|
|
Re: TERRIBLE Nobel Prize for Accelerating Universe
Posted:
Oct 9, 2011 11:54 PM
|
|
On Oct 9, 6:25 am, PD <thedraperfam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 9, 1:36 am, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > This law was never tested especially at such high-z distances. What
> > if Hubble?s law is not linear as claimed but goes like the following?
>
> > ** z^2 = k^2 r
>
> I already answered this. Then you would have evidence for an
> accelerating universe.
No, your bullshit is not an answer. <shrug>
In these posts, you?ve scored three points of the following.
** FAITH IS THEORY
** LYING IS TEACHING ?--- PD
** NITWIT IS GENIUS
** OCCULT IS SCIENCE
** PARADOX IS KOSHER
** FUDGING IS DERIVATION
** BULLSHIT IS TRUTH ?--- PD
** BELIEVING IS LEARNING
** MYSTICISM IS WISDOM
** IGNORANCE IS KNOWLEDGE
** CONJECTURE IS REALITY ?--- PD
** PLAGIARISM IS CREATIVITY
** MATHEMAGICS IS MATHEMATICS
> > At the distance observable within Hubble?s technology, the law seems
> > to behave in the first order. However, at distances further out, it
> > would diverge from the linear model of near field. The law above fits
> > the observation without supporting such a ridiculous claim of
> > accelerated expansion of your universe. <shrug>
>
> > **** Chandrasekhar limit
>
> > Chandrasekhar fudged this up. So, in a stroke of a pen, he was able
> > to stop the mass gain of a companion star cannibalizing on its hapless
> > neighbor. Why don?t you worship Chandrasekhar as a god instead?
> > <shrug>
>
> > ****
>
> > So, a college physics professor is ignorant of any of these, and
> > Einstein Dingleberries are as just as stupid and getting dumber as
> > usual. What else is new? <sigh> and <shrug>
>
> > You got to be nuts to believe in all the assumptions that manifest the
> > Chandrasekhar limit.
>
> > You are out of your mind to dictate how your universe behaves by
> > believing in the Chandrasekhar limit.
|
|
