An alternate cosmology

[Harry]

Over the last couple of days I`ve been researching an intriguing idea of an alternate cosmology to the Big Bang. It largly concerns an apparent, non conformity to the rules governing redshifts. In particular the fact that seemingly connected, deep space objects, can have widly varing redshifts A particular example being NGC 7603.
So I`m wondering if anyone has an ideas about this or possibly some further information I would be able to access


Regards Harry:shrug:

[okiscopey]

Halton Arp has worked on anomalous redshifts. Here's a possible lead to other info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halton_Arp

[AGarvin]

Arps ideas are definately alternate cosmology. They have something to do with quasars being ejected from galactic nuclei in pairs. I think most of his assertions have been explained using more accurate data from recent surveys such as the 2dF and Sloan surveys.

Here's one from Sloan:

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0506366

I can't find the link but there was another done on over 1600 quasar/galaxy pairs by a goup from the University of Nottingham which found that "no sign of any quantised redshift appears". It's also at http://arxiv.org (http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0506366) somewhere.

Andrew.

[xelasnave]

Its not going his way no doubt but how intriging if quasars are born as it were and ejected from the parent gallaxy like little eggs to grow another gallaxy... I dont think many people share his view however, its one of those things where he sounds convincing and is obviously somewhat respected so his view will get attention if only the facts would agree it would change thinking totally.
alex

[mickoking]

Halton Arp. Bit of a rebel (which is good), sadly I don't accept his ideas.

[xelasnave]

I dont even except my own:D . The intruigining thing I think (if the observation is correct and universal,) the spirals lining up like buttons on a string that has no ends:eyepop: .
alex

[Harry]

Great to see this issue has caught the attention, if, and deservedly so, we are all somewhat sceptical. It came to my attention when I typed in cosmology @ the "google video" site. There is a 2 part 2 hour series called "Universe - the cosmology quest". Free to view. Really interesting. I`d luv to find something similar that directly refutes his theories. Hope a few of you get to watch these vid`s and then let me know what you think

Regards Harry :einstein:

[Talon Karrde]

It might interest some of you guys to know that John Dobson himself is a skeptic of the big bang. He has his own views of the universe, of which I've heard him speak several times already. The guy has a crazy sense of humor.

He's still a supporter of 'steady-state' theories. You can read some of his views here:

http://www.johndobson.org/articles/cosmology.html

He stayed at our house for a few days about 3 years ago while he was in town for the 40th anniversary of our local astronomy club. He seems to prefer staying in private homes more than hotels anyway. And man does he have some odd eating habits.

-TK

[Harry]

You know, this subject now has me absolutly intrigued, After all, The Big Bang has some, what I`d call unimagineable concepts to it. Me being a sceptic of most things that are controlled by either religion or politics was astounded to here Stephen Hawkings statement that, while recieving an award from the Pope for his contribution to the theory of the Big Bang in the 80`s the Pope told him that it was great to study the time since the Big Bang but that the Big Bang itself should be left alone as that was creation and the work of god, History shows us that religion has been sciences` greatest hurdle.

Thanks Talon for the Dobson site lots more reading for me it seems

Harry

[xelasnave]

It is difficult to have a go without knowing all "they" know they being those who presumably know:D .
Inflation I find a big stretch to get the Big Bang to work:eyepop: .
Consider we start at a point which inflates at a rate that finally in a very short span of time becomes infinite, even with a finite restriction on the use of the word infinite there be a lot that we must accept did take place, and we are still inflating or in the current stage ..expanding. Expanding into what??? AND indeed I can understand why the Pope would enjoy the big bang approach..Steven says 13 billion years the Pope say seven days.. To me the approaches are similar and both certainly draw out focus to a point in time we must ask the untimate question in our heart:) ;) . I think that the Universe is likely not to have a start, a finish,,. tops bottoms or sides and if there was a big bang it was simply a local matter and created that part we think of as our Universe. It was probably a bang in a already exsisting Universe. It could be a human thing that we cant accept a situation without a start or finish or unless we find a seed at the start ..that is our experience but maybe our experience has not prepared us for what must be contemplated when considering the Universe:shrug: .

[Gargoyle_Steve]

To use a wonderful quote from the Mythbusters:

"I reject your reality, and substitute my own"

;)


I read a definition of an agnostic a few years ago that said something very much like "One who believes that whether God exists, or does not exist, that knowledge will be forever unknown or unproved by mankind"

In terms of the Big Bang - I tend to lean towards it, but to be honest I think I'm kind of "agnostic" about it, if you take my meaning.

(Angry Agnostic bumper sticker: I DON"T KNOW - AND NEITHER DO YOU!!)
:D

[Doug]

I have downloaded them Harry. My initial reaction is that for the then editor of Astrophysics Journal to write "this exceeds my imagination", speaks more of the inflexible, unimaginative, frigid, and egotistical disposition of that editor rather than making a statement about the scientific integrity of Arp and his work. Arp's theories might be wrong, then again they might be right or close. They do deserve more dignified treatment than the politically motivated snow job they received.

cheers,
Doug

[xelasnave]

I will stick my neck out...the Big Bang theory makes no sence to me, yet to raise such a point of view draws responces that makes one feel stupid for thinking such. Well I feel the big bang was dead in the water until inflation came along to save it.. as I said I simply can not accept (inflation) such would have or could have taken place. The only proposition to support the logic is that without inflation each part of the Universe could not know the other.. as if rules of physics will be different if we can not find a point in common at one point..fair enough but that is not the only way. I get the distinct impression that politics has a great bearing on what may be acceptable which is unfortunate as we are really seeking to see into the past with tools that can only be inadequate irrespective of how sophisticated we believe them to be.
I am all for different and competing views for within that environment possibilities can be entertained. Holding firmly to the Big Bang causes one to only see certain possibilities. I prefer the steady state theory because that is the only way I can entertain that God exsists.. whereas the Big Bang to me supports only religion.
Well its early and I am still half asleep but my purpose was to comment on the exclusion of other possibilities as if any mention of them was to demonstarte one was uninformed and uneducated in what "they" know.

[Harry]

It`s been a week since I`ve been able to check up on how An alternate cosmology is fairing, and I`m over the moon to see there are still the odd Philosophers out there.
I`ve been searching madly for anything out there that directly questions the possibility of Non cosmological redshifts. Either I dont know what im looking for or there just not out there. Actually other than the original video that caused me begin An Alternate Cosmology its hard to find anything. Even articles on either Arp himself or even John Dobson are few and far begin.

"Oh well, I Suppose an alternate cosmology just couldn`t be true then"

Tongue planted firmly in cheek

Its info I`m after but where is it?????????????????

Harry

[Harry]

http://www.ldolphin.org/tifftshift.html

Well heres an interesting article

Harry:rolleyes:

[xelasnave]

From what I have come across there is no shortage of alternate views..
try..tired light..it should goggle and there is a view that red shift is manifested by light geting .."tired".. I am not supporting the view but thats one. Others complain that the speed of light is not constant and therefore everything that relies on that conclusion is suspect.
Me I dont believe anything but will read everything cause really who knows for sure.
alex

[Doug]

G'day Harry,
There is another type of red shift that is non doppler related.
Bathochromatic shift, which might only be seen in connection with molecular spectra and not atomic spectra, could be an alternative nevertheless.
The conditions that exist in Stella bodies are way beyond the laboratory environment, where the polarising forces here are mere shadows.
It might well be that gravitational and electromagnetic influences raised to the hellishly high levels in stars might be able to shift atomic spectra in ways that we can not duplicate, in ways hitherto only observed in molecular spectra.
Now I'll go check out the link you just posted.

Cheers,
Doug

[Doug]

That is an interesting article Harry. It does demonstrate the need for an open minded approach to interpreting data. It also begs the question, 'can our laboratory tests reliably demonsrate physics at a galactic level?'
cheers,
Doug