Cosmology View
My views on Cosmology and Physics
site navigation menu
Posts
and Why All are Wrong Beyond Stars in Milky Way
One can only hope the words redshift and blueshift are banished from use with the words galaxy or quasar.
All redshift or blueshift values are wrong for every galaxy and quasar,
Distant Spectral Shifts is a series of web pages to mimic a book. With its link and on-line access, you can begin. The first page has the introduction and table of contents, to click on a section and view it.
The spectrograms for 21 galaxies and 6 quasars need only a click.
The redshift and distance provided by astronomers are presented as text, or in some cases with a click.
All galaxies and quasars have a simple observation.
It is important to recognize every spectral line shift indicates an atom in the line of sight is moving.
The Doppler effect is a real behavior with light.
Unfortunately, astronomers believe, in error, that atoms in the line of sight are always moving with the distant galaxy or quasar.
I demonstrate this error with the 27 distant objects, presenting unedited spectrograms.
This mistake in method has been made with every galaxy since 1912. There is no justification for a belief that there are others beyond the 27 which were measured correctly.
I explain the correct method for measuring the velocity of a distant celestial object. It requires much time, and we have been measuring by the wrong way for 100 years, without question. No one has proclaimed they measured a distant velocity correctly by using a unique method.
A simpler, quicker method was used, with the HST for a few years, each time. This exercise was done with the 3 closest, large galaxies.
This alternate method uses only a few stars, rather than measuring a change in position of the entire galaxy.
With M31, no change in position in a set of stars was observed. However these stars wre not in the galaxy but assumed to be moving with the M31 halo.
Nno change in position for the selected stars was observed. Unfortunately, there are 2 conclusions.
1) no motion of the halo, or 2) the stars were actually in the background, not really near enough to be part of the halo.
The exercise concluded with (2), or no motion of M31 was detected.
The alternate method of stellar groups was used with both Magellanic Clouds. See this excerpt.
From Wikipedia:
The Milky Way and the LMC are predicted to merge in approximately 2.4 billion years.
[SMC] is currently a satellite of the Milky Way, but is likely a former satellite of the LMC.
Announced in 2006, measurements with the Hubble Space Telescope suggest the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds may be moving too fast to be orbiting the Milky Way.
(end)
This web page set for Distant Spectral Shifts is based on my paperback Cosmology Crisis Cleared.
That book identifies the fundamental mistake causing the failure of cosmologists to agree on a value for Hubble's Constant, which is the most important constant in cosmology.
The word distant is in the title of the web page set because astronomers measure stars in the Milky Way fine.
The spectral shift problem is with more distant objects.
Astronomers must recognize every galaxy and quasar has its motion measured incorrectly.
This is simply because they are measured like a star in the Milky Way, using individual spectral lines.
The velocity of a galaxy or quasar CANNOT be measured in a spectrum like a star. Only a star of the 3 has a photosphere surface for attached atoms.
Distant Spectral Shifts provides spectral images of many galaxies and quasars.
The reader can see the spectrograms being used from distant objects to measure a shift in a spectral line.
All absorption and emission lines are from atoms in the line of sight, for distant objects.
When any of these atoms are measured as having a spectral line shift, its shift cannot indicate anything about the galaxy or quasar behind tiny atoms in the line of sight.
With this mistake, the big bang cosmology is based on measuring atoms in motion.
Astronomers have never measured the 3-dimensional velocity of any galaxy or quasar.
This conclusion about measuring a velocity wrong is common sense.
There are many galaxies and quasars with measured velocities of z> 1. The galaxy having the highest velocity is HCN-Z10 with z=10.1.
In my opinion, one's first response to any z>1, where the measured velocity is faster than the speed of light, should be:
"This velocity is impossible, so its measurement was a mistake."
That such a velocity is impossible should not be debated, when billions of stars in a galaxy must be moving at that incredible velocity. Only a tiny proton can be superliuminal.
Every high value of z, both galaxies and quasars, comes from a proton moving at that velocity when it captures an electron, becoming a hydrogen atom, emitting a characteristic wavelength.
It should be common sense that distant objects are not moving faster than the speed of light, despite detecting a tiny proton in the line of sight moving faster than the speed of light
Cosmologists have accepted these measurements and the method being used for more than 100 years. Though some values are clearly wrong, these velocities force awkward explanations.
Astronomers are apparently unwilling to question the validity of their measurements though so near impossible.
Unfortunately, cosmologists accepted these ridiculous values and proposed explanations for them. These solutions are ridiculous also.
They include several whoppers:
1) The invisible fabric of space is expanding at a velocity greater than the velocity of light, to stretch the light from distant objects; the claim is the light is unreliable due to changes within intergalactic space.
Unfortunately, light cannot be stretched by a fictious, invisible, undetectable fabric. Therefore, this unjustified new behavior of light requires "new" physics, because it conflicts with Maxwell's accepted explanation of light's propagation. This stretching requires a change to Maxwell's work, which used words like perpendicular and synchronized; these do not suggest stretching.
Unfortunately for this excuse, the measured redshift in these galaxies and quasars is always from only a specific spectral line shift, for a specific element whose atom is in the line of sight.
Anyone looking at the spectrograms wille se only spectral lines shifted, but never the entire spectrum. Therefore, item (1) simply ignores the observed data, and so item (1) never should have been proposed, or just simply rejected.
The awkward proposal of an an invisible, expanding fabric of space cannot explain the observed spectra.
This irrelevant proposal has been crucial since distant objects were measured with z>1.
These 2 statements reveal a fundamental failure of the big bang cosmology to explain basic observations.
2) a big bang explosion.
This big bang event tried to define a time when the invisible fabric of space began expanding.
3) Dark energy is the invisible, undefined, impossible entity causing these (wrong) velocities of all distant objects away from Earth.
The words redshift and blueshift should be banished from common use in cosmology, for distant objects.
Both words are a reminder of a century of confusion with invalid motion in the universe beyond our Milky Way.
Please remember th atall redshift and blueshift velocities are mistakes for all galaxies and quasars.
Distances based on Hubble's Law are wrong,
Cosmology must restart, after discarding all those wrong values.
All galaxies and quasars must have their motion measured just like was done for the planets, with years of recording positions to get a 3-D velocity by the change-in-position divided by the time-duration.
Light cannot provide that 3-D velocity vector from our line of sight. The vector must measured manually. The method is important, so the result is independent of an observer. This is done for every new comet, or even a newly captured moon of a gas giant.
Most data are from the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database, or NED.
There are many pages having spectra and screen captures of NED pages; these images are provided by links.They are not part of the web pages, but are loaded only on your click. You are free to zoom an image as nedded, which is impossible in a black&white paperback.
Your platform and browser manage the presentation of all pages, not like a 6"x9" paperback.
I tried to provide all the data required for anyone to analyze how a distant velocity or distance is obtained, for objects beyond our Milky Way.
Here is the book done in web pages:
Distant Spectral Shifts
The mix of case is from the software for a site. If typing this link, not a copy and paste, be careful. Any letter of the wrong case in the URL will error.
https://www.cosmologyview.com/Books/Distant-SS/Distant-ss.html
date posted 01/14/2022
Cosmology View
My views on Cosmology and Physics
site navigation menu
Posts
and Why All are Wrong Beyond Stars in Milky Way
One can only hope the words redshift and blueshift are banished from use with the words galaxy or quasar.
All redshift or blueshift values are wrong for every galaxy and quasar,
Distant Spectral Shifts is a series of web pages to mimic a book. With its link and on-line access, you can begin. The first page has the introduction and table of contents, to click on a section and view it.
The spectrograms for 21 galaxies and 6 quasars need only a click.
The redshift and distance provided by astronomers are presented as text, or in some cases with a click.
All galaxies and quasars have a simple observation.
It is important to recognize every spectral line shift indicates an atom in the line of sight is moving.
The Doppler effect is a real behavior with light.
Unfortunately, astronomers believe, in error, that atoms in the line of sight are always moving with the distant galaxy or quasar.
I demonstrate this error with the 27 distant objects, presenting unedited spectrograms.
This mistake in method has been made with every galaxy since 1912. There is no justification for a belief that there are others beyond the 27 which were measured correctly.
I explain the correct method for measuring the velocity of a distant celestial object. It requires much time, and we have been measuring by the wrong way for 100 years, without question. No one has proclaimed they measured a distant velocity correctly by using a unique method.
A simpler, quicker method was used, with the HST for a few years, each time. This exercise was done with the 3 closest, large galaxies.
This alternate method uses only a few stars, rather than measuring a change in position of the entire galaxy.
With M31, no change in position in a set of stars was observed. However these stars wre not in the galaxy but assumed to be moving with the M31 halo.
Nno change in position for the selected stars was observed. Unfortunately, there are 2 conclusions.
1) no motion of the halo, or 2) the stars were actually in the background, not really near enough to be part of the halo.
The exercise concluded with (2), or no motion of M31 was detected.
The alternate method of stellar groups was used with both Magellanic Clouds. See this excerpt.
From Wikipedia:
The Milky Way and the LMC are predicted to merge in approximately 2.4 billion years.
[SMC] is currently a satellite of the Milky Way, but is likely a former satellite of the LMC.
Announced in 2006, measurements with the Hubble Space Telescope suggest the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds may be moving too fast to be orbiting the Milky Way.
(end)
This web page set for Distant Spectral Shifts is based on my paperback Cosmology Crisis Cleared.
That book identifies the fundamental mistake causing the failure of cosmologists to agree on a value for Hubble's Constant, which is the most important constant in cosmology.
The word distant is in the title of the web page set because astronomers measure stars in the Milky Way fine.
The spectral shift problem is with more distant objects.
Astronomers must recognize every galaxy and quasar has its motion measured incorrectly.
This is simply because they are measured like a star in the Milky Way, using individual spectral lines.
The velocity of a galaxy or quasar CANNOT be measured in a spectrum like a star. Only a star of the 3 has a photosphere surface for attached atoms.
Distant Spectral Shifts provides spectral images of many galaxies and quasars.
The reader can see the spectrograms being used from distant objects to measure a shift in a spectral line.
All absorption and emission lines are from atoms in the line of sight, for distant objects.
When any of these atoms are measured as having a spectral line shift, its shift cannot indicate anything about the galaxy or quasar behind tiny atoms in the line of sight.
With this mistake, the big bang cosmology is based on measuring atoms in motion.
Astronomers have never measured the 3-dimensional velocity of any galaxy or quasar.
This conclusion about measuring a velocity wrong is common sense.
There are many galaxies and quasars with measured velocities of z> 1. The galaxy having the highest velocity is HCN-Z10 with z=10.1.
In my opinion, one's first response to any z>1, where the measured velocity is faster than the speed of light, should be:
"This velocity is impossible, so its measurement was a mistake."
That such a velocity is impossible should not be debated, when billions of stars in a galaxy must be moving at that incredible velocity. Only a tiny proton can be superliuminal.
Every high value of z, both galaxies and quasars, comes from a proton moving at that velocity when it captures an electron, becoming a hydrogen atom, emitting a characteristic wavelength.
It should be common sense that distant objects are not moving faster than the speed of light, despite detecting a tiny proton in the line of sight moving faster than the speed of light
Cosmologists have accepted these measurements and the method being used for more than 100 years. Though some values are clearly wrong, these velocities force awkward explanations.
Astronomers are apparently unwilling to question the validity of their measurements though so near impossible.
Unfortunately, cosmologists accepted these ridiculous values and proposed explanations for them. These solutions are ridiculous also.
They include several whoppers:
1) The invisible fabric of space is expanding at a velocity greater than the velocity of light, to stretch the light from distant objects; the claim is the light is unreliable due to changes within intergalactic space.
Unfortunately, light cannot be stretched by a fictious, invisible, undetectable fabric. Therefore, this unjustified new behavior of light requires "new" physics, because it conflicts with Maxwell's accepted explanation of light's propagation. This stretching requires a change to Maxwell's work, which used words like perpendicular and synchronized; these do not suggest stretching.
Unfortunately for this excuse, the measured redshift in these galaxies and quasars is always from only a specific spectral line shift, for a specific element whose atom is in the line of sight.
Anyone looking at the spectrograms wille se only spectral lines shifted, but never the entire spectrum. Therefore, item (1) simply ignores the observed data, and so item (1) never should have been proposed, or just simply rejected.
The awkward proposal of an an invisible, expanding fabric of space cannot explain the observed spectra.
This irrelevant proposal has been crucial since distant objects were measured with z>1.
These 2 statements reveal a fundamental failure of the big bang cosmology to explain basic observations.
2) a big bang explosion.
This big bang event tried to define a time when the invisible fabric of space began expanding.
3) Dark energy is the invisible, undefined, impossible entity causing these (wrong) velocities of all distant objects away from Earth.
The words redshift and blueshift should be banished from common use in cosmology, for distant objects.
Both words are a reminder of a century of confusion with invalid motion in the universe beyond our Milky Way.
Please remember th atall redshift and blueshift velocities are mistakes for all galaxies and quasars.
Distances based on Hubble's Law are wrong,
Cosmology must restart, after discarding all those wrong values.
All galaxies and quasars must have their motion measured just like was done for the planets, with years of recording positions to get a 3-D velocity by the change-in-position divided by the time-duration.
Light cannot provide that 3-D velocity vector from our line of sight. The vector must measured manually. The method is important, so the result is independent of an observer. This is done for every new comet, or even a newly captured moon of a gas giant.
Most data are from the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database, or NED.
There are many pages having spectra and screen captures of NED pages; these images are provided by links.They are not part of the web pages, but are loaded only on your click. You are free to zoom an image as nedded, which is impossible in a black&white paperback.
Your platform and browser manage the presentation of all pages, not like a 6"x9" paperback.
I tried to provide all the data required for anyone to analyze how a distant velocity or distance is obtained, for objects beyond our Milky Way.
Here is the book done in web pages:
Distant Spectral Shifts
The mix of case is from the software for a site. If typing this link, not a copy and paste, be careful. Any letter of the wrong case in the URL will error.
https://www.cosmologyview.com/Books/Distant-SS/Distant-ss.html
date posted 01/14/2022