The universe is expanding, but, where?

[Michael]

Still ignoring the evidence.

Not at all. You however are *irrationally* fixated on *averaged* data over a *tiny* portion of the EM spectrum, and making *outrageously* unsupported claims about *every other wavelength in the universe*! Give me a break!

Talk about immaculate space travel. Those mythical magical space expansion photons of yours managed to supposedly miss every single temperature and EM field gradient, and every other particle in space over *billions* of light years of traveling through *thin dusty plasmas*!

 

[Loudmouth]

Not at all. You however are *irrationally* fixated on *averaged* data over a *tiny* portion of the EM spectrum, and making *outrageously* unsupported claims about *every other wavelength in the universe*! Give me a break!

Talk about immaculate space travel. Those mythical magical space expansion photons of yours managed to supposedly miss every single temperature and EM field gradient, and every other particle in space over *billions* of light years of traveling through *thin dusty plasmas*!

And still ignoring the evidence.

 

[Michael]

No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning

By the way a QM equation of gravity also does away with the need for all of your mythical invisible friends. Just so ya know.....

 

[HitchSlap]

You are ignoring the fact that Christ was here from the beginning of time.

... or was he?

 

[Loudmouth]

No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning

By the way a QM equation of gravity also does away with the need for all of your mythical invisible friends. Just so ya know.....

The wavelength independent redshift is still there.

 

[Michael]

The wavelength independent redshift is still there.

I haven't read the whole paper yet, but as I understand it, it handles that issue via geodesic equations. I don't think you'd really have a leg to stand on in an Ockham's razor argument. At least they're replacing two of your "unseen" in the lab items with only *one* of them (gravitons). More importantly if gravity does indeed have a carrier particle, it would definitely be found on Earth. It would probably also explain Lerner's surface brightness findings too. Nice. I'll have to finish reading it after work.

 

[Loudmouth]

I haven't read the whole paper yet, but as I understand it, it handles that issue via geodesic equations. I don't think you'd really have a leg to stand on in an Ockham's razor argument. At least they're replacing two of your "unseen" in the lab items with only *one* of them (gravitons). More importantly if gravity does indeed have a carrier particle, it would definitely be found on Earth. It would probably also explain Lerner's surface brightness findings too. Nice. I'll have to finish reading it after work.

Unseen in the lab . . . once again, only crackpots demand that all data come from within the walls of a lab.

 

[Michael]

Unseen in the lab . . . once again, only crackpots demand that all data come from within the walls of a lab.

Considering the mainstream Bicep2 fiasco, your crackpot claims know no equal. Those grandiose crackpot claims turned to complete *dust* in mere months.

 

[Loudmouth]

Considering the mainstream Bicep2 fiasco, your crackpot claims know no equal. Those grandiose crackpot claims turned to complete *dust* in mere months.

Your plasma claims turned to complete dust decades ago when cosmological redshift was discovered to be wavelength independent.

 

[dad]

The problem for LM is that I already handed him a link and paper by a group using the MAGIC equipment that already demonstrated that various wavelengths of light don't even likely travel at the same speed through the quantum/plasma medium. His entire basis for making making these space expansion claims went up in smoke already, he's just in denial of the outcome.

Lerner also demonstrated via surface brightness tests on objects at larger redshifts that a static universe theory better 'fits' the actual data sets.

Basically they're in denial of *any* tangible effect the quantum and plasma medium might potentially have on photons, and photon redshift. In order for photons to *never* be redshifted by the medium, they'd have to magically weave and dodge their way around every single dust particle, every single plasma particle, and every single temperature and EM field gradient in the universe. That's just an absurd premise to begin with.

That is above my pay grade. However today I had an interesting thought on redshift. Maybe you can address it as credible or not?


The thought is that space is now where demons live, that we know from the bible. I suspect that when the bible says there will be war in heaven, that it means not in the heaven of heavens but just in plain ol heaven, or space. The demons will be cast out and down here. (that part is pretty well known)

Now, what if (here is the part you might know something about) ..say, before the rebellion of Satan and his angels the known universe (space) was more ot less part of heaven itself at least in some way? Then...the angels rebel, and God we might say..'leaves them' and His Light pulls back to the heaven of heavens (outside the known universe). Thus redshifting the objects because light has went away..? That is quite rough, but the general idea is asking if maybe light itself was affected (redshifted) as a result of the changed space..?

 

[Michael]

Your plasma claims turned to complete dust decades ago when cosmological redshift was discovered to be wavelength independent.

Anytime you're willing to put up a side by side comparison of the visible spectrum with a high energy gamma ray spectrum and actually *demonstrate* that claim, let me know. Until then, your personal *acts of pure faith* aren't all that convincing IMO.

 

[Nick665]

Into another dimension(s) maybe .

 

[Doveaman]

Into another dimension(s) maybe .

Your faith is strong.

 

[Oafman]

Your faith is strong.

Not a comment one would usually direct towards someone who has just made a statement which had 'maybe' as its last word.....