be skewing the redshift, I did not mean just friction as a cumulative force all alone.

When I think about baryonic matter, to me, it is the stuff that creates gravity, since all the planets and stars and matter that we do see, is baryonic matter of some sort, so my implications were not discarding gravity, I was including gravity, via the term, (baryonic matter) and, along with it, dark matter, all of it as a cumulative force, acting together at the cosmological scale.

As far as dark matter not effecting light, I don't believe we know enough about this stuff to make any concrete conclusions to discard it completely just yet.

I'm inlcined to down scaling of photon frequency as a consequence of integrable Weyl Geometry.

This connects the Pioneer anomaly with the Hubble parameter via conformal geometry, and in a sense does away with the need for an assumed expansion of space in favor of a local "down-scaling" of photon frequency, an effect similar to tired light, but originating in the geometry of spacetime rather than as a higher-order gravitational effect

To me, Cosmology, seems to me to be standing at the edge of another shocking realization, one just as exciting as when we first discovered that the universe was full of other galaxies. I can hardly wait to read and hear more about all the new data that is scheduled to come our way, with all the new instruments we now have at our disposal.

I can not help but remember the days, when the whole idea of just being able to actually observe or even detect an exo-planet was out of the question, look at were we are now. these implications alone, can truly change our views of the Cosmological picture.

Dennis

Re: Gravity from past the visible Universe can affect redshift.

Dusty_Matter — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 00:59:15 GMT

Dennis, you have brought up some very interesting points and issues. I would enjoy considering them, but you are right, I have no clear cut answer. For instance, I cannot say for sure that there is nothing interfering with the transmission of light from over billions of years ago, but you might want to consider some side points regarding this.

Your thoughts are that there may be some interference due to dark matter, or perhaps some baryonic matter that may be causing the light to shift into the red. Without getting very technical, we might be able to compare this to a sunset. As the sun gets closer to the horizon, it’s light travels through a thicker atmosphere before reaching our eyes, and it’s light starts turning red due to more interference. Perhaps this may be the cause of the red shift due to the billions of years of traveling through space? But there is something else to consider as well.

Not only does the sun start to turn red the closer it gets to the horizon, but it’s image also becomes more distorted. When looking through a telescope at an object that is close to the horizon, you get more interference in viewing the image. The image is fuzzy, blurry, not clear. That is the reason that most observatories are stationed as high up as they can be, for clarity of view. It would only make sense then that if the light from distant galaxies are being shifted into the red due to interference of some kind, then their images would also be distorted. But this is not the case. We can see galaxies as clearly as possible. The only limiting situation, seems to reside only with the equipment that we have. So nothing seems to be interfering with our field of view.

Technically, the causes of the red shifts, due to particle interference, or acceleration also leave different signatures. In regards to our sunset, the blue end of the spectrum gets absorbed by the atmosphere leaving only the red to see. Red shift due to acceleration still has all of it’s light components, it’s just that all of it has been correspondingly shifted into longer wavelengths.

Dark matter seems to be completely invisible. We haven’t been able to detect even one particle of it, and it does not interact with light. So other than warping spacetime, it does not seem to be turning light red.

What is also interesting about dark matter is that it doesn’t seem to be able to coalesce into anything solid. Unlike baryonic matter which can come together to make stars and planets, dark matter seems to stay in giant clouds that surround galaxies and galaxy clusters.

What is highly theoretical at this point, is that there may be several different kinds of dark matter. Some that can only surround galaxy clusters. Another kind that may be able to shrink down to surround individual galaxies. And perhaps a highly speculative one that may be able to surround individual solar systems. Why this speculation?

Because of a puzzle that you mentioned. The slowing down of the Pioneer space probes. They are not slowing down due to friction or running into any baryonic matter. They appear to be slowing down due to additional mass from our own solar system. We cannot detect this mass from our vantage point within the solar system. Dark matter does not interact with baryonic matter so there is no friction from it, and because it covers such a large area (our entire solar system) we cannot notice it’s affects until we start to leave our solar system, which is exactly what the Pioneer and Voyager probes are doing. It appears that they might be slowing down due to an unexplained gravitational force, coming from our own solar system. This is purely hypothetical!

At the time that these probes were launched there was no idea to look for anything like this, and so, due to their different trajectory changes, and gravitational assists from different planets, we have no way of discerning when this slowdown started to take affect.

Now that we have a puzzle to examine, the New Horizons space probe to Pluto has been designed (trajectory wise) so that we can examine this puzzle. We are waiting on the data to see if we can learn more about this enigma.

Re: Gravity from past the visible Universe can affect redshift.

Primordial — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 14:13:30 GMT

DaveMitsky : Thank you Dave for your response, what amount, and in what category of proof would you require?

Dave I would like to expalin, so don't take me as a wise guy, if you understand the photon, we could take a for example scenario e.g. a gamma photon is released from an event 12.5 billion light years away it consists of energy sufficient to producea a particle pair on the order of the proton and antiproton in a location located at this 12.5 light year location in space-time, now because the photon transverses( you may wish to use propagates) this time span in the form of a wave function it can only become relativistic mass after it has this event at the distance of 12.5 billion light years, so during this 12.5 billion years the only thing that is making this transition is a massless wave function that upon interaction with the columb field becomes two particles that at this time in the event displays a change in the gravitational field of the frame of reference in which this even occured and at the same instant in time 12.5 billion light years away the source reference frame of this transition would undergo a wave function colapse and a change in its gravitational field.

Before I go on do you have questions at this point? This thing is very long. In a simple form just look at my original post .

Re: Gravity from past the visible Universe can affect redshift.

Star Dragon — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 14:07:50 GMT

Hi Dusty,

I totally agree with what you are saying except for one simple fact, You are only using the mass or dark matter that is associated with the observed galaxy, what I am trying to say is, that these extreme redshifts may be the cumulative effect of what is in between us and, the observed galaxies that are not associated with our local group.

Since there is matter out there that we cannot see, just how much dark matter could be out there between us and these far off galaxies? The Pioneer probes have obviously shown that there is something responsible for their slowing down, this problem to me, may indicate that we really are not sure of the density of baryonic and non baryonic matter just out side our Local solar system.

Bottom line is we need more data, I except the BBT for now, but I am also aware that it has some problems that can only be resolved with more instruments. data and time, before I buy it as an actual scientific fact.

It's been a very interesting thread, and I have throughly enjoyed communicating and reading any ideas that have been brought forth.

Dennis

Re: Gravity from past the visible Universe can affect redshift.

Dusty_Matter — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 13:08:41 GMT

You are correct sir. The blue shift is only from nearby galaxies that are approaching us. The rest are redshifted. If we are to infer that redshift is a measure of gravity, perhaps from dark matter, then we can also infer that redshift is also a measure of mass. (As mass generates gravity.) We know that the further galaxies exhibit a higher redshift, and that the farther you are away, the higher the redshift. Does this then infer that the further away a galaxy is, the more massive it is? Is our galaxy then the lightest one in the universe? Do the blueshifted galaxies have a negative mass?

The only point that I am making is that redshift is not a measure a gravity, but of acceleration in a certain direction.

Re: Gravity from past the visible Universe can affect redshift.

Primordial — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 22:37:45 GMT

chipdatajeffB : Thank you JeffB, for your help.