|
|
limits on galaxy luminosity and limits on distance in mapping
galaxies in astronomy #1245 New Physics #1365 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed
Posted:
Feb 20, 2013 2:25 AM
|
|
Alright, I am worried that I will not get back to New Physics and
where I left off with rest-mass, spin, and magnetic monopoles being
only attractive force not repelling. So I will interrupt with the Atom
Totality before I reach page 1300. I wanted to make clear that
astronomy in the past has done a very poor job of recognizing that
lightwaves from stars, their intensity or luminosity or magnitude,
whichever concept you want to use, that distance takes a toll on light
waves and that if the star or galaxy is far enough away, there is no
chance of seeing them, no matter what the power of the telescope or
equipment you use.
So my point is that if the Observable Universe is taken to be 14
billion years old, that only a fraction of of the galaxies from Earth
can and will be seen and a large fraction never able to be physically
seen, simply because the light from those galaxies, no matter if they
are the brightest galaxies of all, will be able to travel the distance
without being dissipated.
So we have two major limitations in astronomy, and this is what angers
me in that astronomers are ignorant of these two limitations.
(1) galaxies have an upper limit of how powerful they are as a shining
body
(2) the most powerful shining galaxy/galaxies light have an upper
limit of distance
So let me give a analogy to what that says. If we have 3 AA batteries
in any type of flashlight you want to build, whether laser or some
other, there is a distance from that flashlight for which a person
cannot see the flashlight anymore, because of dissipation of the
lightwaves.
Now in Halliday & Resnick, Fundamentals of Physics, 3rd edition, 1988,
they discuss this on page 852 with the equation I = P/4pi(r^2), which
is basically the intensity is an inverse square law.
Now astronomers talk about luminosity and about magnitude, where
luminosity has no distance factor but magnitude has a distance factor.
The point I am making is that astronomy has failed to recognize that
at a certain distance we no longer can see galaxies, no matter how
powerful they are. Because there is a limitation on how powerful they
are and a limitation of traversing Space and still be coherent enough
so that someone at a far away distance can know it is there.
So what that means is that the mapping of galaxies by Juric or Jarrett
or many others, that they never used these physical limitations and
blithely assumed that stars and galaxies at a distance of infinity can
be spotted, analyzed and mapped.
So what I want to do is find what that upper limit of distance and the
upper limit of a galactic luminosity is. So that if the Maxwell
Equations are taken as the axioms over all of Physics, then the upper
limit of galactic luminosity is a laser star filled galaxy-- a quasar
to be more exact. In other words our richest laser star laden galaxy
is the upper limit of luminosity, or if I am wrong, perhaps a
supernova is the upper limit. And the upper limit of distance, I
suspect is 1/4 the distance of 14 billion light years.
So that all those mappings of galaxies have to stop at a distance of
3.5 billion light years.
--
Google's archives are top-heavy in hate-spew from search-engine-
bombing. Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and
fair archiving of AP posts for the past 15 years as seen here:
http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986
Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
|
|
