Sorry, I'm just not buying into these arguments. I find it very difficult to believe some sort of shadow anti-universe is sending it's gravity here. For starters, that would be anti-gravitons, which I highly doubt would work well in this Universe. I'm not buying into the jet hypothesis either. Anything emitting that much matter would be easily seen, galaxies are made of lots and lots of matter.

 It's been made abundantly clear that some people here don't believe in BBT, that's fine, you're entitled to your opinions.  The trouble I'm having is the fast and loose definition of science in this thread, just because you don't like a theory doesn't make it invalid, it just means you don't like it. Some of the ideas being thrown about here are for one, at the fringe of cosmology and some sound way more fantastic than the Big Bang itself. I have a major problem when a paper says things like "let's throw some conjecture in here", especially when it's being linked as proving how poor some of our scientific understanding is. I'm not interested in conjecture, I want observable data. There's plenty for an expanding Universe and while all the details haven't been perfectly proven, it's a far better theory than some of the ideas being cast about here. It just strikes me that there's some people here who would grab on to any other theory, just as long as it isn't the BBT and that's poor science indeed.

Harry,

Please format your responses to fit the viewing windows of the forum.  These colorful, oversized blocks of text are very annoying, and inconsiderate.

Long ago in this thread I asked a question that you ignored.  I will ask it again.  Can you show us any observational evidence substantiating your claim to a re-cycling universe?  You say that jets begit galaxies.  Where is this happening?  We can see galaxy mergers taking place, we can see rough young galaxies in the Hubble Deep Field, but I have yet to see even one galaxy which can be linked to a jet.  The only thing I see being recycled here is your argument.

In case anyone missed this recent post on another cosmological thread by Harry:

Through out history people were held back because of existing assumptions and coontrols. The BBT is hypertheical built on ad hoc ideas that observations cannot back up. So why is that people have assumed the BBT to be a fact, than calculate to age the universe without the understandings of its working parts.

Know this, in deep field images 13.2 billion light years away we observe about 100 billion galaxies, knowing the complexity and the billions of stars that make up one galaxy, you would think that modern scientists would comeup with a stronger theory than the BBT. Behind the scenes there are many scientist working extremely hard in trying to understand the working parts. The BBT backed up by the church and politics has restricted funds to only the BBT projects making it the standard model. Whre scientist researched alternative models they were removed from the project and their working place.

It now obvious why you are so disdainful of anyone or anything connected to the BBT theory.  This is a paranoid and utterly unscientific attitude that cannot help but warp your outlook and puts you in a place that makes any argument, any evidence, and any theory that doesn't fit into your cherished doctrine unacceptable and not open to serious debate.

Since this is your thread I will allow you to rave on all that you like but it should be clear to anyone that reads this that your opinions and documentation are highly suspect and should be treated with the utmost incredulity.

L

G'day from the land of ozzzzzzz

You have a choice to think what you want.

Someone asked about Jets.

Sun Jet movies
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2007 ... ayjets.htm

Galaxy jets
http://chandra.harvard.edu/press/00_rel ... 00pic.html

http://chandra.harvard.edu/press/08_rel ... 11008.html


http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/2006/3c273/

'Death Star' Galaxy Black Hole Fires at Neighboring Galaxy
http://chandra.harvard.edu/press/07_rel ... 21707.html

"We've seen many jets produced by black holes, but this is the first time we've seen one punch into another galaxy like we're seeing here," said Dan Evans, a scientist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and leader of the study. "This jet could be causing all sorts of problems for the smaller galaxy it is pummeling."

and so on.

Magnetic reconnection is the Key Process.

======================================

Leo keep reading  

G'day from the land of ozzzzz

To understand the cyclic process, one needs to understand how matter can alter from one phase to the next.

We see this transition in stars and compact stars and particulaly the so called black holes. Matter pulled into a dense object, changed to degenerate matter such as Neutron matrix, in time this matter is ejected from this matrix and reforms into normal matter. Simple processes.

Information on Black holes and their workings holds the key to a recylic process that will alter the thinking of modern cosmology.

http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.3162
Instability of Black Hole Horizon With Respect to Electromagnetic Excitations

Authors: Alexander Burinskii
(Submitted on 18 Mar 2009 (v1), last revised 31 Mar 2009 (this version, v2))

Three of your four links go to empty pages.  The fourth goes to a pretty picture of a jet.  I don't doubt the existance of jets, or that in that one case a jet is directed at a galaxy.  What there is no evidence of is that jets cause galaxy formation.  Even in the one instance where the jet is directed at a neighboring galaxy, there is no mention of star formation due to it, or even any unusual star formation in the target galaxy.  It is sheer coincidence.  Your fantasy, sir has no clothes.

  I see nothing in that link that even remotely adresses what you're trying to tell us about a "recyclic" universe. You're still not offering anything to back up your points, it's beginning to resemble the Monty Python sketch when the man pays for an arguement.

kuzinov  :  This is a quote from one of Harrys websites he gave as a reference "This image from NASA's Hubble, Chandra and Spitzer space telescopes shows a giant jet of particles that has been shot out from the vicinity of a type of supermassive black hole called a quasar. The jet is enormous, stretching across more than 100,000 light-years of space - a size comparable to our own Milky Way galaxy.".

G'day from the land of ozzzzz

I have gone out of my way to share information and all I get is negative emotions.

The link speaks of feedback, what do you think that means.

What do you think a cyclic process represents?

The process has to be explained via quantum mechanics.

Your not going to get a process that cycles the universe as a total.

So! go out of your way and read up on the workings of the parts within the universe.

Harry Costas:

I have gone out of my way to share information and all I get is negative emotions.

As you have on other forums that you have been banned from. You make your points repeatedly, but you can't seem to backup anything you present with enough scientific evidence to prove those points. Yet, your quest is to make everyone believe that what you're posting is fact. You may say that you've looked at both sides and based your beliefs on the one that is not filled with ad hoc ideas, yet your forceful support shows otherwise.  Count this thread as another locked quest, as well as any others that you pursue in this fashion.