Why Parallax doesn't work

[dad]

He did post nothing in a different state past.

Why do you deny a different state past forum?

"It is the announcement no one wanted to hear: The most exciting astronomical discovery of 2014 has vanished. Two groups of scientists announced today (Jan. 30) that a tantalizing signal — which some scientists claimed was "smoking gun" evidence of dramatic cosmic expansion just after the birth of the universe — was actually caused by something much more mundane: interstellar dust."


Evidence for Cosmic Inflation Theory Bites the (Space) Dust

Rather than face the fact that time could be different in space, maybe you should just post silly little attempted wittisms. Everyone has a job.

 

[[serious]]

"It is the announcement no one wanted to hear: The most exciting astronomical discovery of 2014 has vanished. Two groups of scientists announced today (Jan. 30) that a tantalizing signal — which some scientists claimed was "smoking gun" evidence of dramatic cosmic expansion just after the birth of the universe — was actually caused by something much more mundane: interstellar dust."


Evidence for Cosmic Inflation Theory Bites the (Space) Dust

Rather than face the fact that time could be different in space, maybe you should just post silly little attempted wittisms. Everyone has a job.

What does that article have to do with anything?

 

[Astrophile]

Simple..where is the light absorbed!!? Here in our timespace. Naturally earth will have the same lines as light in our timespace. However, that doesn't mean that the hydrogen, for example, that we see, exists in the same time. We just SEE it in our time. Whatever it does, it does in our time. When light enters a new time and therefore time/space, it behaves accordingly and follows the laws.

Do you understand that astronomers use stellar spectra to analyse the physical and chemical properties of stars? Stars are not all the same; there are stars with absorption lines of ionised helium and with temperatures of more than 30,000 Kelvin, and other stars with molecular absorption bands temperatures of about 3,000 Kelvin. There are stars that are losing mass at rates of more than a millionth of a solar mass per year. There are stars in which mercury is 100,000 times as abundant as it is in the Sun, and in which most of the mercury is in the form of the heaviest isotope, Hg-204. There are binary stars with orbital periods of 10 hours or less. How do astronomers know all this? They know from the spectra of these stars. How do you interpret the spectroscopic observations that astronomers have used to establish these amazing facts?

 

[dad]

What does that article have to do with anything?

Why would I explain anything to you, who spam last thursday denial snippet posts? You can't be taken seriously, 'serious'.

 

[Astrophile]

False. Just because something goes round and round does not mean time exists as we know it. How much time does it take to go round? Remember, that can't be determined from looking at it FROM our time!

There are many visual binary stars that have been observed through a complete orbit. Gamma Virginis has an orbital period of 171 years and has been observed since 1718. Alpha Centauri has an orbital period of 80 years and has been observed since 1752. Sirius has an orbital period of 50 years; the companion was discovered in 1862, more than three orbital periods ago. Iota-1 Librae has an orbital period of 23.469 years. There are spectroscopic binaries with orbital periods ranging from days (alpha Virginis, with a period of 4.0145 days) to decades (beta Coronae Borealis, with a period of 10.496 years, and epsilon Aurigae, with P = 27.07 years). The most famous eclipsing binary, beta Persei or Algol, experiences eclipses at regular intervals of 2.8674 days; how can you deny that this is the orbital period?

 

[dad]

Do you understand that astronomers use stellar spectra to analyse the physical and chemical properties of stars?

Right, but the light that carries all that info is in our solar system, or at least close. That means it is HERE. So whatever info it carried from elsewhere (spacetime) has to exist here! That could mean that not all that exists at the star would even be in the light here! That could mean that the hydrogen and etc that was in the star, was having our spectra because it is here! What else could it exist as or look like? From our point of observation, we have never seen anything else. You have merely assumed that time exists as some arrow, or maybe some continuous line, or whatever way you conceptualize time. There is NO evidence for that. You are basically forming a mental model of the whole universe based on a shoebox knowledge and experience. To be fair, rather than a shoebox, it is more like a dust grain of experience and knowledge! That is where you are at. Confess.

Stars are not all the same;

Why would they be?? People are not all the same either. Creation and the Creator are like that. The bible even flat out states that the stars differ from one another.

there are stars with absorption lines of ionised helium and with temperatures of more than 30,000 Kelvin,

No. In our timespace under our laws, it would need to be that hot, to account for what we see. How would you know what helium is like in another time?

and other stars with molecular absorption bands temperatures of about 3,000 Kelvin.

Same as above.

There are stars that are losing mass at rates of more than a millionth of a solar mass per year.

False! That is based on size and distance that is wholly based on assuming time exists, and exists the same out there. If it doesn't, and you don't know, that means all sizes and distances are out the window. Rather than a sun, it could be more the size of a foothall field for all we know. You are preaching religious belief here, not knowledge in any way, shape or form! That is fine, as long as you admit it, and not try to peddle off your stories and claims as science.

There are stars in which mercury is 100,000 times as abundant as it is in the Sun,

Hey, maybe there are thermometers also like that!! So? That doesn't tell us the distance or size, or what all might also be in there, or etc etc. Heck, what if there was mercury on the space station, and we thought that was a star...and it was a lot more mercury than the sun? In that case, obviously, we know what it is, but that is NOT the case with stars.

and in which most of the mercury is in the form of the heaviest isotope, Hg-204.

Ha. That could mean many things to the mind that was not bound by the belief system of manscience.

There are binary stars with orbital periods of 10 hours or less.

So??? You kidding? There are atoms with orbits of less also! Since you have no clue as to the size your point is moot.

How do astronomers know all this? They know from the spectra of these stars.

Ha. In other words they do not know in any way at all. They see light in OUR 'fishbowl' and interpret with fishbowl time and rules.

How do you interpret the spectroscopic observations that astronomers have used to establish these amazing facts?

Strong delusion! As I pointed out since the light is not at the star but here, and you do not know if time exists there...you are hooped.

 

[[serious]]

Why would I explain anything to you, who spam last thursday denial snippet posts? You can't be taken seriously, 'serious'.

I didn't say the world was created last Thursday, I said that last Thursday could be just as much a different state past as 4000 years ago

 

[dad]

(serious) I didn't say the world was created last Thursday, I said that last Thursday could be just as much a different state past as 4000 years ago

Crazy talk...don't mind if I repost something that had content..





Originally Posted by Astrophile

Do you understand that astronomers use stellar spectra to analyse the physical and chemical properties of stars?
​

Right, but the light that carries all that info is in our solar system, or at least close. That means it is HERE. So whatever info it carried from elsewhere (spacetime) has to exist here! That could mean that not all that exists at the star would even be in the light here! That could mean that the hydrogen and etc that was in the star, was having our spectra because it is here! What else could it exist as or look like? From our point of observation, we have never seen anything else. You have merely assumed that time exists as some arrow, or maybe some continuous line, or whatever way you conceptualize time. There is NO evidence for that. You are basically forming a mental model of the whole universe based on a shoebox knowledge and experience. To be fair, rather than a shoebox, it is more like a dust grain of experience and knowledge! That is where you are at. Confess.

Stars are not all the same;
​

Why would they be?? People are not all the same either. Creation and the Creator are like that. The bible even flat out states that the stars differ from one another.

there are stars with absorption lines of ionised helium and with temperatures of more than 30,000 Kelvin,
​

No. In our timespace under our laws, it would need to be that hot, to account for what we see. How would you know what helium is like in another time?

and other stars with molecular absorption bands temperatures of about 3,000 Kelvin.
​

Same as above.

There are stars that are losing mass at rates of more than a millionth of a solar mass per year.
​

False! That is based on size and distance that is wholly based on assuming time exists, and exists the same out there. If it doesn't, and you don't know, that means all sizes and distances are out the window. Rather than a sun, it could be more the size of a foothall field for all we know. You are preaching religious belief here, not knowledge in any way, shape or form! That is fine, as long as you admit it, and not try to peddle off your stories and claims as science.

There are stars in which mercury is 100,000 times as abundant as it is in the Sun,
​

Hey, maybe there are thermometers also like that!! So? That doesn't tell us the distance or size, or what all might also be in there, or etc etc. Heck, what if there was mercury on the space station, and we thought that was a star...and it was a lot more mercury than the sun? In that case, obviously, we know what it is, but that is NOT the case with stars.

and in which most of the mercury is in the form of the heaviest isotope, Hg-204.
​

Ha. That could mean many things to the mind that was not bound by the belief system of manscience.

There are binary stars with orbital periods of 10 hours or less.
​

So??? You kidding? There are atoms with orbits of less also! Since you have no clue as to the size your point is moot.

How do astronomers know all this? They know from the spectra of these stars.
​

Ha. In other words they do not know in any way at all. They see light in OUR 'fishbowl' and interpret with fishbowl time and rules.

How do you interpret the spectroscopic observations that astronomers have used to establish these amazing facts?
​

Strong delusion! As I pointed out since the light is not at the star but here, and you do not know if time exists there...you are hooped.

 

[Queller]

He provided Scripture. That'll do!

There is no scriptural support for a different state past.

How would you know!?

Evidence. Evidence that has been presented to you time and again and which you continue to ignore.

What you said amounts to what I said.

Really? Where did you acknowledge that science has evidence, as I did here?

In the absence of any contradictory evidence whatsoever, and with the evidence that science has, science concludes that time operates the same everywhere in the universe.

Nah. Adam knew better as did Noah, and folks back then. That solid dome you talk about is space. You really think that people thought space was solid?

Why wouldn't they? That's exactly what the Bible describes.

Science has none either way. That doesn't mean you can claim it is the way you like for no reason.

I'm not asking for science's evidence, I'm asking for your evidence. Are you ever going to provide any?

False. Unless there Was a light year, that would not be true except in theory. You been a light year out? No. Until then, humble down. The furthest probe is less than a light day away if I recall?

Have you ever been to Jupiter? Then how do you know it exists?

I personally would be surprised if one could travel at the speed of light on earth straight out in space for a year, and report back it was 5,878,499,810,000 miles.

Why would that surprise you, other than it shows you to be wrong that is. I know how hard it is for you to conceive of the possibility.

Nowhere but in your dreams.

You're the one dreaming about unevidenced different state pasts.

What about it?? By the way, where is the predicted neutron star?

"According to the classic theory, there should be a neutron star where Sanduleak used to be."

Mystery of the Missing Star | DiscoverMagazine.com

"The answer, he and Bethe believe, is that there is indeed a black hole at the center of SN1987A--a small one, formed in a fundamentally different way than classical theory suggests."

You really should read the links you post.

Since parallax cannot be used to determine distances or time by light YEARS, you don't even know how far that star was.

Of course parallax can be used to determine distance. What are you talking about.

You never knew the rings were there as you claim they were, or had to have been.

What the heck are you talking about? Someone else provided observational evidence of the ring.

"Another puzzle is that the observations of the star just prior to the explosion show that it was a blue supergiant. This was a puzzle in 1987, because up to that time theorists had believed that only red supergiants could explode as a supernova. "

Unsolved Mystery of the 1987 Supernova (Today's Most Popular)
[/quote] The very next sentence...

Apparently the star was, until relatively recently, indeed a red supergiant, but over the millennia before the explosion, it shrank in size and its surface heated up gradually.

As I asked before, do you ever read the stories you link to?

 

[Queller]

The key element here is when they entered our time and space.

Where is the boundary of "our" time and space?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

. . . I deny nothing.. .

Yes you do. You deny lots of things. Now you deny your denial!

 

[Strathos]

Your job is to try to make sense and be clear.

I'm fairly certain I'm doing a better job of that than some people here.

 

[dad]

I'm fairly certain I'm doing a better job of that than some people here.

I agree. You say nothing clearly.

 

[dad]

Yes you do. You deny lots of things.

I do not deny spectra or anything else actually, don't be sore just because I won't swallow your take on the evidence. I don't find your particular manscience belief system to be of God.

 

[dad]

There is no scriptural support for a different state past.

Oh brother, where you been??

http://splitmerge.webs.com/split.pdf

Evidence. Evidence that has been presented to you time and again and which you continue to ignore.

Relax. There is nothing to ignore at all, the evidence is not only fine, it is on my side.

Really? Where did you acknowledge that science has evidence, as I did here?

Of course it has evidence..for how to make me a better toilet paper, or fly me on a plane, etc. It has no evidence for time being the same in deep space. Not that anyone has shown here. Why yap, if you have something out with it.

Why wouldn't they? That's exactly what the Bible describes.

Not at all. The birds do not fly in some metal firmament. That is worse than absurd. The moon was not in some metal spere. it moves...remember! You must take men who lived in that day for outright idiots.

I'm not asking for science's evidence, I'm asking for your evidence. Are you ever going to provide any?

Just let us know exactly what you want evidence for, and what kind.

Have you ever been to Jupiter? Then how do you know it exists?

because I am a reasonable guy. Now when someone makes stuff up about things far beyond our range of experience and travel, why that is another story.

Why would that surprise you, other than it shows you to be wrong that is. I know how hard it is for you to conceive of the possibility.

Could be. But as I said I would be surprised. Why would time wait till it got that far out to start changing?? You need a reason. Something more than a hunch.

You're the one dreaming about unevidenced different state pasts.

The highly evidence bible talks of a past that is different, what other evidence could I ask for, seeing science is too dumb to even really weigh in on the matter??

"The answer, he and Bethe believe, is that there is indeed a black hole at the center of SN1987A--a small one, formed in a fundamentally different way than classical theory suggests."

You really should read the links you post.

I see that...'he and Bethe believe'. How impressive. Wave the magic wand and offer NO proof at all. You seem eager to swallow whatever they offer.

Of course parallax can be used to determine distance. What are you talking about.

Why post in a thread when you miss the drift of it? Don't make me repeat this again. The only way distance could be determined using a baseline IN our time and space is IF time and space in deep space were the same. If it is different, then the distance here in our spacetime cannot equal distance in space and time there.

What the heck are you talking about? Someone else provided observational evidence of the ring.

Before the SN?? Focus.

The very next sentence...

Apparently the star was, until relatively recently, indeed a red supergiant, but over the millennia before the explosion, it shrank in size and its surface heated up gradually.

Ha. 'Gee, it golly gee just must've been, but we just missed it, and can't prove that any more than the tooth fairy'

Not only making up fables, but making them up for millennia!! I truly cannot understand how anyone can take that slop seriously.


Kids, I can safely say that cosmology is mostly lies and not of God. Beware.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

I do not deny spectra or anything else actually, don't be sore just because I won't swallow your take on the evidence. I don't find your particular manscience belief system to be of God.

See? You admit to denying something right there. <gggg>

Don't be embarrassed about that. We all deny something from time to time, we have to. I deny your assertions, you deny mine . . .

Oh what to do? Mutual denials! Oh . . . we could go by the evidence.

Have you noticed you share a broken vitamin c gene with other primates? That's another piece of evidence for you . . . to deny.

 

[dad]

See? You admit to denying something right there. <gggg>

Don't be embarrassed about that. We all deny something from time to time, we have to. I deny your assertions, you deny mine . . .

It is OK to weigh in with a desire to blindly support science and oppose what God said. Your opinion matters.

Oh . . . we could go by the evidence.

We could post some rather than citing the word also, if we were intelligent, and honest.

I see this in the news today...hehe


"
Black holes do not exist where space and time do not exist, says new theory"

Black holes do not exist where space and time do not exist, says new theory

I guess we might add to that...the whole model of cosmology doesn't exist without time and space being the same either!

Have you noticed you share a broken vitamin c gene with other primates?

I am not a primate.

I am a man, mate. The words like mammal or primate that manscience invented merely show an unintelligent level of comprehension of God and creation. You are welcome to obsess over such words all you like, for all it's worth.

That's another piece of evidence for you . . . to deny.

Explain the broken gene we share. Let's see why you think anyone would want to deny it. Why flatter yourself that such foolishness is worth denial??

 

[[serious]]

I see this in the news today...hehe


"
Black holes do not exist where space and time do not exist, says new theory"

Black holes do not exist where space and time do not exist, says new theory

I guess we might add to that...the whole model of cosmology doesn't exist without time and space being the same either!

If you actually read that link, you would realize that quantum time theories don't suggest physics works any differently around other stars

 

[Queller]

Oh brother, where you been??

http://splitmerge.webs.com/split.pdf

Oh, I've seen your fiction before. It takes a twisted interpretation of scripture to claim that any of that is evidence of a different state past.

Relax. There is nothing to ignore at all, the evidence is not only fine, it is on my side.

Then why don't you present some?

Of course it has evidence..for how to make me a better toilet paper, or fly me on a plane, etc. It has no evidence for time being the same in deep space. Not that anyone has shown here. Why yap, if you have something out with it.

I have, repeatedly. You ignored it.

Not at all. The birds do not fly in some metal firmament.

There are no stars in the area where birds fly, are there?

That is worse than absurd. The moon was not in some metal spere. it moves...remember! You must take men who lived in that day for outright idiots.

Nope, I take them as uneducated in the way the world actually works. From their point of view, if the dome moved, that would explain why the sun, moon, and stars moved with it.

Just let us know exactly what you want evidence for, and what kind.

I'm asking for your scientific evidence of a different state past.

because I am a reasonable guy. Now when someone makes stuff up about things far beyond our range of experience and travel, why that is another story.

You've traveled to Jupiter?

Could be. But as I said I would be surprised. Why would time wait till it got that far out to start changing?? You need a reason. Something more than a hunch.

Why would time change at all? You need a reason. Something more than a WAG.

The highly evidence bible talks of a past that is different,

No, it doesn't. I'm not aware of any extra-Biblical evidence for anything in the entire book of Genesis. Care to provide some?

what other evidence could I ask for, seeing science is too dumb to even really weigh in on the matter??

You could ask for scientific evidence, of which you have been given reams.

I see that...'he and Bethe believe'. How impressive. Wave the magic wand and offer NO proof at all. You seem eager to swallow whatever they offer.

Hahahaha. How is that anything different than "dad believes". Wave your magic wand and offer NO proof at all. You seem upset that no one is eager to swallow whatever you offer without any supporting evidence.

Why post in a thread when you miss the drift of it? Don't make me repeat this again. The only way distance could be determined using a baseline IN our time and space is IF time and space in deep space were the same. If it is different, then the distance here in our spacetime cannot equal distance in space and time there.

Since there is no evidence whatsoever that time in deep space is different than here on earth, and plenty of evidence that it is the same, parallax can definitely be used to calculate distance.

Before the SN?? Focus.

Why in the world would know the rings were there before we had evidence of them?

Ha. 'Gee, it golly gee just must've been, but we just missed it, and can't prove that any more than the tooth fairy'

Not only making up fables, but making them up for millennia!! I truly cannot understand how anyone can take that slop seriously.

Since nothing in my post resembles this statement, I don't see why you posted it.

Kids, I can safely say that cosmology is mostly lies and not of God. Beware.

Pathetic lies.

 

[Queller]

It is OK to weigh in with a desire to blindly support science and oppose what God said. Your opinion matters.
We could post some rather than citing the word also, if we were intelligent, and honest.

I see this in the news today...hehe


"
Black holes do not exist where space and time do not exist, says new theory"

Black holes do not exist where space and time do not exist, says new theory

I guess we might add to that...the whole model of cosmology doesn't exist without time and space being the same either!

You've really got to start reading more than just headlines.

"In gravity's rainbow, space does not exist below a certain minimum length, and time does not exist below a certain minimum time interval," Ali, a physicist at the Zewail City of Science and Technology and Benha University, both in Egypt, told Phys.org. "So, all objects existing in space and occurring at a time do not exist below that length and time interval [which are associated with the Planck scale]. As the event horizon is a place in space which exists at a point in time, it also does not exist below that scale." When Ali talks about "all objects," he literally means everything around us, including ourselves.

When Ali talks about "all objects," he literally means everything around us, including ourselves.

We also do not exist physically below that length and time interval," he said. "However, for us, our house, our car, etc., it does not matter if we do not exist at any one point of space and time, as long as we exist beyond a certain interval. However, for the event horizon it does matter, and this causes the main difference in our calculations."