Despite your assurances of what is likely, they estimate that just the Milky Way.... ".. contains
100-400 billion stars and is estimated to have at least 50 billion planets.."
Milky Way - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
With some 100 billion planets and maybe 800 million stars colliding, I am not sure that your ideas are based on anything. That is all according to your own ideas in so called science of course.
We are confident that there will be no actual collisions because, despite the seemingly large number of stars, the space they occupy is so much bigger that they're small blips in an otherwise vast expanse of empty space. The odds that two stars would happen to meet is extraordinarily small.
Think of it this way: there are 100 billion stars in
our galaxy already. Why haven't
they collided? The simple answer is that each star is so very far away from any other star. The closest star to the Sun is 4 lightyears away - that means it would take light
four years to traverse the distance. What hope is there that the Sun itself would traverse a distance that great, and just so happen to collide with another star?
The point of the thread is that Blueshift actually doesn't mean that the 'object' is getting closer maybe. In that case no crash is forecast at all.
Now, when we look at say a spiral galaxy, and see a blue shift on the one end, and red on the other, is there any independent confirmation of the spin direction? (other than the light shifting)
Yes - the fact that it correlates with every other spinning galaxy, even when we take into account the angle at which the galactic disk is orientated (we see more blue- and red-shift on head-on galaxies than face-on galaxies, for example); the fact that this blue-and-red shifting are themselves small variations on the much larger general red-shift; the fact that these shifts only occur exactly in accordance to the theory that explains them; the fact that these spiral galaxies are
spiral galaxies, not diffuse blobs of stars, as we would expect when a galaxy has been rotating for hundreds of millions of years; the fact that computer simulations of the development of galaxies of certain masses shows us exactly what we see in outer space, complete with galactic rotation curves, core bars, etc.
The major sources of evidence that these galaxies are rotating are a) red- and blue-shift, and b) the galaxies' structure themselves. Naturally you'll dismiss these evidences as being "fishbowl, PO, so-called science", but, well, you'd be saying that over a global telecommunications system built upon the same laws and theories as you disparage.
