Rule -> RE: Astronomical Question (10/19/2006 5:56:56 AM)
|
At close distances the spectral shift as a result of the proper motion of stars exceeds the spectral shift of the socalled 'expansion' of the universe, which is additional and thus negligible at relatively nearby, small distances. We have to distinguish between observed facts and interpretation, though. We know that nearby galaxies have a proper motion and that the shift of their spectrum is the result of the Doppler effect. However, we do not know at all that the spectral shift of far galaxies is the result of a proper motion: that is merely and quite lazily assumed. The expanding universe interpretation is supported by only a few pillars: the redshift of far galaxies, the cosmic background radiation and the hypothesis of general relativity. In the little known book that I wrote about my discoveries in astronomy I provide alternative explanations for the first two observations and throw strong doubt upon the hypothesis of general relativity. I blame the redshift of far galaxies on the photons getting 'tired' the farther they travel, exchanging wave energy for their increase in angular momentum the farther they move from their source. I deduced a formula that accurately describes the redshift of a photon emitted with a particular frequency. (It needs a calibration factor, though). It is this shedded wave energy that we perceive as the cosmic background radiation. (It all comes neatly together.)
|
|
|
|