Physics has no clue of the photon. So you are free to speculate in any
direction.
Currently we use the envelope function to describe a traveling photon.
Of course this function contradicts basic Maxwell equations as E/B are
never symmetric.
Solar photon emission produces a pressure that
The original tired light hypothesis was rejected as an explanation of the
hubble red shift relation because it predicted more distant galaxies would
appear fuzzier then we observe. The predicted the fuzziness was a
consequence of scattering causing the red shift. However, perhaps a new
version of
Cosmology is the gossip kitchen table for sidelined physicists
Enjoy the nice pictures of galaxies but do not believe any version
II,III etc. of bibles genesis like big bang.
Most fake facts about black holes have been debunked as nonsense simply
because real physics cannot work with
Eric Lerner argues the "unexpected" data from the JWST is expected in an
non-expanding universe. Of course if the universe is not expanding he also
says explaining the hubble redshift relation would require some new physics.
Harry
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 7:32 PM Jones Beene wrote:
> As Lerner
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 24 Aug 2022 23:32:47 + (UTC):
Hi,
[snip]
>Maybe CMB should not be observable in 3 space at all.
I would agree if it were what they think it is.
>
>IOW - it can be argued that the cosmic background is itself poorly understood
>and not the best
As Lerner admits, the CMB is the main thing which is holding the big bang
theory together.
Yet the 'experts' really can't explain exactly how CMB radiation, which is
moving away from us at light-speed from a single point in time, manages to
somehow magically be reflected back so as to be
6 matches
Mail list logo
